NEW PUBLICATIONS.

ELEMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.
By Henry Wheaton, LL.D., Minister of the United States at the Court of Prussia, corresponding member of the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences in the Institute of France, honorary member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Berlin, etc. Eighth Edition, edited, with notes, by Richard Henry Dana, Jr., LL.D. 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 749. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1866.

Whoever will examine Fulbecke's Pandects of the Law of Nations, published at London in 1602, which the author styles the first, to his knowledge, that hath been written on this subject, and compare it with the first addition of Wheaton's International Law, published in 1836, must be astonished at the great progress which has been made in this most interesting science in a period of two centuries and a third. But a glance at Dana's Wheaton will satisfy the most superficial Inquirer that the last thirty years have still more fully develop the principles of that code of law which professes to find the nations of the civilized world.

Mr. Dana has well and faithfully performed a duty, requiring for its proper [{283}] and efficient discharge talents of the highest order. He has produced a book which will be read with interest, not only by the professional man, but by the general reader; for he treats on subjects that the people of the United States are, at the present time, and have been for the last five years, more nearly concerned with than ever before in the history of their government. And as the work is edited with signal ability, it is the more to be regretted that, in a Treatise on International Law, Mr. Dana has deemed it proper to incorporate his own political opinions on a question not of International, but of American Constitutional Law.

On pages 82 and 85, in a note on the United States as a supreme government, the editors says:

The United States "is a new state or government, acting directly upon each individual, by its own officers and departments, in the execution of its own laws. Within its sphere it acts as if there were no separate states in existence. It is also the final judge in a dispute between itself and a state as to the limits of its sphere of action."

"The civil war saw the final and complete establishment of that construction of the Constitution which makes the United States a State in the scientific sense of the term, having direct authority over each citizen, to be exercised by its own officers independently of the states; and a right to the direct allegiance of each citizen, from which no state action can absolve him; with the right to determine the limits of its own jurisdiction; with no appeal from its decision except through constitutional methods of altering the laws, or the administration, by the ballot, or through public revolution."

The editor entirely ignores the theory that the federal government is one of delegated powers, as well as the 10th article of the amendments to the Constitution, by which it is declared that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." If the federal government has this exclusive right to determine the limits of its own jurisdiction, then has this provision of the bill of rights become nullity. Besides, the argument is an illogical one; if it be once admitted the powers of the federal government are delegated powers, it is difficult to maintain the theory that either an individual, or a government acting by virtue of delegated powers, is competent to decide, without appeal, on the extent of the powers delegated. There is always this great question to be solved, Have the people delegated such a power? If not, how can the determination of the federal government, that the people have done so, be construed to confer it?

If Congress should, by statute, enact that the presidential term of office should continue during the life of the incumbent, and the executive should ratify the act, and the judiciary decide that it was a constitutional exercise of the powers delegated, inasmuch as the federal government has the exclusive right to determine the limits of its own jurisdiction, would any sane man believe that this could give efficacy to such a gross usurpation?

But it is useless to follow out the argument; the mere statement of the principal is its own reputation.

Nor has the Civil War just ended established any such principle. Slavery has been abolished as a result of the war, but this has been done under the forms of the Constitution. The heresy of secession has also been overthrown forever; this, however, has been accomplished, not by virtue of any power in the federal government to determine the extent of its own jurisdiction, but because the majority of the people of the North have decided in favor of such a construction of the Constitution, upon a point left undetermined at its formation, upon which two great parties have ever since held opposite views, and which could only be settled by the ultima ratio regum; there being no other tribunal to which they could submit their differences.

The civil war was not waged for the purpose of enlarging the powers of the federal government, nor for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of the states; as was emphatically declared by both branches of Congress in 1861; and its effect has been simply to maintain the authority of the constitution, with all the powers which it confers, and all the restrictions which it imposes, unabridged [{284}] and unaltered. No such authority having been previously vested in the government, it cannot be assumed as one of the results of the civil war.

Putting aside, however, this only blemish upon a great work, we desired to call particular attention to the masterly manner in which Mr. Dana has treated the great topics of the day.

