de act. sup. terest, postea res publica auctoritate divendi aut addici iis quorum interest. Sed hæc atque alia peti debent ab his qui jura civilia tractant, et nominatim in hac materia a Bartolo, qui de repressaliis scripsit. 4 Illud hic addam, quia ad juris hujus satis per se Eg. Regius rigidi emollitionem pertinet, eos qui non solvendo quod debedisp. 13. dub. bant, aut jus non reddendo causam dederunt pignorationibus, ipso naturali ac divino jure teneri ad resarcienda damna aliis, quibus eam ob causam aliquid decedit. 7. n. 117. gora libro IX. ἀλλ ̓ οὐδὲ τῶν ἁλισκομέ imminuta, donec recepto debito integra redderent. (Pag. 189. Ed. Genev.) 5 Addidi vocem illam postea, sine qua, aut simili, locum esse hiulcum, nemo non videt. J. B. Teneri ad resarcienda damna] Plutarchus in Cimone de Scyriis: où βουλομένων τα χρήματα τῶν πολλῶν συνεκτίνειν, ἀλλὰ τοὺς ἔχοντας καὶ διηρπακότας ἀποδοῦναι κελευόντων Plerique pecunias contribuere nolebant, sed jubebant eos qui res alienas aut habebant aut rapuerant, sarcire damnum. (Pag. 483 c.) places, from the judges. By the Law of Nations, the ownership of things taken is ipso facto acquired to the extent of the debt and expenses, the residue being to be returned. By instituted Law, they are to be cited who are concerned, and then their property sold or seized by public authority for the benefit of those who have a claim. Such and other rules are to be sought in those who treat of the Civil Law, and especially, in this matter, from Bartolus, who has written on Reprisals. 4 I will add, because it is a point which tends to the softening of the right of which we are speaking, which of itself is sufficiently harsh, that they who, by not paying what they owed, or by withholding any right, have given occasion for this seizure of securities, are, by Natural and Divine Law, bound to make good the loss to those who have thereby suffered. I. 1 CUPRA dicere incepimus justum bellum apud probos *SUPRA auctores dici sæpe, non ex causa unde oritur, neque ut alias ex rerum gestarum magnitudine, sed ob peculiares quosdam juris effectus. Quale autem sit hoc bellum optime intelligitur ex hostium definitione apud Romanos Jurisconsultos: hostes sunt qui nobis, aut quibus nos publice bellum decernimus: ceteri latrones aut prædones sunt, ait Pom- 1. 118. de a Supra] Lib. 1. cap. iii. § 4. CHAPTER III. Of a Just or Formal War by the Law of Nations ; and herein of Declaration of War. I. 1 We have above begun to say that a just war is often so called in respectable authors, not from the cause in which it originates, nor from the scale of the movements, but on account of certain peculiar jural effects. What kind of war this is, is best understood, from the definition of an enemy in the Roman Jurist: Those are our enemies who publicly declare war against us or we against them: others | are robbers or pirates, says Pomponius. And so Ulpian, adding: there Verb. sign. captiv. L. 24. D. de ponius: nec aliter Ulpianus: hostes sunt quibus bellum publice populus Romanus decrevit, vel ipsi populo Romano; ceteri latrunculi vel prædones appellantur. Et ideo qui a latronibus captus est, servus latronum non est, nec postliminium illi necessarium est. Ab hostibus autem captus, puta a Germanis et Parthis, et servus est hostium, et L. 19. §2. D. postliminio statum pristinum recuperat. Et Paulus: A piratis aut latronibus capti liberi permanent. Accedat illud Ulpiani: in civilibus dissensionibus, quamvis sæpe per eas respublica iædatur, non tamen in exitium reipublicæ contenditur: qui in lterutras partes discedent vice hostium non sunt eorum inter quos jura captivitatum aut postliminiorum fuerint: et ideo captos, et venundatos posteaque manumissos placuit supervacuo repetere a principe ingenuitatem, quam nulla captivitate amiserant. de captiv. L. 21. § 1. eod. tit. 2 Illud tantum notandum, sub exemplo populi Romani quemvis intelligi qui in civitate summum imperium habeat. Philip. iv. 6. Ille hostis est, ait Cicero, qui habet rempublicam, curiam, ærarium, consensum et concordiam civium, et ratior m aliquam si res ita tulerit pacis et federis. II. 1 Non autem statim respublica aut civitas esse desinit si quid admittat injustum, etiam communiter, nec Qui a latronibus captus est, servus latronum non est] Hinc argumentum Panulo Plauti: Eunucho Terentii. Talis et Eumæus Odyss. O. (vers. 402. et seqq.) cA piratis] Pompeius a piratis captos liberos pronuntiavit. Appianus Mithridatico (pag. 237. Ed. H. Steph.) 