Page:International law and the discriminiations practices by Russia under the Treaty of 1832 (IA internationallaw00kuhn).pdf/17

 community of nations. With this exception, even though the provisions be vexatious or completely different from those prevailing in any other state or countries, or inconsistent with a sane or wise political administration, “aliens must nevertheless conform to them, unless the provisions respecting them arc in opposition to international treaties” In a footnote he points to the action of Lord Granville in refusing to insist upon greater rights for a British subject than accorded to Russian Jews in Russia, to which we have already referred at length. He naturally is well satisfied with the British submission to the Russian contention, though it is difficult to see how the footnote in any way illustrates the text. He seems to have considered it a clear departure and exception to the principle which he himself enunciates. In concluding this branch of his discussion he says (translating): “In reality each government is free to take all measures against aliens which it deems convenient, provided they do not violate its treaties and are not absolutely contrary to international relations.”

As a matter of strict legal right then, each nation may, in the absence of treaty, exclude aliens from its territory or prescribe the conditions upon which it will admit them. But as a matter of comity, friendly intercourse and good faith between nations of the international community, the situation is different. Hall well says (International Law, 5th Ed., p. 214) : “For the reason also that a state may do what it chooses within its own territory so long as its conduct is not actively injurious to other states, it must be granted that in strict law a country can refuse the hospitality of its soil to any, or all, foreigners; but the exercise of the right is necessarily tempered by the facts of modern civilization. For a state to exclude all foreigners would be to withdraw from the brotherhood of civilized peoples : to exclude any without reasonable or at least plausible cause is regarded as so vexatious and oppressive that a government is thought to have the right of interfering in