His note on the Monroe doctrine will well repay perusal, as it is a subject on which much apprehension exists in the public mind. This enunciated of American policy, he shows to have consisted of two points: 1. That inasmuch as the whole of the American continent is now within the territorial limits of some one or other civilized power, it is no longer open to colonization by European nations. 2. That the United States will view, as an unfriendly act, any attempt on the part of European powers to interfere for the purpose of controlling the political affairs of any of the American States, or to extend to them the operation of the European political system. The question is well worth the study of the statesman, and it is ably treated in this work.

Another question of more than common interest, especially to our naturalized citizens, is the extent to which the government of the United States will afford them protection in foreign lands. The doctrine extracted by Mr. Dana from the cases of Martin Koszta, Simon Tousig, and others, is, that the government will afford protection to a domiciled resident of the United States whilst travelling in a foreign country, under her passport, against any arrest or seizure by the government of his native sovereign, in any event except that of a voluntary return to his place of birth; but in such case he will not be protected against military service owing by him to his native sovereign at the time of his emigration.

The case of the Trent, in which Messrs. Mason and Slidell, the rebel commissioners to Great Britain and France, were removed from that vessel, at sea, by the commander of an armed vessel of the United States, and brought in as prisoners of war, is the subject of a learned note by Mr. Dana. He considers this case to have settled but one principle: "that a public ship, though of a nation at war, cannot take persons out of a neutral vessel, at sea, whatever may be the claim of her government on those persons." A doctrine always held by the government of the United States, and one which they were glad to see authoritatively established on a claim made by that of England.

We have not space to point out in detail the many interesting questions discussed in Mr. Dana's learned notes, such as those of Intervention, Mediation Extradition, etc. But we cannot, injustice to him, omit a reference to the question now agitating the public mind, arising out of our reclamation on Great Britain for compensation for the ravages of the Alabama and other Confederate privateers, fitted out in the ports of that country. The question at issue is a somewhat different one from what is generally supposed. Our own supreme court has decided that it is no breach of neutrality, in the absence of any treaty stipulation, or local statute, to build, arm, and equip a vessel of war, and send her, under American colors, to the port of a belligerent, with the bonâ fide purpose of there offering her for sale as a commercial enterprise; though she may be subject to capture by the other belligerent, as contraband of war. Mr. Dana, after a thorough examination of the authorities and of the diplomatic correspondence between the two governments, thus sums up the points at issue:

The United States claims reparation from Great Britain for injuries done to her commerce by cruisers under the rebel flag, for the following reasons:
1. Because Great Britain made a precipitate and unwarranted recognition of belligerency of the rebel power, and thereby established in law, and to some extent brought about in fact, a state of things which made possible and probable the illegal acts of individuals complained of.
2. Because the measures taken by the British Government to prevent the sailing of vessels from British ports, fitted and equipped therein in violation of her neutrality, were tardy and feeble, as well as ineffectual; whether this arose from mistakes of law in the advisers of the crown, or bad faith, or incapacity in inferior officials, or from the insufficiency of the Acts of Parliament, being purely an internal question, with which the United States were not bound to deal.
3. Because Great Britain did not seize and detain or disarm these vessels, or refuse them asylum, or otherwise deal with them in such manner has the law of [{285}] nations authorized her to do, after their fraudulent escape from the original ports.
4. Because the British Government refused even to suggest amendments of her Acts of Parliament in any respect whatever, or to introduce the subject to Parliament when their inefficiency had been proved, and the government had then requested so to do, not only by the United States, on terms of reciprocity, but by citizens interested in preserving neutrality.
5. Because the government had neglected or refused to prosecute citizens of the so-called Confederate States who work openly residing in England as agents for that power, and notoriously engaged in fitting out vessels in violation of British neutrality, though abundant evidence had been furnished to authorize proceedings.
6. Because, by reason of this course of the British Government, the rebels had been able to set forth and maintain an effective force of steamers cruising against American commerce, having asylum and making repairs and getting coal and supplies in British ports; built, fitted out, armed, and manned in and from England, and never even expecting, or pretending to visit a port of the confederacy, when otherwise they would scarcely have had a single cruiser; the result of which had been a most effective belligerent aid to the rebellion, and the great advantage to England and detriment to the United States of driving from the seas the greater part of the American mercantile marine, heretofore the equal and rival of Great Britain, and transferring the commerce of the world to the British flag.

