States have the rights of _enemies_ only. The recent cases
of the Brilliant, Hiawatha, and Amy Warwick settle this beyond all
question. There was some difference of opinion among the judges, but
only on the question whether this condition _preceded_ the Act of
Congress of July, 1861,--a majority holding that it did, commencing with
the proclamation of the blockade. So that it cannot be denied that we
may treat the Rebel States as _enemies_, and adopt all measures against
them _which any belligerents engaged in a just war may adopt_.

And no principle of the law of nations is more universally admitted than
this,--that the party in the right, after the war is commenced, may
continue to carry it on until the enemy shall submit to such terms as
will be a sufficient indemnity for all the losses and expenses caused by
it, _and will prevent another war in the future_. And to this end he may
conquer and hold in subjection people and territory, until such terms
are submitted to. And until then, the state of war continues. The right
to impose such terms as will _secure peace in the future_ is one of the
fundamental principles of international law.

"Of the absolute international rights of States," says Mr. Wheaton, "one
of the most essential and important, and that which lies at the
foundation of all the rest, is _the right of self-preservation_. This
right necessarily involves all other incidental rights which are
essential as means to give effect to the principal end."

"The end of a just war," says Vattel, "is to avenge, _or prevent_,
injury."

"If _the safety of the State_ lies at stake, our precaution and
foresight cannot be extended too far. Must we delay to arrest our ruin
until it has become inevitable?"

"Where the end is lawful, he who has the right to pursue that end has,
of course, a right to employ all the means necessary for its
attainment."

"When the conqueror has totally subdued a nation, he undoubtedly may, in
the first place, do himself justice respecting the object which had
given rise to the war, and indemnify himself for the expenses and
damages sustained by it; he may, according to the exigency of the case,
subject the nation to punishment by way of example; and he may, _if
prudence require it, render her incapable of doing mischief with the
same ease in future_."

"Every nation," says Chancellor Kent, "has an undoubted right to provide
for its own safety, and to take due precaution against _distan