THE FISIIEIUES. 220 



the impressment of real or pretended Britlsli subjects 

 on board ships of the United States. And it lett 

 room, by its silence, for Great Britain to raise ques- 

 tion of our right to participate in the coast fisheries, 

 \vhich question, although dealt with from time to time 

 in successive treaties, has more than once seriously 

 endangered the peace of the two Governments. 



Does war have the elTect of annulling all existing 

 treaties 1 A general answer to this question is given 

 by one of the most authoritative of modern publicists 

 [Calvo] as follows : 



"If the treaty of peace modifies anterior treaties, or express- 

 ly declares the renewal of them, the dispositions of the treaty 

 of peace arc thereafter to constitute the law; but if no partic- 

 ular mention is made in this respect, the anterior treaties must 

 necessarily continue to have full force and effect. In order 

 that they should be deemed definitively abroijated, it -would 

 be recpiisite that they shall not only be suspended by tlic war 

 but annidled in fact, as in the case of treaties of alliance of 

 which the raison (VCtrc ceases at the end of the war: 't would 

 bo requisite, indeed, that tlicir contents should bo incompatible 

 witli the stipulations of the treaty of ))eace, which occuis, fur 

 e.\an^l)le, in what regards ancient treaties relative to the de- 

 limitation of frontiers l)etween two States." 



The Supreme Court of the United States lays down 



the law as follows: 



" Wc think that treaties stipulating for permanent rif/Jds and 

 general arrangements, and professing to aim at peri)ctuity, and 

 to deal with the case of war as ■well as of ])eace, do not cease 

 on the occurrence of war, but are, at most, only suspended 

 while it lasts ; and unless they arc waived by the parties, or 

 new and repugnant stipulations are made, t/iei/ rcvioe in their 

 operations at the return of peace." ^ 



Such has been the received doctrine in the United 