1 Confer PUFENDORFIUM, De Jure Nat. et Gentium, Lib. VIII. cap. vi. § 5. d Criminis causa sociantur] “Oμiλos ἀνθρώπων οὐ νόμῳ ξυνιόντων, ἀλλ ̓ ἐκ τοῦ αδίκου ξυνειλεγμένων turba homi fore he who is taken prisoner by robbers is not subject to them, nor is postliminium necessary for him. But he who is taken prisoner by enemies, suppose Germans or Parthians, becomes their slave, and recovers his former state by postliminium. So Paulus. Ulpian adds that, in civil wars, the opposite parties are not formal enemies, and therefore the captives taken do not lose their free condition. 2 We may note that which is said by the Roman jurists, of the Roman People, is to be understood of him who has the supreme power in any state. He is our enemy, says Cicero, who has the government, the council, the treasury, the consent and agreement of the citizens, and the power of making war and peace. II. 1 A State or Commonwealth does not cease to be such by perpetrating an act of injustice, even in common: nor is a band of 1 cœtus piratarum aut latronum civitas est, etiamsi forte æqua- Καὶ μὲν δυσμενέες καὶ ἀνάρσιοι, οἵ τ ̓ ἐπὶ γαίης robbers or pirates a state, although they preserve a sort of equal rule among them, without which indeed no body of men can hold together. For such a body is associated for the purpose of crime: but the others, though they are not free from fault, are associated by mutual rights, and acknowledge certain rights in others; if not rights according to Natural Law (which is often much obliterated), yet rights according to certain conventions or usages. Thus the Greeks, while they held it lawful to plunder at sea, abstained from murder, from night-attacks, and from seizing oxen and ploughs, as the Scholiast to Thucydides notes. Other nations, as mentioned by Strabo, who lived by plunder at sea, were in the habit, when they had carried their plunder home, of sending to the owners to ransom it at a fair price. So Homer. 495, 496. Cap. 30. de Civ. Dei, ii. 21. xix. 24. 2 Principale autem pro forma est in moralibus: et, ut recte Ciceroni dictum est de Finibus quinto, ex eo quod maximas partes continet, latissimeque funditur, tota res appellatur: cui convenit illud Galeni, ἀπὸ τοῦ πλεονεκτοῦντος ἐν τῇ κράσει γίνονται αἱ προσηγορίαι. Idem talia spe vocat ὀνομαζόμενα κατ ̓ ἐπικράτησιν. Quare crude nimis Apud August. dictum est ab eodem Cicerone, de Republica tertio, ubi injustus est rex, ubi injusti optimates, aut ipse populus, non jam De Civ. Dei, vitiosam sed nullam esse rempublicam: quam sententiam Augustinus corrigens, nec ideo tamen, ait, vel ipsum non esse populum, vel ejus rem dixerim non esse rempublicam, quamdiu manet qualiscunque multitudinis rationalis cœtus rerum quas diligit concordi communione sociatus. Corpus morbidum, corpus tamen est: et civitas, quanquam graviter ægrota, civitas est, quamdiu manent leges, manent judicia, et quæ alia necessaria sunt, ut ibi jus exteri consequi possint, non minus quam privati inter se. Rectius Dion Chrysostomus, qui legem (eam præsertim quæ jus gentium facit) dicit esse in civitate, ut mentem in corpore human^: 'ea enim sublata civitatem non esse amplius. Et Aristides, Borysth. p. 443 A. el de lege p. 648 A. Tom. II. p. 385 A, B. Ea enim sublata civitatem non esse amplius] Cicero libro x. epist. 1: Nec leges sunt, nec judicia, nec omnino simulacrum aliquod ac vestigium civitatis. 2 But in morals, the principal part is taken as the characteristic; so Cicero and Galen. Wherefore Cicero spoke too widely, when he said (in the third book of the Republic) that when the king is unjust, or the aristocracy, or the people itself, the commonwealth is not so much to be called vicious as non-existing: which opinion, Augustine correcting, says, We are not to say that the people does not exist, or that its common concerns are not those of a commonwealth, so long as there remains a body of any reasonable number, associated by a common participation in its interests. A body which is diseased is still a body; and a state, though grievously out of health, is a state, as long as there remain the laws, the tribunals, and other things which are necessary in order that strangers may there obtain justice, as well as private persons in their affairs one with another. Dio Chrysostom speaks more rightly when he says that law, (especially that which realizes the Law of Nations,) exists in a state, as the soul in the body; and that when that is taken away, the state no longer exists. And Aristides, in the oration in which he exhorts the Rhodians to concord, shews that many good laws may subsist even under a tyranny. Aristotle in his Politics says, if any one carry too far the violent proceedings either of the Few or of the People, the commonwealth first becomes vicious, |