º
3.
¿?***&&*。··
§§§§§§¿
§§
.*
ſºšº:$，?，!，:§;
***（№ķș
§§§§
¿? №
§§
§§§
$
、
¿
šķț șaegae
§§#
¿š
šŠĶ';
§§· §§§§§¿
！§§§§§§§§§§
§§§§
§ ff.
%）ğ;
§§
¿?
§§
§§§§
§§
§§§§
§§
ș*
Ķ
zae
ģ
º
§
##
$º
º
~- --ſae
- ··¿¿.*~§§§§Êae~
gez✉·§§§§§§§§§§§·· -¿
§§§§§::- -- -·- ·-§§Ř®¿¿.*-¿?
-~-*· -š！?！*º*… --★ →*|- -··«r: -¿?
…|-, ！• × °.~:~~· * * .* -*'.· |-ț¢- -
§§¿
·∞
&-
:¿?
¿; ;ºzgłłłý---
∞--
¿
ſae
ķ
§§§§***
§§§
-§§
§§}，- →!3
≡§§§§··ºr，
¿
#
§§
;*
*..*
#ffff;
№Ě
ģ
șģ
¿š
-。
&#***¿¿.**-·-§§§§§§§）■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■、、; ··§ ***|-;ex）;¿
*T...！！！！！！--！ ·∞ √° √∞::~~-->*$$$$$¢ £ €：：:--- |-！”¿
§§§'‰}}%;&#ff;&šķae¿
·--~¿·-ſ.a.;&&&&~ -¿??¿��
--¿- ~ffºsº;）:）、。&&{;º & 8 &…'; };& -、。
。¿§§§§§§§·· × ×-·šķī£§§§
ģ*¿· :：::*（?:a， §. Š×}·&
****-£;'$ž-
×：
*
¿?
¿
§§§§

-}ĒĒĒĒĒĒĒĮĮĶĶĹĹĻĻĽĮŽĘ
E（~~~~••••••••••••§ſ§¶•@|
:E;\\$\\]\\
Enº
‘AMo
ninsulatº
*UAERISPs
ĶĒĻĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪ
È\ŅĢĒffffffffffffĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĒ
№ſae
t
R
ſſſſſ
İIIITIIIſſiſſiſſiſſ
ºr ºrº-ººººººº-
āī
§
TTTTTTTTT
mT
†
WTH
î.
iſſi
Emſ.
§）,§ §§
¿¿.*>（.）




















































JTX
23 )
, F-4 2
V 2
THE
AMERICAN DIPLOMATIC CODE,
} , ,
EMBRACING A COLLECTION OF
TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS
BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND FOREIGN POWERS:
FROM 1778 TO 1 S 34.
WITH AN
A B S T R A C T OF IMPORTANT J U DICIAL D E CISIONS,
ON POINTS CONNECTED WITH
our Foreign attiations.
ALSO,
A CONCISE DIPLOMATIC MANUAL,
CONTAINING A SUMMARY OF THE
I. A v o F N A T I o N s,
FROM THE WORKS OF
Wºcquefort, Martens, Kent,
Wattel, Ward, Story, &c. &c.
AND OTHER
DIPLOMATIC WRITINGS ON QUESTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.
USEFUL FOR
PUBLIC MINISTERS AND CONSULS,
AXIO IOR ALL OTHERS HAVING OFFICIAL OH. COMMERCIAL INTERCOUltSE WITH FM) REIGN NATIONS ſle
BY JONATHAN ELLIOT.
“It would be exceedingly to the diseredit of any person, who should be called to take a
“share in the councils of the nation, if he should be found deficient in the great leading
“principles of International Law.”—Kent's Commentaries on Jimerican Law.
IN TWO W O L U M E S.—V O L U M E T H E S E CON D.
WITH NOTES AND INDEXES •
2&laſsijington:
PRINTED BY JON AT HAN E L LI ot, J UN I or,
ON THE PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE,
1834.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year eighteen hundred and thirty-
four, by Jonathan Elliot, in the Clerk's Office of the Bistrict Court, for the District
of Columbia.
