The Power to whom the Island had been ceded, would be the Power owning the Mainland on the other side, or shore, of such Portion of the Sea.
Such right, to be affected by the latter Cession, must have been possessed before such cession (as is alluded to in P. 3) of the opposite Island, and the Decision upon which such assertion of right is based, must never have been extinguished, abandoned, or relinquished. But the Power affecting this right is the Power which ceded the island to the Ceding Power.
And as it was firstly, of the evidence of such disputed right in itself, and secondly, that Dominion, and consequent Jurisdiction, would pass by the cession of Territory to the Power to whom the Island was ceded, as a necessary incident, or appurtenant, to the Possession of the Territory.
It follows, by the operation of the Laws which govern the construction of treaties, that the Power which was the grantor, or ceder, of the Territory, had it in its power to limit, or restrict, its grant or cession, so as not to affect any other inherent or latent right or Jurisdiction possessed by itself. The fact of its not so stipulating, limiting, or restricting its grant or cession, prevents it now objecting to the exercise of that Jurisdiction which is by Public and International Law recognized as incident to the lawful possession of Territory and Dominion thereon.
Page 148