友情提示:如果本网页打开太慢或显示不完整,请尝试鼠标右键“刷新”本网页!阅读过程发现任何错误请告诉我们,谢谢!! 报告错误
热门书库 返回本书目录 我的书架 我的书签 TXT全本下载 进入书吧 加入书签

part12-第1章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!







        〃FREE SHIPS MAKE FREE GOODS〃




        _To the U。S。 Minister to France_

        (ROBERT R。 LIVINGSTON)

        _Monticello; Sep。 9; 1801_




        DEAR SIR;  You will receive; probably by this post; from the

Secretary of State; his final instructions for your mission to

France。  We have not thought it necessary to say anything in them on

the great question of the maritime law of nations; which at present

agitates Europe; that is to say; whether free ships shall make free

goods; because we do not mean to take any side in it during the war。

But; as I had before communicated to you some loose thoughts on that

subject; and have since considered it with somewhat more attention; I

have thought it might not be unuseful that you should possess my

ideas in a more matured form than that in which they were before

given。  Unforeseen circumstances may perhaps oblige you to hazard an

opinion; on some occasion or other; on this subject; and it is better

that it should not be at variance with ours。  I write this; too;

myself; that it may not be considered as official; but merely my

individual opinion; unadvised by those official counsellors whose

opinions I deem my safest guide; & should unquestionably take in

form; were circumstances to call for a solemn decision of the

question。




        When Europe assumed the general form in which it is occupied by

the nations now composing it; and turned its attention to maritime

commerce; we found among its earliest practices; that of taking the

goods of an enemy from the ship of a friend; and that into this

practice every maritime State went sooner or later; as it appeared on

the theatre of the ocean。  If; therefore; we are to consider the

practice of nations as the sole & sufficient evidence of the law of

nature among nations; we should unquestionably place this principle

among those of natural laws。  But it's inconveniences; as they

affected neutral nations peaceably pursuing their commerce; and it's

tendency to embroil them with the powers happening to be at war; and

thus to extend the flames of war; induced nations to introduce by

special compacts; from time to time; a more convenient rule; that

〃free ships should make free goods;〃 and this latter principle has by

every maritime nation of Europe been established; to a greater or

less degree; in it's treaties with other nations; insomuch; that all

of them have; more or less frequently; assented to it; as a rule of

action in particular cases。  Indeed; it is now urged; and I think

with great appearance of reason; that this is genuine principle

dictated by national morality; & that the first practice arose from

accident; and the particular convenience of the States which first

figured on the water; rather than from well…digested reflections on

the relations of friend and enemy; on the rights of territorial

jurisdiction; & on the dictates of moral law applied to these。  Thus

it had never been supposed lawful; in the territory of a friend to

seize the goods of an enemy。  On an element which nature has not

subjected to the jurisdiction of any particular nation; but has made

common to all for the purposes to which it is fitted; it would seem

that the particular portion of it which happens to be occupied by the

vessel of any nation; in the course of it's voyage; is for the

moment; the exclusive property of that; and nation; with the vessel;

is exempt from intrusion by any other; & from it's jurisdiction; as

much as if it were lying in the harbor of it's sovereign。  In no

country; we believe; is the rule otherwise; as to the subjects of

property common to all。  Thus the place occupied by an individual in

a highway; a church; a theatre; or other public assembly; cannot be

intruded on; while it's occupant holds it for the purposes of it's

institution。  The persons on board a vessel traversing the ocean;

carry with them the laws of their nation; have among themselves a

jurisdiction; a police; not established by their individual will; but

by the authority of their nation; of whose territory their vessel

still seems to compose a part; so long as it does not enter the

exclusive territory of another。  No nation ever pretended a right to

govern by their laws the ship of another nation navigating the ocean。

By what law then can it enter that ship while in peaceable & orderly

use of the common element?  We recognize no natural precept for

submission to such a right; & perceive no distinction between the

movable & immovable jurisdiction of a friend; which would authorize

the entering the one & not the other; to seize the property of an

enemy。




        It may be objected that this proves too much; as it proves you

cannot enter the ship of a friend to search for contraband of war。

But this is not proving too much。  We believe the practice of seizing

what is called contraband of war; is an abusive practice; not founded

in natural right。  War between two nations cannot diminish the rights

of the rest of the world remaining at peace。  The doctrine that the

rights of nations remaining quietly under the exercise of moral &

social duties; are to give way to the convenience of those who prefer

plundering & murdering one another; is a monstrous doctrine; and

ought to yield to the more rational law; that 〃the wrongs which two

nations endeavor to inflict on each other; must not infringe on the

rights or conveniences of those remaining at peace。〃  And what is

_contraband_; by the law of nature?  Either everything which may aid

or comfort an enemy; or nothing。  Either all commerce which would

accommodate him is unlawful; or none is。  The difference between

articles of one or another description; is a difference in degree

only。  No line between them can be drawn。  Either all intercourse

must cease between neutrals & belligerents; or all be permitted。  Can

the world hesitate to say which shall be the rule?  Shall two nations

turning tigers; break up in one instant the peaceable relations of

the whole world?  Reason & nature clearly pronounce that the neutral

is to go onin the enjoyment of all it's rights; that it's commerce

remains free; not subject to the jurisdiction of another; nor

consequently it's vessels to search; or to enquiries whether their

contents are the property of an enemy; or are of those which have

been called contraband of war。2




        Nor does this doctrine contravene the right of preventing

vessels from entering a blockaded port。  This right stands on other

ground。  When the fleet of any nation actually beleaguers the port of

its enemy; no other has a right to enter their line; any more than

their line of battle in the open sea; or their lines of

circumvallation; or of encampment; or of battle array on land。  The

space included within their lines in any of those cases; is either

the property of their enemy; or it is common property assumed and

possessed for the moment; which cannot be intruded on; even by a

neutr
返回目录 下一页 回到顶部 0 0
未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
温馨提示: 温看小说的同时发表评论,说出自己的看法和其它小伙伴们分享也不错哦!发表书评还可以获得积分和经验奖励,认真写原创书评 被采纳为精评可以获得大量金币、积分和经验奖励哦!