nor to require a salute; but, if they should be saluted, they are to return it, gun for gun. Foreign vessels of war in Spanish ports are to salute only those of their own nation. By royal orders of January, 1826, and September 7th, 1828, it is directed, that Spanish.ports, in which there are foreign vessels, shall, on the birth days of such foreign sovereigns, make the same salutes and demonstrations as are made on the birth days of Spanish sovereigns, provided that such foreign vessels extend the same courtesies on such Spanish festival occasions. (Riquelme, Derecho Pub. Int., lib. 1, tit. 2, ch. 11; Ordenanzas de la Armada, passim.)

§ 27. The military regulations for the government of the army of the United States, determine with great minuteness the salutes and military honors to be paid by troops and forts to our civil, military, and naval officers, according to the rank of each. Thus, a national salute is determined by the number of states composing the Union, at the rate of one gun for each state. The President of the United States alone, is to receive a salute of twenty-one guns; the Vice President, seventeen guns; the heads of the executive departments of the federal government, the commanding general of the army, and the governors of states and territories, within their respective jurisdictions, fifteen guns; major generals, and ministers to foreign states, thirteen guns; brigadier generals, eleven guns; and officers of the navy, according to their relative rank with officers of the army. The President and Vice President of the United States, are to be received by troops. with standards and colors dropping, officers saluting, drums beating, and trumpets sounding. The compliments of other officers of government are varied according to the rank of each. Foreign officers, whether civil, military, or naval, when invited to visit a military post or national vessel, are to be saluted according to their rank, and to receive the same honors as officers of the United States of the rank which corresponds. Thus, a foreign sovereign prince receives the same honors as the President of the United States; foreign ambassadors and ministers, the same as American envoys of corresponding rank to foreign courts, etc. Foreign ships of war, entering American ports, are saluted from fortifica. tions in return for a similar compliment, gun for gun, on

notice being officially received of such intended salute. It is usual to agree beforehand what number of guns are to be fired, and it is directed that in no case shall the compliment exceed the national salute. Similar rules are established for the navy of the United States, with respect to salutes to be given to our own and foreign officers. American ships of war, on visiting foreign ports, salute fortifications on receiving notice that the compliment will be returnad, gun for gun. Our ships salute each other and foreign ships, according to the rank of their respective commanders. (U. S. Army Regulations; U. S. Navy Regulations.)

§ 28. These rules, however just and proper in themselves, sometimes give rise to serious questions in their application to particular cases. Thus, should a commodore, or flag officer, who is the highest officer in the United States navy, receive the same honors as a British or French admiral, who has the same command, or only such as are due to a British or French commodore, who, although enjoying the same title, has an inferior command, and is, in fact, of inferior rank. Again, is a general of the highest rank in the United States army to receive the same honors as a British or French marshal, or only those of an inferior officer, who has the same title of general? Again, if a foreign sovereign prince should visit an American ship of war in one of his own ports, should he receive only the honors which such ship pays to the President of the United States, or the honors, perhaps, much higher, which would be due to him from one of his own ships? Such questions, although relating to mere matters of etiquette and ceremony, are sometimes of considerable importance, as promoting or disturbing relations of friendship. Where not arranged by some international agreement, they should be settled in each case by a mutual understanding, entered into beforehand, between the immediate parties who give and receive the salutes, and where no such agreement can be made, it is proper to abstain from all salutes, visits, and ceremonies.

A dispute of this kind, with respect to relative rank, occurred in the anchorage of Sacraficios, Mexico, between Vice Admiral Baudin, commanding the French ship La Néréide, and Commodore Shubrick, commanding the Amer

ican sloop Macedonian. A similar difficulty, with respect to salutes, occurred at Toulon, in 1830, between Vice Admiral de Rigny, commanding the French ship le Conquerant, and the captain of an English frigate. (Ortolan, Diplomatie de la Mer, tome 1, liv. 2, ch. 15; Blanchard et Dauzats, Relation de l'expedition F. au Mexico, pp. 583-585; Reports of the Sec. of the Navy, Cong. Doc., 1841, etc.; Cooper, Naval Hist. of the United States, introduction.)

