« PreviousContinue »
veying the sovereign of a state. Vessels transporting military forces in command of regularly commissioned government officers are usually granted immunities accorded to men-of-war.
(3) Over private vessels in foreign waters the amount of jurisdiction claimed by different states
varies. The principle which is meeting with growing favor, as shown by practice and by treaty stipulation, is stated by Chief Justice Waite in 1886 as follows,“ Disorders which disturb only the peace of the ship, or those on board, are to be dealt with exclusively by the sovereignty of the home of the ship, but those which disturb the public peace may be suppressed, and, if need be, the offenders punished by the proper authorities of the local jurisdiction.”]
The position of France is, briefly, to assume no jurisdiction over foreign merchantmen within her ports save in cases where the act affects some person other than those belonging to the ship, where the local authorities are expressly called upon to interfere, or, when the order of the port is disturbed.2
The British Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act of Aug. 28, 1878, gives jurisdiction to the authorities over all acts committed within the marine league, even though the ships are not anchored but merely passing through territorial waters. This is an extreme position, and not supported by the best authorities, even in Great Britain.
The position of France, as stated above, is open to little objection either in practice or theory, and is more and more becoming a form of treaty agreement, and may be considered generally approved. Where these principles are adopted the jurisdiction of breaches of order within the ship may be referred to the home consul at the port, who has jurisdiction, and if necessary may call upon the local officers to assist him in enforcing his authority.
1 Wildenhus's Case, 120 U. S. 1, 18. 2 Bonfils, “ De la compétence des tribunaux français," § 326, 8 Statutes, 41 and 42, Vict., p. 579.
(4) In recent years special exemption from jurisdiction has been accorded to certain semipublic vessels engaged particularly in the postal and scientific service. Vessels in the postal seryice have by treaties been accorded special freedom from customs and port regulations; and by the Convention between Great Britain and France, Aug. 30, 1890 (Art. 9), it is agreed that in time of war such vessels shall be free from molestation till one of the states shall give formal notice that communication is at an end.
§ 56. Jurisdiction over Persons — Nationality Under the discussion of jurisdiction of the state over persons comes the question of nationality. Nationality involves the reciprocal relations of allegiance and protection on the part of the person and state. It corresponds to citizenship in the broad sense of that terin. In general a state may exercise jurisdiction over its own subjects or citizens as it will, and the relations of a state to its citizens are matters of municipal law only.
A state exercises jurisdiction over all persons within its limits except certain officers of other states by exterritoriality entitled to exemption from local jurisdiction. In some of the Eastern states citizens of Western states are by treaty exempt from certain local laws. This last exemption may properly be said to be by local law, as a treaty becomes a part of the state law for the subjects upon which it touches.
The jurisdiction also varies with the status of the person as regards his relations to other states. The conflict of laws in regard to nationality forms an important part of private international law.
§ 57. Jurisdiction over Natural-born Subjects Children born within a state of which the parents are citizens are natural-born subjects of that state. Such persons are fully under the local jurisdiction.
Foundlings, because of the uncertainty of parentage, are considered subjects of the state in which they are found.
Illegitimate children take the nationality of the mother, provided they are born in the state of which the mother is subject.
The great bulk of the population of all states, except those most recently founded, is natural-born, and therefore fully under local jurisdiction.
§ 58. Foreign-born Subjects It is the general principle that each state determines citizenship by its own laws. The status of persons born abroad may become very uncertain by virtue of the conflict of laws of the state of which one or both the parents are citizens and the state in which the child is born.
These laws in regard to children born to parents while sojourning in foreign countries may be classified as follows:
(a) The child born in the foreign country is a subject of the state of which his parents are citizens. That the child inherits the nationality of his father is a common maxim known as jus sanguinis. The United States law says, “ All children heretofore born or hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were or may be at the time of their birth citizens thereof, are declared to be citizens of the United States ; but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United States."1 The jus sanguinis is followed by Austria, Germany, Hungary,4 Sweden, Switzerland, and by some of the smaller European states.
(6) Certain states follow the rule of jus soli, maintaining that the place of birth determines the nationality. Great Britain, by Article 4, of the Act of May 12, 1870, adopts this principle. By the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, “ All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." The laws of the United States have given rise to many questions.7 Portugal and most of the South American states follow the jus soli.
(c) Other states follow sometimes the jus sanguinis, sometimes jus soli, and sometimes modifications of these laws. The laws of Belgium and Spain regard the child of an alien as an alien, though on attaining majority the child may choose the citizenship of the country of his birth. The French laws of June 26–28, 1889, and July 22, 1893, consider as subjects the children born abroad to French citizens, also the children of foreigners born in France, unless these children within one year after attaining majority elect the nationality of their parents. Most states allow the descendants born to foreigners sojourning within their limits to elect their allegiance on attaining majority. Switzerland, however, strongly maintains the jus sanguinis, without according any choice to the descendants born to foreigners within her limits, or to her own subjects born abroad except by formal renunciation of citizenship. Thus the child of a citizen of Switzerland born in France would be by French law a citizen of France, and by Swiss law a citizen of Switzerland.
1 U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1993 ; 1 Gould and Tucker, 478; 2 ibid., 178, 203. 2 Civil Code, Art. 28. 8 Law of June 1, 1870. 4 Dec. 24, 1879. 6 Feb. 27, 1858. 6 July 3, 1876. ? Whart., § 183 ff.
By the law of Germany, a citizen of Germany sojourning more than ten years abroad without registration at his consulate loses his German citizenship, without necessarily acquiring the citizenship of the country of his sojourn, thereby becoming heimatlos, or a “man without a country.”
At the present time the laws in regard to descendants born to parents sojourning in a foreign state show the widest diversity and give rise to unfortunate complications. 1
$ 59. Jurisdiction by Virtue of Acquired Nationality
The jurisdiction of a state extends to those who voluntarily acquire its citizenship.
(a) A woman in most states by marriage acquires the nationality of her husbaná. In some of the South American states the husband acquires the citizenship of
13 Pradier-Fodéré, 1648–1653.