Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:41:55.726Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Theory of the Independence and Equality of States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Philip Marshall Brown
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

International law in common with other sciences is compelled to lay down certain major premises or postulates. These are variously termed the “fundamental,” “primordial,” “inherent,” or “absolute rights” of the state. Thus Hall says:

The ultimate foundation of international law is an assumption that states possess rights and are subject to duties corresponding to the facts of their postulated nature. In virtue of this assumption it is held that since states exist, and are independent beings, possessing property, they have the right to do whatever is necessary for the purpose of continuing and developing their existence, of giving effect to and preserving their independence, and of holding and acquiring property, subject to the qualification that they are bound correlatively to respect these rights in others. It is also considered that their moral nature imposes upon them the duties of good faith, of concession of redress for wrongs, of regard for the personal dignity of their fellows, and to a certain extent of sociability.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , April 1915 , pp. 305 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1915

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 International Law, 6th. ed., p. 43.

2 Droit International Public, 5th ed., p. 133.

3 International Law, 6th ed., p. 18.

4 Principles of International Law, 3rd ed., p. 242.

5 Prize Cases, in Scott’s Cases, p. 479.

6 Scott’s Cases, p. 19.

7 Quoted by Wheaton, 8th ed., p. 5, as edited by Dana.

8 Principles of International Law, 3rd ed., p. 22.

9 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary.

10 International Law, 6th ed., p. 39.

11 Scott’s Cases, p. 2.

12 International Law, p. 42.

13 Commentaries, I, 1, 43.

14 Droit International, 2d. ed., p. 53.

15 De Foro Legatorum, III, 10

16 International Law, 6th ed., p. 82.

17 M’Ilvaine v. Coxe’s Lessee, 1808, 4 Cranch, 209, 212.

18 Institutes of the Law of Nations, I, 141.

19 Institutes, I, 135

20 Institutes, I, 155.

21 Institutes, I, 192.

22 Ibid., I, 163.

23 Ibid., I, 136.

24 Theory of the State, 2d. ed., pp. 19–22.

25 International Law, I, 3.

26 Quoted by Lorimer, I, 111.

27 Principles, p. 111.

28 International Law, p. 18.

29 Institutes, I, p. 140.

30 International Law, Dana’s Ed., p. 31.

31 The Antelope, 1825, 10 Wheaton, 66, 122.

32 See article by Hicks, F. C. on “The Equality of States and The Hague Conferences,” this Journal, Vol. II, p. 530 Google Scholar.

33 Institutes, I, 170.

34 Ibid., II, 260.

35 Ibid., I, 187.

36 Ibid., I, 182.

37 Oppenheim, International Law, 1st ed., I, 161.

38 Droit International Public, 5th ed., p. 156.

39 Institutes, I, 216.

40 Ibid., II, 209–210.

41 Institutes, II, 16.

42 Ibid., II, 253.

43 Ibid., II, 249.

44 Institutes, I, 130.

45 L’Equilibre Européen, p. 96.

46 Principles, p. 29.