AEGUMENT OF SIB WILLIAM BOBSON. 1655 



and as part of the basis of their decision, but, that you contend is 

 disavowed by Mr. Evarts? 



SIR W. ROBSON: Yes, I am much obliged to Mr. Justice Gray. 

 That point would have made it legitimate, if Lord Salisbury had 

 been really claiming to have cut down the grant. Then he would 

 have put himself so much in the wrong the United States would 

 have been entitled to say, although this is your money, or may be 

 your money, still, you have adopted an attitude which really termi- 

 nates diplomatic relations. That might have been, in that point of 

 view, a fair thing to do ; but it is I think only a slight and not un- 

 natural misunderstanding, owing to the complexity of dealing with 

 so great a correspondence, which was upon so many matters, and I 

 pass over it. 



I come now to a subject which I am quite sure the Tribunal will 

 receive with a certain degree of philosophic interest, though I am 

 afraid with some sensation of physical fatigue, for I come to the 

 question of servitudes, which has played so great a part in this con- 

 troversy, and which has excited so very great interest throughout 

 juristic and legal circles in Europe, because, as I said in my opening ob- 

 servations upon this question, we are touching here the broadest prin- 

 ciple and the deepest foundation of all. that which we call international 

 law, a name which is itself slightly misleading, but which is sufficient 

 for the purpose; nothing is more important to nations at large than 

 that our conceptions with regard to international law should be care- 

 fully guarded and clearly defined ; that we should not permit in that 

 sphere any degree of unnecessary laxity, that we should not treat it 

 as a mere matter of philosophic speculation, but remember in dealing 

 with it that we are touching on matters concerning which every na- 

 tion is most sensitive, and concerning which our principles should be 

 extremely well defined. Well now, why is the United States com- 

 pelled, why is it driven to servitudes in defence of its claim ? 



It is to be pointed out at once that the whole of that claim, so far as 

 it rests upon any avowed legal basis, rests now on this doctrine of 

 servitudes. They do not treat the historical part of their case as 

 affording what lawyers call a ground of action. It may be interest- 

 ing and important. It may have a bearing upon the construction of 

 the documents which have passed between the parties, but it is not 

 the thing which entitles them, according to their own view, to your 

 judgment. Xow. so far as it is said to have any bearing upon con- 

 struction. I have dealt with it fully, I hope not too fully. 



I come now to deal with what remains to them of their ground of 

 action, the question of this international law as affecting the contract. 



They are faced of course with this difficulty, namely, that they are 

 claiming sovereign rights, the things for which nations fight, and for 

 which patriots suffer, they are claiming these sovereign rights with- 