GENERAL INDEX...Wol. II.
AIVIERICAN T R E A TI E S W IT H T H E UNITED STATE S.
I BRAZIL.
Treaty, or General Convention, of Peace, Commerce and Navigation, between the
United States of America and his Majesty the Emperor of Brazil concluded
and signed at Rio de Janeiro, on the 12th day of December, 1828, on the
part of the United States, by W. Tudor; on the part of Brazil, by Marquez
de Aracaty, and Miguel de Souza Mello e Alvim, . . . . . . . . .
Negotiators appointed to conclude a treaty. Art. 1. Firm and inviolable peace, &c.
Art. 2.
3.
10
13.
Favors of commerce to be common to both parties . . . . . . . . . .
Mutual benefits in trade and residence to be equally enjoyed. 4. Each party
may carry its own produce to the republic of the other—equalization of duties
established, and to be the basis of all trade . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Importations and exportations to be on a reciprocal footing. No partial prohibitions
to be established. 6. Merchant, commanders of ships, and other citizens of
both countries, &c. to manage their own business; to be treated as citizens of the
most favored nation. 7. Citizens of neither of the contracting parties shall be
liable to any embargo, &c. 8. Whenever the citizens of either party seek re-
fuge, in the dominions, &c. of the other, they are to be treated as friends, &c. . .
All ships, &c. belonging to the citizens of either party captured by pirates, and
found within the dominions of either, to be delivered up to the owners. . . .
Assistance and protection to be rendered in case of wrecks, &c. within the domin-
ions of each other. 11. Citizens of each party shall have power to dispose of their
goods and effects within the jurisdiction of the other by sale, testament, or otherwise.
Alien heirs allowed 3 years to dispose of their property. 12. Complete protec-
tection in persons and property in the territories of both nations, legal redress, etc. .
Liberty of conscience and rites of burial secured. 14. Both parties at liberty to
trade with those at enmity with either, ete. Free ships to make free goods. All
persons on board, except those in the actual service of an enemy to be free. . . .
Elag covering the property to be applied to those powers, only, who acknowledge
the principle. 15. Enemy’s property, to be protected by a neutral flag, must be
shipped two months before declaration of war, etc. 16. Gontraband specified.
Definition of blockade. 18. Contraband only, liable to confiscation. 19. In
cases of blockade, vessels to be notified but not detained, etc. Vessels entering be-
fore blockade, may quit unmolested. etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20. During a visit at sea, armed vessels to remain out of reach of cannon shot, -Neutrals
not to go on board the examining vessel. 21. In case of war, sea-letters, certificates
of cargo, etc. to be furnished, expressing to whom the property belongs, . . .
22. Visiting regulations to apply only vessels without convoy, . . . . . . . .
23.
24.
25.
Established courts only to try prize causes—Motives of condemnation to be stated,
The neutral party not to accept a commission to cruise against the other, . . .
In case of war, six months allowed to those on the coast, and 12 for those in the
interior, to remove effects, etc. 26. No sequestration of money in banks, etc, .
27. Official intercourse in relation to public ministers, etc., to be on a reciprocal footing,
28. Each party permitted to have consuls in each other's ports, . . . . . . .
29. Commissions to be exhibited before exeguatur is obtained, . . . . . . . .
30.
31.
$3.
Consuls exempt from public service—their archives inviolate, . . . . . .
Consuls may call in the public authorities to aid in securing deserters, who are not
to be detained more than 2 months in prison. 32 Consular convention to be formed,
The following points agreed to:-1st. Treaty to be in force 12 years—Peace, etc.
2ndly. Citizens responsible for infringing this article. 3dly. War not to be
declared, until remonstrance is made, and satisfaction is refused, . . . . .
****, Otb*" ºreaties not to be contravened by this—-Patifications within 8 months,
S
66
66
66
67
68
69
69
70
71
72
73
74.
74.
74,
74
75
75
75
75
76
77
INDEX. —CENTRAL AMERICA.
CENTRAIL ANTEHRHCA.
General Convention, of Peace, Jimity, Commerce, and Navigation, between the
United States of America, and the Federation of the Centre of America.
