ing office in the nation of his residence, or participating in the military service of that nation, does not of itself operate to prevent his nation from extending to him its protection; but that, as bearing upon the question whether the alien has expatriated himself and forfeited his right to protection, such action on his part will be considered as important evidence tending to prove expatriation. (Moore's Digest, Vol. III, pp. 730-735, 783, 785.)

The right of expulsion as respects civilized aliens is now rarely exercised by civilized nations except as against aliens who have participated in the abnormal political life of the community; but it may be exercised on this ground without giving cause for international complaint. The Alien and Sedition Acts adopted by the Congress of the United States in 1798 were entirely consistent with international law, being directed against alien political agitators who were trying to engage this nation in a foreign war and probably also in a civil war. Another class of questions which has arisen is, as to the extent of the protection which a nation gives its citizens who are residents in a foreign nation which has a military conscription system, against the claim of that nation to compel them to participate in its political life as soldiers or to pay a military exemption tax. law on this subject is so uncertain, that the question is usually settled between particular nations by treaty. One point seems, however, to be settled, namely, that in case of emergency and necessity-as, for instance, where there is danger of invasion, or of attack by savagesthe military or constabulary service of aliens, whether residents or sojourners, may be compelled. The strong tendency seems to be for nations to regard as an unfriendly act compulsion to perform military service exercised against their citizens by other nations in

The

which they reside, but to permit without remonstrance the taxation of such persons for military purposes, if the taxation is uniform with that imposed on other persons for the same purpose. (Moore's Digest, Vol. IV, p. 65.)

A question arises as to the rights of resident aliens to participate in the political life of the community when a country inhabited by civilized persons is ceded by one nation to another. This matter is generally regulated by the treaty of cession. If the country ceded is contiguous to the nation to which it is ceded, so that it can properly be incorporated with its inhabitants into the body-politic of the nation, it is customary to provide for such incorporation and for citizenship of the nhabitants on equal terms with the other citizens of the nation. If the country is non-contiguous, so that it is impossible to incorporate it in the body-politic of the grantee nation, treaty arrangements can, of course, go no farther than to recognize the ceded country as having a sufficient degree of statehood so that it may have its own citizenship, and to provide that the civilized inhabitants at the time of cession shall be citizens of the ceded country. Those general principles have been recognized in the treaties of cession made to this nation.

A question of the protection which a nation gives to its citizens residing abroad, in their political rights, led to the Boer War. The Transvaal Republic-or, as it was called, the South African Republic-controlled by persons of Dutch descent, asserted the right to impose such terms upon resident aliens with regard to acquiring citizenship as it might see fit, and in fact imposed such terms that the acquisition of citizenship was made exceedingly difficult, at the same time taxing the resident aliens and placing discriminating burdens

on them. The resident aliens were equal or superior in civilization to the native citizens. They were a mixed body of persons who had been attracted by the diamondfield near Johannesburg which began to be exploited in the year 1886. The alien population, called Uitlanders by the Dutch, collected in towns and cities on the diamond-field-the Rand, the Dutch population being scattered throughout the country. The foreign residents increased until they nearly equalled the Dutch citizens. The South African Republic was under the suzerainty of Great Britain, and by the convention determining the specifications of the suzerainty, all foreigners "conforming to the laws" of the state were entitled to enter and reside there and were protected in their civil rights and against discriminating taxation. Nothing was said in the convention respecting their participation in the political life of the state, and as regards their political rights they were subject to the rules of international law. The question was treated as one of international law; the suzerainty being regarded as limiting the right of other nations to intervene but not otherwise affecting the case. Great Britain, in behalf of all Uitlanders, insisted that it was the duty of the South African Republic to provide a method of naturalization of foreigners on reasonable terms the reasonableness of the terms to be determined by the custom of civilized nations as to admitting resident aliens to citizenship. The South African Republic insisted on terms making the acquisition of citizenship much more difficult than is customary. Lord Milner, as High Commissioner, in his famous dispatch to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, of May 4, 1899, based the case of Great Britain upon its right of international intervention to protect its citizens, partly on the ground that the action of the South

African Republic affected the honor and vital interests of Great Britain, and partly on the ground that it was for the interests of civilization that the right claimed by the South African Republic, to keep civilized resident aliens in a status of political inferiority as long as it might see fit, when they desired to become citizens, should not be yielded to by the civilized nations. In that dispatch he said:

[The Uitlanders] have many grievances, but they believe all these could be gradually removed, if they had a fair share of the political power. This is the meaning of their vehement demand for enfranchisement. Moreover, they are mostly British subjects, accustomed to a free system and equal rights; they feel deeply the personal indignity involved in a position of permanent subjection to a ruling caste, which owes its wealth and power to their exertion. The political turmoil in the Transvaal Republic will never end till the permanent Uitlander population is admitted to a share in the Government, and while that turmoil lasts, there will be no tranquillity or adequate progress in Her Majesty's South African dominions.

It is this which makes the internal condition of the Transvaal Republic a matter of vital interest to her Majesty's Government. No merely local question affects so deeply the welfare and peace of her own South African possessions. And the right of Great Britain to intervene to secure fair treatment of the Uitlanders is fully equal to her supreme interest in securing it. The majority of them are her subjects, whom she is bound to protect. But the enormous number of British subjects, the endless series of their grievances, and the nature of these grievances, which are not less serious because they are not individually sensational, makes protection by the ordinary diplomatic means impossible.

The true remedy is to strike at the root of all these injuries-the political impotence of the injured. What diplo

matic protest will never accomplish, a fair measure of Uitlander representation would gradually, but surely, bring about. It seems a paradox, but it is true, that the only effective way of protecting our subjects is to help them to cease to be our subjects. .

It could be made perfectly clear that our action was not directed against the existence of the Republic. We should only be demanding the establishment of rights which now exist in the Orange Free State, and which existed in the Transvaal itself at the time of, and long after, the withdrawal of British sovereignty. It would be no selfish demand, as other Uitlanders besides those of British birth would benefit by it. It is asking nothing from others which we do not give ourselves. And it would certainly go to the root of the political unrest in South Africa, and though temporarily it might aggravate, it would ultimately extinguish the race feud, which is the great bane of the country.

Lord Milner's position was adopted by the British Government.

Professor Westlake, in his lecture on "The Transvaal War," delivered in the University of Cambridge on November 9, 1899, more fully interpreted the government's position and justified the intervention of Great Britain in the internal affairs of the South African Republic to secure for the resident aliens a participation in its political life, as one of those extraordinary rights which grow out of an intolerable situation-the kind of rights referred to in our arbitration treaties as rights to protect the national honor and vital interests. He said:

[This] is a war between two ideals, of which only one is a racial ideal. On one side we have the English ideal of a fair field for every race and every language, accompanied by a humane treatment of the native races. The other ideal..

is founded. . . on the desire to maintain