QUESTION ONE. 57 



enjoy certain national property in common with the subjects of the 

 State carries with it by implication an entire surrender, in so far as 

 the property in question is concerned, of one of the highest rights of 

 sovereignty, the right of legislation." The author was here guilty 

 of another lapse and had lost sight of the fact that the simple grant 

 to foreign subjects of which he speaks was a right of fishery granted 

 by one State to another, and that it was what he had admitted it to 

 be in his servitude discussion, a servitude derogating from the full 

 enforcement of sovereignty over parts of the national territory. His 

 concluding observation that the United States could demand no more 

 "than that American citizens should not be subjected to laws or 

 regulations, either affecting them alone, or enacted for the purpose 

 of putting them at a disadvantage," is so far from correct that one 

 of the most eminent of modern English statesmen in dealing with the 

 very matter, as will be shown in another connection, made no such 

 broad claim, and in the very submission in this Question Great Brit- 

 ain admits that American inhabitants can not be subjected to such 

 laws and regulations unless they are inherently reasonable, necessary, 

 and appropriate, fair, just, and equitable. 



Mr. Hall is not a safe author to rely on in cases where his sym- 

 pathies or prejudices are : nvolved. This is not the view alone of 

 counsel for the United States. Doctor Oppenheim, the learned and 

 impartial English publicist, at present professor of international law 

 at Cambridge University, in the preface to the second volume of his 

 work on international law, refers to the fault of writers who manifest 

 their political sympathies and antipathies, a fault of which he says : 

 "Hall's classical treatise furnishes at once an illustration and a 

 warning." 



The treaty provisions, reproduced in the British Case as examples, 

 do not bear upon the position which the United States has taken in 

 this argument. Stipulations for the entry of citizens or subjects of 

 one nation into the territory of another, entitling them to do business 

 there, and to have their property and property, rights respected, are 

 mere obligations as distinguished from real rights and do not dero- 

 gate from sovereignty. 



With reference to the first article of the reciprocity treaty of 1854 

 between the United States and Great Britain, printed in the British 

 Case, the United States takes the position that by that article a 



