[Footnote 87: See below, § 88 (Confederations of States), § 106 (Holy See), and vol. II. §§ 59 and 76 (Insurgents).]
It must be specially mentioned that the character of a subject of the Law of Nations and of an International Person can be attributed neither to monarchs, diplomatic envoys, private individuals, or churches, nor to chartered companies, nations, or races after the loss of their State (as, for instance, the Jews or the Poles), and organised wandering tribes.[88]
[Footnote 88: Most jurists agree with this opinion, but there are some who disagree. Thus, for instance, Heffter (§ 48) claims for monarchs the character of subjects of the Law of Nations; Lawrence (§ 42) claims that character for corporations; and Westlake, Chapters, p. 2, and Fiore, Code, Nos. 51, 61-64, claim it for individuals. The matter will be discussed below in §§ 288, 290, 344, 384.]
§ 64. A State proper--in contradistinction to so-called Colonial States--is in existence when a people is settled in a country under its own Sovereign Government. The conditions which must obtain for the existence of a State are therefore four:
There must, first, be a _people_. A people is an aggregate of individuals of both sexes who live together as a community in spite of the fact that they may belong to different races or creeds, or be of different colour.
There must, secondly, be a _country_ in which the people has settled down. A wandering people, such as the Jews were whilst in the desert for forty years before their conquest of the Holy Land, is not a State. But it matters not whether the country is small or large; it may consist, as with City States, of one town only.
There must, thirdly, be a _Government_--that is, one or more persons who are the representatives of the people and rule according to the law of the land. An anarchistic community is not a State.
There must, fourthly and lastly, be a _Sovereign_ Government. Sovereignty is supreme authority, an authority which is independent of any other earthly authority. Sovereignty in the strict and narrowest sense of the term includes, therefore, independence all round, within and without the borders of the country.
§ 65. A State in its normal appearance does possess independence all round and therefore full sovereignty. Yet there are States in existence which certainly do not possess full sovereignty, and are therefore named not-full Sovereign States. All States which are under the suzerainty or under the protectorate of another State or are member States of a so-called Federal State, belong to this group. All of them possess supreme authority and independence with regard to a part of the tasks of a State, whereas with regard to another part they are under the authority of another State. Hence it is that the question is disputed whether such not-full Sovereign States can be International Persons and subjects of the Law of Nations at all.[89]