Negotiated at Washington, on the 5th of December, 1825. Signed on the
part of the United States, by Henry Clay, and on the part of Central America,
by Antonio José Cañas, e o o º e o e o o º e º º º º o o
Art. 1. Firm and inviolable peace, etc. 2. Favors in commerce to be common to both
parties. 3. Mutual benefits in trade and residence to be equally eujoyed
4. Each party may can ry its own produce to the republic of the other—equalization of
duties established, and to be the basis of all trade, . . . . . . . . .
5. Importations and exportations to be on a reciprocal footing. No partial prohibitions
to be established. 6. Merchants, commanders of ships, and other citizens of
both countries, &c. to manage their own business; to be treated as citizens, etc.
7. Citizens of neither of the contracting parties shall be liable to any embargo, &c.
8
. Whenever the citizens of either party seek refuge in the dominions, ete of the
other, they are to be treated with humanity, &c., . . . . . . . . . .
9. All ships, etc. belonging to the citizens of either party, captured by pirates, and
found within the doninions of either, to be delivered up to the owners . . . .
10. Assistance and protection to be lendered in case of wrecks, etc. within the dominions
12
*e
13.
17.
19.
22.
30.
13.
of each other. 11. Citizens of each party, shall have power to dispose of their
goods and effects within the jurisdiction of the other, by sale, testament, or otherwise
Complete protection in persons and property in the territories of both nations, &c.
Liberty of conscience and rites of burial secured. 14. Both parties at liberty to
trade with those at enmity with either, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Free ships to make free goods. All persons on board, except those in the actual
service of an enemy to be free. Flag covering the property to be applied to
those powers, only, who acknowledge the principle. 15. Enemy’s properly to
be protected by a neutral flag, must be shipped two months before declaration of
war, &c. 16. Contraband specified . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goods not contraband. IXefin. of blockade. 18. Contraband only liable to confis'n
In cases of blockade, vessels to be notified but not detained, &c. Vessels entering
before blockade, may quit unmolested, &c. 20. During a visit at sea, armed
vessels to remain out of reach of cannon shot. Neutrals not to go on board the
examining vessel. 21. In case of war, sea letters, certificates of cargo, &c.
to be furnished, expressing to whom the property belongs. . . . . . . .
Visiting regulation to apply only to vessels without convoy. 23. Established
courts only to try prize causes. Motives of condemiation to be stated. 24. The
neutral party not to accept a commission to cruise against the other. 25. In
case of war, six months allowed to those on the coast, and twelve for those in the
interior to remove effects, 8 c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
And no sequestation of money in bank or public funds. 27. Official intercourse
in relation to public ministers, &c. to be on a reciprocal footing. 28. Each
party permitted to have consuls in each others’ ports. 29. Commissions to be
exhibited before ckeduatar is obtained. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consuls exempt from public service—their Archives inviolate. 31. Consuls
may call in the public authorities to aid in securing deserters, who are not to be de-
tained more than two months in prison. 32. Consular convention to be formed.
The following points agreed to : 1st. Treaty to remain in force twelve years.
Peace perpetual. 2nd. Citizens responsible for infringing this article. 3rd.
War not to be declared, until remonstrance is made, and satisfaction is refused.
4th. Other treatles not to be contravened by this. Ratification within eight months
41
43
43
45
47
47
47
49
49
55
57
59
61
4
INDEX,-COLOMBIA.
COLOBMI BHA.
1. General Convention of Peace, Amity, Navigation and Commerce, between the
United States of America, and the Republic of Colombia, signed at Bogota
on the 3d. of Oct. 1824. Negotiated on the part of the United States by R.
C. Anderson, and Pedro Gual on the part of Colombia. . . . . . . .
Rules of correspondence between the two nations. Negotiators. . . . . .
Art. 1. Firm and inviolable peace, &c. 19. Art. 2. Favors of commerce to be com-
mon to both parties, 19. Art. 3. Citizens of the United States at liberty to
frequent all the coasts and countries of the Republic of Colombia, to reside there, &c.