The British Government replies:

1. That the recognition of belligerency was justifiable, and made necessary at the time it was done, and dictated by a duty to the United States as well as to Great Britain: and that the United States gained by it the rights of blockade and search.
2. That the government acted in good faith and with reasonable diligence in in enforcing its laws for the preservation of it's neutrality; and that, if subordinate officials failed in capacity or diligence in particular cases, their acts or failures being but a part of the entire proceedings otherwise proper and effective, the nation cannot be expected to hold itself responsible their remote consequences, in the way of making compensation for acts done by belligerents out of the jurisdiction.
3. That the government did seize and prosecute, in her colonial ports, vessels which were charged with being fitted out at home in violation of neutrality; and that she was not bound by the law of nations to refuse asylum to, or seize or disarm or insist on the disarmament of vessels afterward commissioned as public ships of war of a belligerent visiting her ports, on the ground that they had been originally, and before their commissioning as vessels of war, fitted out in her jurisdiction in violation of her neutrality.
4. That the government was not satisfied that the Acts of Parliament had proved inadequate to such an extent, and after so full trial, or that any amendment would be likely to improve them so materially as to justify the United States in charging the refusal to attempt their amendment as a want of good faith.
5. That the government had judged in good faith, on the advise of competent counsel, whether, in cases suggested, prosecutions against individuals should be instituted.
6. That if vessels fitted out and dispatched from Great Britain ever so clearly in violation of her neutral rights, had fraudently escaped, without bad faith on the part of the government. Great Britain was not responsible for acts of hostility done by such vessels beyond her jurisdiction. Her duty was fulfilled if she restored any prizes such vessels might bring within her jurisdiction.
7. That it was inconsistent with the dignity and honor of the government to submit to arbitration claims of another government, the decision of which involved a question whether the advisers of the crown had correctly interpreted the law, or the executive officers of the crown had acted with diligence, good judgment, or good faith.

The points we have thus briefly noticed are but a few of the most important ones which are fully discussed by Mr. Dana; for a proper appreciation of his labors we must refer the reader to the book itself, with the assurance that it will well repay the time devoted to its perusal. It is no ephemeral production, but a good, solid, and deeply interesting work, which will long preserve its place as a landmark in the literature of the nineteenth century.

[{286}]

LIFE OF SAINT CECILIA, VIRGIN AND MARTYR. By the Reverend Prosper Guéranger, Abbé de Solesmes. Translated from the French. 12mo, pp. 404. Philadelphia: P. F. Cunningham. 1866.

This work from the pen of the learned Benedictine will, no doubt, be warmly welcomed, both because of its authorship and its own intrinsic merit. It will take its rank, however, rather among works of profound hagiological research than as a contribution to popular biographies of the saints. The history of the life and martyrdom of St. Cecilia occupies but a very small portion of the volume. The rest is devoted to the confirmatory testimonies to her life afforded by the liturgies of the church, both Greek and Latin, the history of her relics and of the Roman basilica erected in her honor, and the homage paid to her throughout Christendom in literature and the arts. All this is of the greatest interest and value, and no little thanks are due to the eminent author for his labor and research. As a life of Saint Cecilia it does not satisfy us. The style is crude and laborious, and lacking in the elements of a finished biography. The author has collected materials which would have come from the hand of a Wiseman or a Newman a masterpiece of literary art, a living picture of the life and times of one of the most illustrious saints of the church. But he does not appear to know how to take advantage of the treasure which he has gathered together with so much painstaking labor. Hence the scenes in the life of Saint Cecilia furnished him by the quaint and charming descriptions in the "Acts" of the saint—her espousals, the vision of the angel seen by her husband, the martyrdom of the two brothers Valerian and Tiburtius, her own interrogatory before the Roman prefect, and sublime death—scenes replete with varied interest, and affording matter for the most powerful dramatic description, and presented to us in the tamest and rudest style. What, for instance, can be more commonplace than the following: Valerian, in presence of Cecilia and the angel, is assured by the heavenly visitor that in return for his consent to the vow of virginity made by his saintly spouse, any request he might make will be granted him. The young man, overcome with gratitude, threw himself at the feet of the divine messenger, and thus expressed his desires: "Nothing in life is more precious to me than the affection of my brother; and now that I am rescued from peril, it would be a bitter trial to leave this beloved brother exposed to danger. I will, therefore, reduce my requests to one: I beseech Christ to deliver my brother, Tiburtius, as he has delivered me, and to perfect us both in the confession of his name."

