192 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



which the inhabitants of the country are suliject, and 

 his solicitude is in proportion to the injuries to which 

 he is thus exposed. This fact became conspicuous 

 in the late war between Germany and France, and led 

 to many complaints on the part of British subjects 

 voluntarily residing at the seat of war, which con- 

 strained Lord Granville to disabuse them of the idea 

 that armies in the field were to fold their arms and 

 cease to act, lest by chance they might, in the heat of 

 action, disturb the peace of mind, or damage the 2)rop- 

 erty or person, of some commorant Englishman. 



Incidents of this nature are most of all frequent in 

 times of civil war, especially in those countries of 

 Spanish America, where militarism prevails, and the 

 regular march of civil institutions is interrupted by 

 military factions headed by generals, in contention 

 with one another, and with the constituted authorities 

 of the Government. 



For injuries thus done to its subjects, residing or 

 sojourning in a foreign country, every Government 

 possesses of course the right of war or of reprisals, 

 which, in effect, is the same thing, being the adoption 

 of force as a remedy in lieu of reason : a method of 

 redress for private injuries, which, however common 

 formerly, is contrary to all the prevalent notions of 

 international justice in our day. 



Hence, while it is the right and duty of every Gov- 

 ernment to interpose on proper occasion, through its 

 Ministers or Consuls, or otherwise, on the haj^pening 

 of any injury to its citizens or subjects abroad, yet 

 the recurrence to force as a means of redress is admis- 



