[Footnote 180: See above, §§ 14 and 113.]
The first is that, whenever a question arises which has to be settled by the consent of the members of the Family of Nations, every State has a right to a vote, but to one vote only.
The second consequence is that legally--although not politically--the vote of the weakest and smallest State has quite as much weight as the vote of the largest and most powerful. Therefore any alteration of an existing rule or creation of a new rule of International Law by a law-making treaty has legal validity for the signatory Powers and those only who later on accede expressly or submit to it tacitly through custom.
The third consequence is that--according to the rule _par in parem non habet imperium_--no State can claim jurisdiction over another full-Sovereign State. Therefore, although foreign States can sue in foreign Courts,[181] they cannot as a rule be sued[182] there, unless they voluntarily accept[183] the jurisdiction of the Court concerned, or have submitted themselves to such jurisdiction by suing in such foreign Court.[184]
[Footnote 181: See Phillimore, II. § 113 A; Nys, II. pp. 288-296; Loening, "Die Gerichtsbarkeit über fremde Staaten und Souveräne" (1903); and the following cases:--The United States _v._ Wagner (1867), L.R. 2 Ch. App. 582; The Republic of Mexico _v._ Francisco de Arrangoiz, and others, 11 Howard's Practice Reports 1 (quoted by Scott, "Cases on International Law," 1902, p. 170); The Sapphire (1870), 11 Wallace, 164. See also below, § 348.]
[Footnote 182: See De Haber _v._ the Queen of Portugal (1851), 17 Ch. D. 171, and Vavasseur _v._ Krupp (1878), L.R. 9 Ch. D. 351.]
[Footnote 183: See Prioleau _v._ United States, &c. (1866), L.R. 2 Equity, 656.]
[Footnote 184: Provided the cross-suit is really connected with the claim in the action. As regards the German case of Hellfeld _v._ the Russian Government, see Köhler in Z.V. IV. (1910), pp. 309-333; the opinions of Laband, Meili, and Seuffert, _ibidem_, pp. 334-448; Baty in _The Law Magazine and Review_, XXV. (1909-1910), p. 207; Wolfman in A.J. IV. (1910), pp. 373-383.]
To the rule of equality there are three exceptions:--
First, such States as can for some parts[185] only be considered International Persons, are not equals of the full members of the Family of Nations.