Same in relation to citizens of Colombia, 21. Art. 4. Merchants, commanders
of ships, and other citizens of both countries, &c. to manage their own business; to
be treated as citizens of the most favored nation, 21. Art 5.0itizens of neither of the
contracting parties shall be liable to any embargo,&c. Art.6.Whenever the citizens
either party seek refuge, in the dominions, &c. of the other, they are to be treated
as friends, &c. 23. Art.7.All ships belonging to the citizens of either party captured
by pirates, and found within the dominions of either, to be delivered up to the owners
Art. 9. Assistance and protection to be rendered in case of wrecks, etc. within the dominians
of each other, 23. Art. 9. Citizens of each party shall have power to dispose
of their goodø and effects within the jurisdiction of the other, by sale, testament, or
otherwise. Alien heirs allowed 3 years to dispose of their property. . . . .
Art. 10. Complete protection in persons and property in the territories, of both nations le-
gal redress, etc. 25. Art. 11. Liberty of conscience and rights of burial secured
Art. 12. Both parties at liberty to trade with those at enmity with either, etc. Free ships
to make free goods, 25. All persons on board, except those in the actual service
of an enemy to be free. Flag covering the property to be applied to those powers,
only, who acknowledge the principle, 27. Art. 13. Enemy’s property, to be pro-
tected by a neutral flag, must be shipped two months before declaration of war, etc.
Contraband specified, 27. Art. 15. Goods not contraband, 29. Definition of
blockade, 29. Art. 16. Contraband only liable to confiscation . . . .
Art. 17. In cases of blockade, vessels to be notified but not detained, etc. . . . . .
Vessels entering before blockade, may quit unmolested, etc. . . . . . .
Art. 18. During a visit at sea, armed vessels to remain out of reach of cannon shot. Neutrals
not to go on board the examining vessel, 31. In case of war, sea letters, certifi-
cates of cargo, &c. to be furnished, expressing to whom the property belongs. . .
Art. 20. Visiting regulations to apply only to vessels without convoy. . . . . . .
Art. 21. Established courts only to try prize causes. Motives of condemnation to be stated
Art. 22. The neutral party not to accept a commission to cruise against the other. . .
Art. 23. In case of war, 6 months allowed to those on the coast, and 12 for those in the in-
terior to remove effects, &c. 33. Art. 24. And no sequestration of money in
bank or public funds. 35. Art. 25. Official intercourse in relation to public
ministers, &c. to be on a reciprocal footing, 35. Art. 26. Each party permit-
ted to have consuls in each others ports, 35. Art. 27. Commissions to be exhi-
bited before exeguatur is obtained, 35. Art. 28. Consuls exempt from public
service—their archives inviolate, 35. Art. 29. Coasuls may call in the public
authorities to aid in securing deserters, who are not to be detained more than 3 months
in prison, 37. Art. 30. Consular convention to be formed. . . . . .
Art. 31. The following points agreed to: 1st. Treaty to remain in force twelve years.
Peace perpetual. 37. 2d. Citizens responsible for infringing this article . . .
3d. War not to be declared, until remonstrance is made, and Satisfaction is refused.
4th. Other treaties not to be contravened by this. Ratification within eight months
19
19
21
23
23
25
37
37
39
39
INDEX. —MEXICO.
MTEXICO.
1. Treaty of Amity,Commerce and Navigation, between the United States of America
and the United Mexican States, concluded at Mexico, on the 5th of April, 1831,
by A. Butler, on the part of the United States, and Lucas Alaman, and Rafael
Mangino, on the part of Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81*
Art. 1. Universal peace and sincere friendship, 82*. 2. Basis—perfect equality and reci-
procity, 82*. 3. Freedom to visit all ports, hire warehouses, &c. . . . . . 82°
Duties, &c. same as most favored nations. Coasting trade always excepted . . . . . . . . 82°
4. Duties on importation into Mexico, same as on like articles into the United States . 82°
Export duties, same as to other foreign nations, 84*. 5. Light, or harbor dues, pi-
lotage and salvage, same as in United States, 84*. 6. Duties, drawbacks, &c. on
imports or exports, same, whether made in Mexican or United States vessels, of the
growth of either country, 84*. 7. Brokers, factors, etc. to be chosen as the par-
ties may think fit, 80*. 8. No embargo or detention withºut compensation. . . 86°
9. Exemption from compulsory service, 86*. 10. Refuge from stress of weather, en-
enemies, etc. provided for, 86*. 11. Vessels, etc. captured by pirates, to be
given up, 86. * 12. Assistance in case of wreck, etc. 88.* 13. Right of dispo-
sal of property, by will or sale, same as native eitizens, 88 * 14. Special protec-
