COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 85 



AUTHORITIES QUOTED TO SHOW THAT LAWS OF A NATION 

 AFFECT NONE BUT ITS OWN SUBJECTS, AND FOREIGN- 

 ERS WHOSE PERSONS OR PROPERTY MAY BE WITHIN 

 ITS TERRITORIAL, JURISDICTION. 



In connection with this branch of the subject, viz., the 

 scope and ettect of the legishition of other nations, it is 

 essential to keep in mind the well-known rule of interna- 

 tioual law, that the laws of a nation affect none but its own 

 subjects and the subjects of other nations whose ])ersonsor 

 property may be within its territorial jurisdiction. 



No nations have more consistently affirmed this rule than 

 the United States and Great Britain, and a large number 

 of citations might be given establishing this proposition, 

 but a few will suffice. 



Two distinguished American jurists may be quoted. 

 Mr. Sedgwick writes : 



As <i general proposition, the rule is good that no nation is bound Sedgwick, "In- 

 to respect the laws of another nation, except as to persons or property terpretation and 

 within the limits of the latter. This is the general rule of our law, ft^iftutory and 

 and this, too, is the language of the great civilians. " Constat, igitar," CourtLaw,'"New 

 says Kodeuburg [De Stat., ch. 3, s. 1, p. 7], "extra territoriitm legem York, 1857, p. 70. 

 dieere Jicere nemini, idqne si fecerit qiiis, impune el iion pareri, quippe ibi 



cessat siafutorum fuiidamentum, rohur, et jtiridictio." " Null inn 

 98 statutiim," says P. Voet [De Stat., s. 4, ch. 2, n. 7, p. 124. Id. 130, 



138; ed. 1661], " sive in rem sire in personam, si de ratione juris 

 civilis sermo mstituatur sese extendil ultra statuentis territorUim." And so 

 says Boullenois: " Of strict right no laws made by a Sovereign liave 

 anj^ force or authority except within the limit of his dominion." [1 

 Boullenois Prin. Gen., 6, p. 4.] 



Mr. Justice Story states the same proposition as one of 

 the— 



maxims or axioms which constitute the basis upon which all reason- Story, "Com- 

 ings on the subject must necessarily rest, and without the express or meutaries on the 

 tacit admission of which it will be found impossible to arrive at any L"°*'"''8t] r^ 

 principles to govern the conduct of nations, or to regulate the due tion, by Bigelow^ 

 administration of justice. Boston, 1883, s! 



20, p. 22. 



The writer proceeds to quote the passages from Eoden- ibid.,p.2i. 

 burg, Voet, and Boullenois, already cited by Mr. Sedgwick, ^^^^■^'p-^'^- 



The rule of English law is no less clear. 



Sir P. B. Maxwell, in a work which is the standard author- Maxweiionthe 

 ity on the interpretation of Statutes, writes: o/statutes/'sud 



Another general presumption is that the Legislature does not intend jgg3 gj^ap. vi p'. 

 to exceed its jurisdiction. 168.' 



Primarily, the legislation of a country is territorial. The general 

 rule is that extra terriloriiim Jus dicenti impune non paretur: leges extra 

 territorium non obligant. The laws of a nation apply to ail its subjects 

 and to all things within its territories, including in this expression 

 not only its ports and waters which form, in England, part of the 

 adjacent county, but its shi])s, whether armed or unarmed, and the 

 ships of its subjects on the high seas or in foreign tidal waters, and 

 foreign private shijis within its ports. They apply also to all for- 

 eigners within its territories as regards criminal, police, and, indeed, 

 all other matters except some questions of personal status or capacity, 

 in which, by the comity of nations, the law of their own country, or 

 the lex loci actus or contractus applies. 



It is true this does not comprise the whole of the legitimate juris- 

 diction of a State ; for it has a right to impose its legislation on its 

 subjects, natural or naturalized, in every part of the world; and, 

 indeed, on such matters as personal status or capacity it is understood 

 always to do so; but, with that exception, in the absence of an iuten- 



