abstract sense, would embrace those rules of intereourse be- tween nations which are deduced from their rights and moral claims; or, in other words, it is the expression of the jural and moral relations of States to one another.

"If international law were not made up of rules for which reasons could be given satisfactory to man's intcllectual and moral nature, if it were not built on prineiples of right, it would be even less of a science than is the code which governs the aetions of polite society."

It is evident, therefore, that the one fundamental right, of which the "law of nations" is at once the expression and the gnardian, is the right of erery nation to just treatment from other nations, the right of even the smallest republie eqnally with "tho most powerful kingdom." Just as the one funda mental right, of wlich civil law is the expression and guardian, is the right of each individual to just treatment from every other iudividual a right indefeasible, inalienable, in nowise strengthened by power as majestic lessened by weakness or in the person of "the dwarf" as in that of the giant."

Of justice, Vattel says: "Justice is the basis of all society, the sure bond of all commerce,

"All nations are under a strict obligation toward each other, to observe it serupulously and carefully, to abstain from auything that may violate it. * ** "The right of refusing to submit to injustice by force if neccssary, is part of the law of nature, and as such recognized by the law of nations.

"In vain would Nature give injustice, in vain would she oblige others to be just in their dealings with us, if we could not when they refused to discharge this duty. The just would lie at the mercy of avarice and injustice, and all their rights would soon become useless. distinct branches, first, the right of a just defence, which be to cnltivate justice injustice, of resisting right to refuse submitting us a to lawfully make use of force From the foregoing right arise, as two