124 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



not subject, like many of the ordinary contracts between independent 

 nations, to abrogation by a subsequent war between the same parties, 

 His Lordship not only considers this as a position of a novel nature. 

 to which Great Britain cannot accede, but as claiming for the dip- 

 lomatic relations of the United States with her a different degree of 

 permanency from that on which her connections with all other States 

 depend. He denies the right of any one State to assign to a treaty 

 made with her such a peculiarity of character as to make it in dura- 

 tion an exception to all other treaties, in order to found on a pecu- 

 liarity thus assumed an irrevocable title to all indulgences which (he 

 alleges) have all the features of temporary concessions; and he adds, 

 in unqualified terms, that " Great Britain knows of no exception to 

 the rule that all treaties are put an end to by a subsequent war be- 

 tween the same parties." 



The undersigned explicitly disavows every pretence of claiming, for 

 the diplomatic relations between the United States and Great Britain. 

 a degree of permanency different from that of the same relations be- 

 tween either of the parties and all other Powers. He disclaims all 

 pretence of assigning to any treaty between the two nations any pecu- 

 liarity not founded in the nature of the treaty itself. But he sub- 

 mits to the candour of His Majesty's Government whether the treaty 

 of 1783 was not, from the very nature of its subject-matter, and from 

 the relations previously existing between the parties to it, peculiar? 

 whether it was a treaty which could have been made between Great 

 Britain and any other nation? and, if not, whether the whole scope 

 and objects of its stipulations were not expressly intended to consti- 

 tute a new and permanent state of diplomatic relations between the 

 two countries, which would not, and could not, be annulled by the 

 mere fact of a subsequent war between them? And he makes this 

 appeal with the more confidence, because another part of Lord 

 Bathurst's note admits that treaties often contain recognitions and 

 acknowledgments in the nature of perpetual obligation, and because 

 it implicitly admits that the whole treaty of 1783 is of this character, 

 with the exception of the article concerning the navigation of the 

 Mississippi, and a small part of the article concerning the fisheries. 



The position that " Great Britain knows of no exception to the 

 rule that all treaties are put an end to by a subsequent war between 

 the same parties," appears to the undersigned not only novel, but un- 

 warranted by any of the received authorities upon the laws of nations; 

 unsanctioned by the practice and usages of sovereign States; suited, 

 in its tendency, to multiply the incitements to war, and to weaken the 

 ties of peace between independent nations ; and not easily reconciled 

 with the admission that treaties not unusually contain, together with 

 articles of a temporary character, liable to revocation, recognitions 

 and acknowledgments in the nature of perpetual obligation. 



A recognition or acknowledgment of title, stipulated by conven- 

 tion, is as much a part of the treaty as any other article ; and 

 73 if all treaties are abrogated by war, the recognitions and ac- 

 knowledgments contained in them must necessarily be null and 

 void, as much as any other part of the treaty. 



If there be no exception to the rule that war puts an end to all 

 treaties between the parties to it. what can be the purpose or meaning 

 of those articles which, in almost all treaties of commerce, are pro- 

 vided expressly for the contingency of war, and which, during the 