The translation we should judge to be a faithful one, and is, in the main, correct English. We hardly see how it could be much improved considering the formal unsympathetic style of the original; but we wish that in certain descriptive passages the historical present had been preserved throughout, or altogether avoided. We are surprised to see the authors styled upon the title page as the Reverend Prosper per Guéranger, abbé de Solesmes. It is not common to attach the title of Rev. to the name of authors and prelates of such note as Dom Guéranger, and abbé de' for 'abbot of' is not in good taste.

A fancy portrait accompanies the volume, representing Saint Cecilia with a harp, which ill accords with the Antiphon quoted on the title-page: "Cantantibus organis, Cecilia Domino decantabat," and which is, moreover, so completely at variance with all representations of her by both ancient and modern artists, and we would willingly dispense with that; but the book is, for the reasons we have assigned, of such value, that we thank the enterprising publisher for the opportunity afforded the American public of perusing the work in English.

SPANISH PAPERS AND OTHER MISCELLANIES, hitherto unpublished or uncollected, by WASHINGTON IRVING. Arranged and edited by PIERRE M. IRVING. 2 vols., 12mo. With a portrait after Wilkie. New York: G. P. Putnam. Hurd and Houghton. 1866.

In the first of these volumes we are presented with a choice selection of papers by the illustrious author, consisting of several charming Spanish legends, illustrative of the events of the conquest of Spain by the Moors, the greater portion of which is newly published. The second volume contains some early contributions to the Morning Chronicle, when the author was but nineteen years of age. These were his first essays in print, but they are none the less remarkable for the fine humor they display, and for which he became so much admired him after years. [{287}] The biographical sketches, which follow, of Captain James Lawrence, Lieutenant Burrows, Commodore Perry, and Captain David Porter possess no little historical value; and the extended memoir of the child poet, Margaret Miller Davidson, the younger sister of the well-known youthful authoress, Lucretia Maria Davidson, is full of the most touching and romantic interest. A number of reviews and miscellaneous papers close these volumes, which need no further praise from us than to say that they are all marked with the genius of Washington Irving. We have been so much charmed by the perusal of the Spanish legends that we could not refrain from placing one of them entire before our readers—the Legend of Count Julian and his family. It will be found in the pages of the present number of THE CATHOLIC WORLD. The form in which the publication is given is as credible to the publishers, as it is worthy of the interesting matter.

LAURENTIA: A Tale of Japan. By Lady Georgiana Fullerton. (American Reprint) Baltimore: Kelly and Piet, 174 Baltimore street. 1866.

Lady Georgiana Fullerton consecrates her high intellectual gifts and finished culture with a noble devotion to the sacred cause of the Catholic religion. In her latest story of Laurentia, she has chosen her theme from the comparatively unknown history of the Catholic Church in Japan, and appears to have derived her materials chiefly from the work of F. Charlevoix on that subject.

F. Charlevoix's History of Christianity in Japan is one of the most intensely interesting books we have ever read, and unfolds a page in the annals of the church equalling the records of the first three centuries in glory. The persistent misrepresentation and suppression of truth, which the enemies of the Catholic religion make use of just so far as the credulousness of the public will permit, have hitherto kept the facts in regard to this topic under a veil of mist. This veil is lifting, however, and is destined soon, we trust, to disappear before the rays of truth.

Lady Fullerton's story is well adapted to awaken attention to this subject, if the general apathy and aversion to all Catholic literature does not prevent its being read. Its incidents are mainly historical, with just enough of embellishment and portraiture of imaginary characters and incidents to make it life-like. It is written with that ardor of feeling and in that glowing style, chastened by good taste, which are characteristic of Lady Georgiana's productions. As a work of art it is not equal to her master-piece, Constance Sherwood. The events described are, however, so replete with the highest and most absorbing interest, that one feels no inclination to advert to the mere artistic merit of plot, style, or description. It combines the fascination of a well-written sensation novel, with the utility of a solid book of spiritual reading. We recommend it to all who read anything at all except the daily papers, and advise all parents, whether they read or do not read themselves, to give it to their children. The latter, we are sure, will not find it hard to take.

