2002 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



ments which were supposed to create servitudes, as being well worthy 

 the attention of the Tribunal. And he described Mr. Clauss as 

 a learned author. Now when it appears that in this b(x>k, which 

 the Tribunal has, there were statements of fact, of a great range of 

 facts, and expressions of opinion which do not suit the British Case. 

 my learned friend the Attorney-General flouts Mr. Clauss. and he 

 rather criticises him for shrinking from giving a definition of sov- 

 ereignty. The Attorney-General goes on to make a definition of 

 sovereignty, and I am bound to say that when I read his definition 

 I am inclined to think Mr. Clauss was wise, for the Attorney-Gen- 

 eral's definition is either defective or no definition at all. The defi- 

 nition by the Attorney-General [p. 1033] is 



" Sovereignty is the supreme governing power vested in some de- 

 fined person or persons over all persons and things within the limit 

 or under the control of a State. That is the modern view of sov- 

 ereignty." 



If that means by the expression " within the limit of a State " 

 within the spatial territorial sphere of the State, it excludes the very 

 important range of sovereignty which is maintained generally on 

 the continent, that is, the control over the person, the subject, the 

 citizen, wherever he goes, and which we certainly do exercise, all of 

 us, all countries in the Western civilised world, within the range of 

 extra-territoriality, in the Oriental countries. If the words " within 

 the limit of a state " do not refer to spatial extent, then we have no 

 definition, because this amounts merely to saying that sovereignty 

 is the power to govern all persons and things within the power of 

 government; and the addition of the words "or under the control 

 of a state " adds nothing to the definition, because it is merely ex- 

 pressing the same idea in different words. 



Now, let me join Sir William in rushing in where Mr. Clauss 

 feared to tread. I do it with more confidence, because there is no coun- 

 sel to come after me, and I am sure that the Court will be judicial 

 in its treatment of the subject. I am going to state what seems to 

 me to be the modern idea of sovereignty, the universal idea, and bast- 

 it upon the definition of a very great English thinker I should 

 say, although, of course, it is open to difference of opinion and dis- 

 pute, the most accurate English thinker of modern times and that 

 is John Austin. Basing the definition upon what he says, I should 

 say: "Sovereignty is the power to control, without accountability, 

 all persons constituting an organised political community and the 

 territory occupied by them, and all persons and things within that 

 territory." 



The essential quality of the definition, which is Austin's, is the free- 

 dom from accountability to anyone, and that is the same idea, I 



