Justice among Nations. A History of International Law - Stephen C. Neff

Of Spiders and Bees 205

be disagreement, though, about the breadth of territorial seas (as they came to

be called). For instance, there was dispute as to just what the much- vaunted

cannon- shot distance actually was. Diff erent states made diff erent assertions

on this point, with some states claiming three miles and others four. It might

also be wondered whether territorial seas should automatically expand in

width as artillery technology improved. Not until the late twentieth century

would this issue be satisfactorily resolved.

Revolutionary Times

Th e French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a frightening aff air to con-
servative forces throughout Eu rope. One of the many aspects of that cata-
clysm that would have long- term implications was the association between
natural- law ideas and po liti cal radicalism. Th is was not altogether new,
since the “Glorious Revolution” in En gland in 1688 and the American War
of In de pen dence both witnessed appeals to natural law and natural rights. It
should be appreciated, too, that general natural- law thought (i.e., not spe-
cifi cally relating to international aff airs) had been decidedly reformist in
character throughout the late seventeenth and eigh teenth centuries. It is not
diffi cult to see that a system of thought characterized by a resolute and un-
compromising rationalism would be perceived as threatening by entrenched
elites and vested interests. Th is is indicated by the reaction to one of the
major features of systematic jurisprudence (as general natural- law studies
were sometimes known): codifi cation of law. Codifi cation was, in large part,
a program for sweeping away the various excrescences, anachronisms, anti-
quated practices, localisms, and fi ctions with which legal systems were en-
crusted, and replacing them with streamlined, rational, centralized ways of
operating.
Exemplifying this disruptive, quasi- subversive aspect of natural law was a
group of writers in France known as the physiocrats, who emerged in the
1750s. Th eir very title (meaning “rule by nature” in Greek) highlighted the
centrality of natural law to their thought. Th ey sought to strengthen central
government at the expense of local and feudal interests, while at the same
time liberating individuals to engage in productive activity without hin-
drance from those same interests. (“Laissez faire, laissez passez” was one of