Online Encyclopedia


Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V25, Page 523 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: it!
IIENT. of the Union remained sovereign. According to the theory of J. C. Calhoun, the states had entered into an agreement from which they might withdraw if its terms were broken, and they were sovereign. According to the theory expounded in the Federalist, the individual states did not, after the formation of the constitution, remain completely sovereign: they were left in possession of certain attributes of sovereignty, while others were lodged in the Federal government; while there existed many states, there was but one sovereign. Even if the origin was a compact or contract, after the " United States " were formed by a " constitutional act " there no longer existed a mere contractual relation: there existed a state to which all were subject, and which all must obey (von Stengel, Staatenbund and Bundesstaat; Jahrbuch fur Gesetzgebung, 1898, p. 754; Cooley, Principles of Constitutional Law, pp. 21, 102). According to Austin: " In the case of a composite state or a supreme federal government, the several united governments of the several united societies together with a government common to these several societies, are jointly sovereign in each of these several societies and also in the larger society arising from the federal union, the several governments of the several united societies are jointly sovereign in each and all " (5th ed., vol. i. p. 258). In point of fact, there are fields of action in which A is sovereign, others in which B is sovereign, and certain others in which A and B are jointly or alternately sovereign. To take the American constitution, for example, the states are sovereign as to some matters, the Federal government as to others. 5. Another division includes anomalous cases, such as Cyprus or Bosnia, in which one government administers a country as to which another state retains certain powers, theoretically large. 6. The territories governed or administered by chartered companies form a class by themselves. Nominally such companies are the delegates of some states; in reality they act as if they were true sovereigns. 7. Two other classes may be mentioned: (a) cases of real union between states, e.g. that between Austria and Hungary; (b) personal unions, distinguished from the above-named forms—for example, the union of Great Britain and Hanover. 8. A small group consists of instances of condominium or arrangements similar thereto; for example, the arrangements as to the Samoa Islands from 5889 to 1899. According to modern usage the appellation " sovereign state " belongs only to states of considerable size and population exercising without control the usual powers of a state, e.g. able to declare peace or war. Leibnitz, discussing this subject in his Tractatus de jure suprematus (Opera, 4. 362), says: " Itaque valde etiam dubito, an possit Reipublicae illi Italiae, quam vocant Sancti Marini oppidum, concedi suprematus, Size of tametsi jure liberam esse nemo negat," a remark Slate. which would apply also to the republic of Andorra: " Illi tantum vocantur souverains ou potentate, qui territorium majus habent, exercitumque educere possunt; atque hoc demum illud est, quod ego voco suprematum, et Gallos quoque arbitror, cum de rebus ad jus gentium spectantibus, pace, bello, foederibus sermo est, et ipsi aliquos vocant souverains, eos non de urbibus liberis loqui, nec exiguorum territoriorum dominis, quae facile dives Mercator sibi emere potest, sed de majoribus illis potestatibus, quae bellum inferre, bellum sustinere, propria quodammodo vi stare, foedera pangere, rebus aliarum gentium cum auctoritate intervenire possunt " (4. 359). With this view, may be compared that of a writer in the Law Magazine (1899) xxv. 30, who argues that the republic of San Marino is a state in the full sense. It is sometimes suggested that self-governing colonies are to be regarded as true states. Undoubtedly some of them can no longer be regarded as colonies in the old sense. The Colonies. self-governing colonies forming part of the " multi- cellular British state," as F. W. Maitland describes it (Political Theories of the Middle Ages, p. x.), have an essentially " state-like character." If Liberia is a state, the same may surely be said of Canada. It is true the British colonies have not the power of declaring war or peace, or regulating the foreign policy of the empire; and the Crown may disallow a measure passed by the dominion parliament (J. G. Bourinot, Constitution of Canada, 188S, p. 95; A. H. F. Lefroy, Legislative Power in Canada, 244). Colonial legislatures are said to have delegated powers. It is more accurate to say that as to certain matters the legislature of the Canadian Dominion is sovereign, and as to certain others that it is not (Lefroy, 244; Quick and Garran, Australian Common-wealth, 328; Dicey, 1o6); and as to some matters they are in fact, if not in form, universitates superiorem non recognoscentes (Quick and Garran, 319); or that they are states in process of making. Occasionally the expression " subject of a colony " is now used (Low v. Routledge, L.R. 1 Ch. 42; Lefroy, Legislative Power in Canada, 329). It has been decided by the judicial committee of the Privy Council that the colonial legislatures are not mere delegates of the Imperial parliament (A. B. Keith, Responsible Government in the Colonies, p. 81). At all events, the self-governing colonies may be classed as " half sovereign states " or " quasi-sovereign." Many attempts have been made to enumerate the attributes of sovereignty, i.e. the regalia, prerogatives, &c., as they were Attributes called. For example, Bodin gives a list of the of cove- properties of majestas or sovereignty: (a) " Legem reignty. universis, &c., singulis civibus dare posse; (b) helium indicere aut pacem inire; (c) to appoint and change magistrates; (d) power of final appeal; (e) power of pardon; (f) raising revenue; (g) coining money " (De republica, vol. i. ch. 1o). Leibnitz, with the middle ages in view, divides the attributes or faculties into two classes: regalia majora and regalia minora. Hobbes (Leviathan), analysing these attributes, enumerates twelve attributes. " These," he says, " are the marks which make the essence of sovereignty, and which are the marks whereby a man may discover in what man, or assembly of men, the sovereign power is placed or resideth." He also describes them as " inseparable rights." Bluntschli (Allgemeine Staatslehre, i. 575) enumerates these attributes: (a) right of recognition of majestas; (b) independence; (c) power to determine constitution; (d) right of legislation; (e) action through deposed organs; (f) irre- sponsibility. All of these enumerations are open to the objection that they merely describe the action of the state at a particular time, or indicate a theory of what an ideal state should be.
End of Article: IIENT

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click and select "copy." Paste it into a website, email, or other HTML document.