tion to persons and property; tribunals of justice open, etc. . . . . . . . 88°
Liberty of conscience, and privilege of sepulchre . . . . . . . . . 90°
16. Free trade with those at enmity with either party—Free ships make free goods.
The flag to protect the passengers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90°
And to cover property to apply to those who acknowledge the principle . . . 92*
17. Neutral property on board enemy vessels, to be considered enemies’ property, and
liable to confiscation, 18 Contraband specified. 19. Things not enumerated free 94"
20. Contraband articles only to be condemned, the rest of the cargo to be free, . . 94*
21. In case of blockade, warning to be given. 22 Rules of visit to be established, . 94*
23. In case of war, sea-letters to be furnished, expressing name, property, &c., . . 96*
24. Rules for the examination of vessels, to apply only to vessels without convoy, . . 96*
Established prize courts only to take cognizance of prize causes . . . . . . . 98*
26. In case of war, six month’s notice, to merchants on the coast, and twelve for those in
the interior. Other trades may remain with their property unmolested . . . . 98°
27. Public ministers granted the same immunities, etc. as the most favored nations . 98*
28. Consuls to exhibit their patent; and admitted in all ports open to foreign commerce 100°
29. Consuls and their officers exempt from all local taxes. 100°. 30. Consuls may
call in the aid of the authorities to arrest deserters. 100.* 31. Provision form-
ing a consular convention. 102*. 32. Interior commerce to be regulated by
mutual agreement—but, in the meantime, to be conducted as heretofore with JMis-
souri. 102*. 33. Indian hostilities on the respective boundaries to be restrained
by force. 102*. Captives to be set free, and returned to their own territories . 104°
Points to be observed, to preserve a good understanding. . . . . . . . . 104°
1st. Treaty to remain in force 8 years; after that period, one year’s notice to termi-
nate it. 104*. 2nd. Citizens to be held personally responsible for infringing it. 104°
3. Before war, a statement of injuries to be presented, and justice demanded . 106"
Fifh and sixth articles to be suspended for six years . . . . . . . . 106*
2. Treaty of Limits, between the United States of America, and the United Mexican
States, negotiated on the part of the United States by A. Butler, and on the
part of the United Mexican States by Lucas Alaman, and Rafael Mangino, on
the 5th of April, 1831, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Treaty of 22d February, 1819, confirmed. Art. 1. Third and fourth articles to
34
be carried into full effect. 2. Boundaries designated. . . . . . . ~ 110°
3. Commissioner and surveyor to be appointed . . . . . . . . e s il?”
Additional article to the above) Treaty of Limits . . . . . . . . . . 114"
6
INDEX—LAWS, &c.
LAWs, &c.
• LAWS, &c. of the United States, relative to Public Ministers, Consuls, Conven-
tions, Equalization of Duties, Slave Trade, &c., tº © Q page 81
No. 1 Act fixing the Compensation of Public JMinisters, and of Consuls, residing on the
coast of Barbary, tº º * tº & © May 1, 1810, 81
[Ministers plenipotentiaries $9000 per annum, (and $9000 outfit) secretaries of
legation $2000, charge des affaires $4,500, on the Barbary coast $2000. Consul
general at London and Paris $2000 each by usage.]
s. Privileges of Foreign Ministers—Extract from the Act of April 30, 1790 • 83
[For Privileges, etc. of Ambassadors, see No. 55, from page 396 to 409.]