VIGNETTES, Biographical Sketches of Madame Swetchine, La Soeur Rosalie, Madame Pape Carpentier, Madame Lamertine, etc. By Bessie Rayner Parkes. London and New-York: Alexander Strahan. 1866.

These sketches are all full of interest, some of them most touching and beautiful. The life of La Soeur Rosalie cannot fail to win admiration from every heart. The most wretched faubourg of Paris was the scene of her labors; here with heart and hands, with every power of soul and body, she labored year after year, never weary, but simply and quietly performing a work which man has been proud to honor, a work which God alone fully knows. We quote a short passage describing the funeral of La Soeur Rosalie:

"She was followed to the grave by a multitude such as could be neither counted nor described: every rank, age, and profession was there; great and small, rich and poor, learned men and laborers, the most famous and the most obscure. Instead of going straight toward the church, the body was borne through the streets where she had been accustomed to visit, and women and children who could not walk in the great profusion fell on their knees and prayed. A band of soldiers surrounded the bier and rendered military honors to the one who lay upon it, for she had been decorated with the Cross of the Legion of Honor."

[{288}]

This lowly Sister of Charity felt not that her sphere was narrow, but her love, her energy, and activity found everywhere opportunities; they never failed her, she never failed them. This life of Sister Rosalie alone would give interest to any volume of biographies; but several others have almost an equal interest, particularly that of Madame Swetchine, a noble Russian lady. She embraced the Catholic faith, spent many years of her life in Paris, associating with the noblest spirits of the day—Lacordaire, Chateaubriand, Montalembert—by all of whom she was admired with a sort of tender reverence. Though influencing for many years the highest circles of Parisian society, her life was most simply, humbly, and devoutly Christian. The sketch of one of our own countrywomen, Harriet K. Hunt of Boston, who has done much toward enlightening the women of the working classes by her lectures on physiology, is also pleasantly given. We think our authoress has shown in this volume that women have power to do a great work, and that this work can easily be found, and easily done, if but the heart and soul are in it. The volume is beautifully gotten up.

THE SHAM SQUIRE, AND THE INFORMERS OF 1798, with a View of their Contemporaries. To which are added jottings about Ireland seventy years ago. By William John Fitzpatrick, J.P., Biographer of Bishop Doyle, etc., etc. 1 vol. 12mo, pp. 379. Boston: Patrick Donahoe.

In THE CATHOLIC WORLD for April last, page 122, will be found an article entitled: "Ireland, and the Informers of 1798." That article gave a synopsis of portions of "The Sham Squire," of which the copy under notice is a reprint from the last Dublin edition. It is a curious book, and contains many highly interesting incidents of the rebellion of 1798; of the death of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Emmet, and other Irish patriots of that day. The facts disclosed show that through bribery and the spy system, England succeeded in crushing out all efforts for Ireland's independence, even better than her ministers hoped. This system of bribery, however, is not peculiar to Ireland, as many writers have asserted; but is the same in all countries, and in all times. It has been used in this country by both sides in the late or, with as much success as it ever was in Ireland. The only difference being that the Irish patriots never had money to use for such a purpose, while England had plenty, hence her success. The book is well worth reading, and throws white on many disputed points of Irish history, especially that portion of it relating to 1798.

FIRST PRINCIPLES: A letter to a Protestant friend asking information about the Catholic Church, by the Rev. G. H. Doane. New York: P. O'Shea, Publisher, No. 27 Barclay Street. 1866.

The title of this pamphlet speaks for itself. It is a plain statement of the difference between Catholics and Protestants on the way pointed out by Christ to find true Christianity.

LAWRENCE KEHOE, New York, will soon publish a new volume of Sermons by the Paulist Fathers. It will contain several Sermons by the late Father Baker.

MESSRS. JOHN MURPHY & CO. announce a new edition of "Good Thoughts for Priest and People." By Rev. Father Noethen.

RECEIVED:

From J. J. O'Connor and Co., Newark, N. J. Curious Questions. by Rev. Henry A. Brann, D.D. 1 vol. 12mo. pp. 292.

D. and J. Sadlier and Co., New York. Disappointed Ambition; or, Married and Single. By Miss Agnes M. Stewart 1 vol. 12mo, pp. 248.

Wanted to purchase, at this Office, several copies of Branchereau's "Praelectiones Philosophicale." Second Edition.


[{289}]