"  The  stipulation  which  subjects  neutral  property  found  in  the  bot-
tom of  an  enemy  to  condemnation  as  prize  of  war,  is  a  concession  made
by  the  neutral  to  the  belligerent.  It  narrows  the  sphere  of  neutral
commerce,  and  takes  from  the  neutral  a  privilege  he  possessed  under
the  law  of  nations.  The  one  may  be,  and  often  is,  exchanged  for  the
other.  But  it  may  be  the  interest  and  the  will  of  both  parties  to  stipu-
late the  one  without  the  other;  and  if  it  be  their  interest  or  their  will,
what  shall  prevent  its  accomplishment  t  A  neutral  may  give  some
other  compensation  for  the  privilege  of  transporting  enemy  goods  in
safety,  or  both  parties  may  find  an  interest  in  stipulating  for  this  privi-
lege, and  neither  may  be  disposed  to  make  to,  or  require  from,  tbe
other,  the  surrender  of  any  right  as  its  consideration.  What  shall  re-
strain independent  nations  from  making  such  a  compact!  And  how  is
their  intention  to  be  communicated  to  each  other  or  to  the  world,  so
properly  as  by  the  compact  itself!

"  If  reason  can  furnish  no  evidence  of  the  indissolubility  of  the  two
maxims,  the  supporters  of  that  proposition  will  certainly  derive  no  aid
from  the  history  of  their  progress,  from  the  first  attempts  at  their  in-
troduction to  the  present  moment.
**  For  a  considerable  length  of  time  they  were  the  companions  of  each
other,  not  as  one  maxim  consisting  of  a  single  indivisible  principle,  bat
306


CHAP  XVIL]  seizure   OF   GOODS   AT   SEA.  [§  342.