§ 29. It is hardly probale that different nations will ever assign the same names or grades to the officers of the same command, either upon land or in their respective naval forces.. Difficult and embarrassing questions of rank and precedence will, therefore, necessarily arise, whenever they meet upon the high seas or in foreign ports. In the matter of salutes it would be easy to avoid any question of this kind, by considering all salutes as international, instead of personal, to the officer, according to his rank, such salutes being always returned gun for gun, as is now the practice between ships and forts. If the salute were considered as given to the flag borne by the ship instead of the officer commanding it, the salutes would necessarily be equal, and always the same, as the flag represents the state to which it belongs, and all sovereign and independent states are now considered, in international law, of equal dignity, in matters of ceremony. A similar rule might be applied to military salutes given to foreign officers on land, each officer entitled to a salute, being considered as representing the dignity of his state, whatever might be the name or rank conferred upon him by such state. The question of time as to which should salute first, would then be governed by the rules already established with respect to vessels of equal rank. (Kluber, Droit des Gens, § 121; Nau, Volkerseerecht, § 143; Heffler, Droit International, § 197; Ortolan, Diplomatie de la Mer, liv. 2, ch. 15; Décret du 15 Août, 1851, Art. 749; Vide, Ante § 22.)

CHAPTER VI.

RIGHTS OF PROPERTY AND OF DOMAIN.

27

CONTENTS.

1. Divisions of the sovereign powers of the state-3 2. Prerogatives of the sovereign-23. Jura majestatis and regalia- 4. Property and domain of state-25. Right of eminent domain-26. Right of a state to own property-27. Modes of acquiring property —¿ 8. Right of disposition of territory-29. Inhabitants of transferred territory-2 10. Examples of alienation by sale-11. By mortgage-2 12. By deeds of gift and bequest-13. Extent of Maritime territory-214. Extent of the terms "coasts and "shores"- 15. Ownership of islands-? 16. Principle of the king's chambers- 17. Difficulties in its application- 18. Claims to contiguous portions of the sea-2 19. Danish sound dues-? 20. Questions of mare-clausum, and mare-liberum-2 21. Black sea, how far a mare-clausum-§ 22. The great lakes and their outlets- 23. Navigable rivers within or bounding on a state- 24. Changes in rivers or lakes dividing states- 25. Effect of such changes on boundaries-¿ 26. Navigable rivers passing through several states- 27. Incidental use of their banks-28. Right of innocent passage-? 29. This right may be modified by compact- 30. Navigation of the Rhine-231. Of other European rivers- 32. Navigation of the Mississippi- 33. Of the St. Lawrence.

§ 1. Before proceeding to discuss the rights of property and domain, it may be proper to define what is understood by the property and domain of a state, as distinguished from the rights of sovereignty, and the powers and prerogatives of the sovereign or ruler.

As remarked in a preceding chapter, the sovereignty of a state is the collection of the wills and powers of all the individual members of which the state is composed. According to Grotius, Puffendorf, and more modern text-writers, this power has two subjects, common and proper, the former being the state itself or the community which constitutes the state, and the latter the person or persons in whom, by the organic laws, the power is vested; the former, being the source, is one and indivisable, while the latter may be one or many, and is frequently divided into legislative, executive, and judicial, each branch or division being separate and distinct, and sometimes entirely independent. The sovereignty of a state, is, therefore, its public power or authority, and the sovereign is the person, or body of persons, who are invested with that power or authority. If that power or authority remains in the community, the common and proper subjects are one and the same, and the government is a democracy; if vested in a number of individuals, it is an aristocracy; if in a single person, it is a monarchy. These simple forms are modified and varied, according to the organic laws of each state. (Grotius, de Jur. Bel. ac Pac, lib. 1, cap. 3, §§ 6, 7, 17; Puffendorf, de Jur. Nat.et Gent., lib. 7, cap. 2, § 20; cap. 4, §1; cap. 5, §1; Bowyer, Universal Pub. Law, pp. 210216; Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 1, ch. 1, §§ 1, 3; Garden, De Diplomatie, tome 1, pp. 106, 110; Martens, Precis du Droit des Gens, §23; Rayneval, Institutions du Droit, tome 1, p. 44; Ortolan, Diplomatie de la Mer, tome 1, pp. 11, 12; Wheaton, Elm. Int. Law, pt. 1, ch. 2, §5; Ortolan, Domaine International, pp. 16 et seq.; Heffter, Droit International, §§ 16-25; Burlamaqui, Droit de la Nat. et des Gens, tome 4, pt. 2, ch. 5; Merlin, Repertoire, verb. Souveraineté; Dalloz, Repertoire verb. Souveraineté ; Proudhon et Dumay, Domaine Public, tome 1, ch. 7.)

§ 2. The term prerogative is frequently used to express the uncontrolled will of the sovereign power in the state. It is applied not only to the king, but also to the legislative and judicial branches of a government, as the "royal prerogatives," the "prerogatives of parliament," the "prerogatives of the court," etc. Rutherforth says, prerogative simply means a power or will which is discretionary, and above and uncontrolled by any other will, and, that if this power be