respective subjects of each country become positive enemies
of each other. They can carry on no commercial or other
intercourse with each other; they can make no valid
contracts with each other; they can institute no suits in
the courts of either country; they can, properly speaking,
hold no communication of an amicable nature with each other;
and their property is mutually liable to capture and
confiscation, by the subjects of either country. Now, it is
obvious from these considerations, that the whole ends and
objects of the partnership, the application of the joint
funds, skill, labours, and enterprize, of all the partners
in the common business thereof, can no longer be attained.
The conclusion therefore, would seem to be absolutely that
this mutual supervening capacity, must, upon the very
principles applied to all analagous cases, amount to a
positive dissolution of the partnership."[51]

The law of nations has not even stopped at the points already stated;
it proceeds further. The question of enemy or no enemy, depends not
upon the natural allegiance of the partners, but upon their domicile.

[Sidenote: Partnerships.]

If a partnership is established, and as it were domiciled, in a
neutral country, and all the partners reside there, it is treated as a
neutral establishment, and is entitled to protection accordingly. But
if one or more of the partners is domiciled in an enemy's country, he
or they are treated personally as enemies, and his share of the
partnership property is liable to capture and condemnation
accordingly, even though the partnership establishment is in the
neutral country. The inference from these considerations is, that in
all these cases there is an utter incompatibility from operation of
law between the partners, as to their respective rights, duties, and
obligations, both public and private; and therefore, that a
dissolution must necessarily result therefrom, independent of the will
or acts of the parties.[52]

And, as a general rule, therefore, it may be laid down, that if the
performance of a covenant be rendered unlawful by the Government of
this country entering into war, the contract will be dissolved on both
sides, and the offending party, as he has been compelled to abandon
his contract, will be excused from the payment of damages for its
non-performance; but it is otherwise, if the non-performance is
pr