scribe. No American citizen is allowed to expatriate himself when his country is at war.

31

Protegés and de facto citizens.-There are at least two occasions when persons not citizens may come under the protection of a state abroad. The first is when, by international agreement or for reasons of humanity, a state or its diplomatic or naval agents abroad undertake or assume this protection. Agreements of a permanent nature may be made by a small nation, like Switzerland, or in case of a war of a temporary nature by neutral diplomatic agents in behalf of belligerent subjects in an enemy's country, like the position assumed by the American minister in Paris towards German subjects in the Franco-German War. In these cases the protected persons are known as protegés.

Instances of naval protection afforded to other citizens by our naval vessels in uncivilized and weak communities has been frequent in times past in the Orient, and in the Straits of Magellan in case of a penal revolt, and also in 1877 on the occasion of a negro insurrection at Santa Cruz in the West Indies.

It may happen also that a state promises diplomatic protection in certain Oriental countries to natives in the service of embassies or consulates. Such natives are known as de facto subjects of the protecting states. This position of protection is anomalous, but authorized by the treaty of 1880 with Morocco, of which the United States was a participant.

Protection of citizens abroad by naval commanders.-By the Naval Regulations of the United States the following is enjoined upon officers of the Navy in command:

Art. 334. "During a war between civilized nations with which the United States is at peace, he and all under his command, shall observe the laws of neutrality and respect a lawful blockade, but at the same time make every possible

Act of Congress Ap., March 2, 1907.

effort that is consistent with the rules of international law to preserve and protect the lives and property of citizens of the United States wherever situated."

Art. 341. "On occasions where injury to the United States or to citizens thereof is committed or threatened, in violation of the principles of international law or treaty rights, he shall consult with the diplomatic representative or consul of the United States, and take such steps as the gravity of the case demands, reporting immediately to the Secretary of the Navy all the facts. The responsibility for any action taken by a naval force, however, rests wholly upon the commanding officer thereof."

Art. 342. "The use of force against a foreign and friendly state, or against anyone within the territories thereof, is illegal. The right of self-preservation, however, is a right which belongs to states as well as to individuals, and in the case of states it includes the protection of the state, its honor, and its possessions, and the lives and property of its citizens against arbitrary violence, actual or impending, whereby the state or its citizens may suffer irreparable injury. The conditions calling for the application of the right of self-preservation cannot be defined beforehand, but must be left to the sound judgment of responsible officers, who are to perform their duties in this respect with all possible care and forbearance. In no case shall force be exercised in time of peace otherwise than as an application of the right of self-preservation as above defined. It must be used only as a last resort, and then only to the extent which is absolutely necessary to accomplish the end required. It can never be exercised with a view to inflicting punishment for acts already committed." "

Art. 343. "Whenever, in the application of the above-mentioned principles, it shall become necessary to land an armed force in foreign territory on occasions of political disturbance,

82 Navy Regs., 1909.

where the local authorities are unable to give adequate protection to life and property, the assent of such authorities, or of some one of them, shall first be obtained, if it can be done without prejudice to the interests involved."

Art. 345. "So far as lies within their power, commandersin-chief and captains of ships shall protect all merchant vessels of the United States in lawful occupations, and advance the commercial interests of this country, always acting in accordance with international law and treaty obligations."

Classification of states with regard to stability and protection afforded.—All states, with respect to their character or institutions, may be divided into three general classes: (1) Stable, (2) weak, (3) semi-civilized or barbarous.

In the case of states possessing stable institutions, and whose courts are always ready and open for hearings or trials for the purpose of affording redress for the injuries of individuals, all that is ordinarily done is to call the attention of the government of the state through the usual diplomatic channels, to any seeming failure of justice in respect to citizens abroad, and if a dispute follows it is settled diplomatically by arbitration or in extreme cases by war.

66

Case of the "Baltimore."-A case in an ordinarily stable country was that of mob violence towards the crew of the U. S. S. "Baltimore" in Valparaiso, Chile, on October 16, 1891. A considerable number of the men of the Baltimore " being on leave and unarmed on shore in the city were assaulted by armed men nearly simultaneously in different localities in the city. One petty officer was killed and another died from his injuries, while seven or eight of the seamen were seriously injured.

The ground taken by the United States in this matter was: First. That the attack was one upon the men because they wore the uniform of the United States Navy, and as a feeling

33 U. S. Navy Regs., 1909.

of hostility to the United States, and not from any action upon the part of our men.

Second. That the authorities of Valparaiso failed in their duty in not giving police protection to the attacked men, which offense was aggravated by the fact that some of the police of the city, as well as some Chilean sailors and soldiers, joined in the attack."

The Chilean Government entered a general denial of hostile intent against the United States, and quoted the following from a dispatch from our Secretary of State in connection with riots against Italian subjects within our territory. The dispatch was to the Marquis Imperiali, under date of May 21, 1891, and the words quoted were as follows: "There is no government, however civilized it may be, however great may be the vigilance displayed by its police, however severe its criminal code may be, and however speedy and inflexible may be its administration of justice, that can guarantee its own citizens against violence growing out of individual malice or a sudden popular tumult."

With regard to such cases in general Vattel also says that: "It would be unjust to impute to the nation all the faults of its citizens. In general, it cannot be said that one has received an injury from a nation because some of its members have injured him."

وو

The vital question of international law involved in the Baltimore case was, however, whether the Chilean Government took proper or sufficient measures to prevent the attack and to bring the offenders to punishment. This was a question of fact which our government had to decide for itself according to all the evidence in its possession, and it decided that the Government of Chile had not done all that it should have done to prevent the attack and to punish the offenders."

34 Moore's Digest, p. 854, etc.

35 Snow's Int. Law. ed. by Stockton, p. 54.

With respect to the second class of states, that is weak states with unstable governments, it at times occurs that citizens abroad must be protected at once, not by diplomatic representation; there is no time for that, but by the employment of naval force.

Under these circumstances whenever civil disturbances occur, it is usual for naval powers to send a naval force to the place of the troubles or threatened commotion for the purpose of affording protection or asylum to the citizens that may be there domiciled. In those cases the regulations of the Navy already quoted must be followed so far as they can apply. The responsibility for any action taken by a naval force, rests wholly upon the commanding officer thereof, after due consultation with the diplomatic or consular officer upon the spot.

At times the mere appearance of a naval force, accompanied by a firm attitude on the part of the officer in command, will prevent the resort to active measures. A display of force is sometimes ordered by Congress or by the President of the United States.

It happens at times that the commanding officer of a naval force is required by circumstances or request to protect the citizens of other countries than his own. Instances of this kind have occurred of late years, for example, in the protection afforded by British men-of-war in Alaska at the time of a threatened Indian uprising, and by our own vessels on the Isthmus of Panama and at Bluefields in Nicaragua.

As to the third class of governments, such as are ordinarily classed as semi-civilized or barbarous, intervention by force in behalf of citizens domiciled or sojourning there is a more common matter. In these countries the employment of naval forces is the principal means of such protection, added thereto at times by the landing of military detachments.