ursue, in
order to fulfil her duties, the effect of the whole is to produce, at
least externally, in the eyes of mankind, a perfect equality of rights
between nations, in the administration of their affairs, and in the
pursuit of their pretensions, without regard to the intrinsic justice
of their conduct, of which others have no right to form a definitive
judgment."

Chancellor Kent, in the 1st volume of his Commentaries, lecture 2d,
after collating the opinions of Grotius, Heineccius, Vattel, and
Rutherford, enunciates the following positions as sanctioned by these
and other learned publicists, viz: that "nations are equal in respect
to each other, and entitled to claim equal consideration for their
rights, whatever may be their relative dimensions or strength, or
however greatly they may differ in government, religion, or manners.
This perfect equality and entire independence of all distinct States
is a fundamental principle of public law. It is a necessary
consequence of this equality, that each nation has a right to govern
itself as it may think proper, and no one nation is entitled to
dictate a form of government or religion, or a course of internal
policy, to another." This writer gives some instances of the violation
of this great national immunity, and amongst them the constant
interference by the ancient Romans, under the pretext of settling
disputes between their neighbors, but with the real purpose of
reducing those neighbors to bondage; the interference of Russia,
Prussia, and Austria, for the dismemberment of Poland; the more recent
invasion of Naples by Austria in 1821, and of Spain by the French
Government in 1823, under the excuse of suppressing a dangerous spirit
of internal revolution and reform.

With reference to this right of self-government in independent
sovereign States, an opinion has been expressed, which, whilst it
concedes this right as inseparable from and as a necessary attribute
of sovereignty and independence, asserts nevertheless some implied and
paramount authority of a supposed international law, to which this
right of self-government must be regarded and exerted as subordinate;
and from which independent and sovereign States can be exempted only
by a protest, or by some public and formal rejection of that
authority. With all respect for those by whom this opinion has been
professed, I am constrained to regard it as utterly untenable, as
palpably inconsistent, and as presenting in a