In, when he was Dane Professor of Law at Harvard, Joseph Story published at Boston his Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws.177 In the second chapter, entitled General Maxims of International Jurisprudence, he adverts “to a few general maxims or axioms, which constitute the basis, upon which all reasonings on the subject must necessarily rest.”178 After some discussion of these he comes to Huber: Story accepted the authority of Huber, against critics such as Hertius and, more particularly, against Livermore, soon to be noticed.180 He claimed for Huber that he “has at least this satisfactory foundation for his most important rule, that he is mainly guided in it by the practice of nations; and he thus aimed, as Grotius had done before him, to avail 177 For Story’s knowledge and use of Roman and civil law see M.H. Hoeflich, ‘John Austin and Joseph Story: Two Nineteenth Century Perspectives on the Utility of the Civil Law for the Common Lawyer,’ 29American Journal of Legal History (1985), pp. 36ff., at pp. 56ff. 178 P. 19. 179 P. 30. 180 See, e.g. Conflict, pp. 31ff. V Huberus has laid down three axioms, which he deems sufficient to solve all the intricacies of the subject. The first is, that the laws of every empire have force only within the limits of its own government, and bind all, who are subject to it, but not beyond those limits. The second is, that all persons, who are found within the limits of a government, whether their residence is permanent or temporary, are to be deemed subjects thereof. The third is, that the rulers of every empire from comity admit, that the laws of every people in force within its own limits, ought to have the same force everywhere, so far as they do not prejudice the power or rights of other governments, or of their citizens. “From this,” he adds, “it appears, that this matter is to be determined, not simply by the civil laws, but by the convenience and tacit consent of different people, for since the laws of one people cannot have any direct force among another people, so nothing could be more inconvenient in the commerce and general intercourse of nations, that that what is valid by the laws of one place should become without effect by the diversity of laws of another; and that this is the true reason of the last axiom, of which no one hitherto seems to have entertained any doubt.”179
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=