3. Act concerning consuls and vice-consuls, © tº * April 14, 1792, 85
4. Act supplementary to the [above] “act concerning consuls and vice-consuls,” and for
the further protection of American seamen, <> February 28, 1303, 88
[On consuls, etc., see No. 120 to 164, from page 427 to 458. )
3. Equalization of Duties.—Act to repeal so much of the several acts imposing duties
on the tonnage of ships and vessels, and on goods, wares and merchandise imported
into the U. States, as imposes a Discriminating Duty on tonnage, between foreign
vessels, and vessels of the United States, and between goods imported into the
United States in foreign vessels, and vessels of the United States, March 3, 1815, 91
(Contingent repeal of discriminating duties, in favor of foreign countries.] -
6. Deposite of Foreign Consular Papers. Act anthorizing the deposite of the papers of
foreign vessels, with the consul of their respective nations March 3, 1817, 92
7. Passenger Vessels. Act regulating passenger ships and vessels March 2, 1819, 93
8. JWavigation.—Act concerning the navigation of the U. States March 1, 1817,
April 18, 1818, 94
9. Supplementary to [the above] an act concerning navigation May 15, 1820, 96
10. British American and West India Intercourse.—Act to regulate the intercourse
between the U. States and certain Brit, American Colonial ports March 1, 1823, 98
President’s Proclamation, [Trade with certain British Colonial ports prohibited—
Revival by acts of congress concerning navigation of 1818 and 1820, March 17, 1827, 100
12, Act to amend the acts regulating the commercial intercourse between the United
States, and certain Colonies of Great Britain o © May 29, 1830, 102
13. Proclamation of the president, declaring the ports of the United States to be open
to British vessels with their cargoes, from certain British Colonial ports, * *
October 5, 1830, 103
14. Act to equalize the duties on vessels of the republic of Colombia and their cargoes
April 20, 1826, 104
15, Slave Trade.—Act to prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from the United
States, to any foreign place or country o e º March 23, 1794, 105
[Forfeiture of vessels, etc.—Penalties for building, fitting out.—Bend for suspected
vessels.-Penalty for concealing slaves.]
Act in addition to the above act, etc. * e tº May 10, 1800, 106
[Forfeiture of interest in slave vessels.—Penalty.—Punishment for serving on
board.—Seizure of vessels and crews by ships-of-war.—Trial of offences.—Appli-
cation of forfeitures.] •
17, Act to prevent the importation of certain persons into certain states, where, by the
laws thereof, their admission is prohibited. © • February 28, 1803, 107
[Importation of negroes for sale.— Prohibition of negroes, not natives, into certain
states.—Penalties for offences, etc.)
18. Act to prohibit the importation of slaves into any port or place, within the juris- *
diction of the U. States, from, and after Jan. 1, 1808 º March 2, 1807 108
[Forfeiture of vessels fitting out, or sailing for slave trade.—Penalties for fitting out.
H6
7
INDEX. —LAWS, &c.
Slave Trade—
and for receiving slaves for traffic.—Forfeiture of vessels which have carried slaves,
Disposal of the negroes.-Punishment for slave dealing.—Penalty for sale of slaves
imported.—Forfeiture of vesssls having slaves on board—Punishment of com—
manders—Employment of ships-of-war—Penalty for conveying slaves for sale,
in v’sls under 40 tons.—Regulations for vessels carrying slaves for sale, coastwise,]
19. Act [in addition to the above act, of March 2, 1807, to prohibit the introduction of
slaves, etc. and to repeal certain parts of the same º © April 20, 1818, 114
[Importation of slaves in any manner whatever, for sale, prohibited.—Forfeiture of
vessel.—Vessels built for slave-trade forfeited.—Penalty.--Punishment for convey-
ing negroes from Africa, etc. not held to service as slaves. –Disposal of negroes
imported.—Penalty for holding, importing, or selling imported slaves.—Repeal of
part of act of 1807.]
20. Act in addition to the ast, prohibiting the Slave Trade, . . March 3, 1819, 116
[Employment of ships of war—Seizure of slave vessels—Distribution of proceeds;
Punishment of offenders—Disposal of negroes—Agents on the coast of Africa—
Bounty for captured negroes—Penalty for holding negroes imported—bounty to
informers—Port of adjudication—Repeal of repugnant acts—appropriation of
money—See in connexion with the second section of this convention, the opinion
of the Attorney General of the United States, page 695]
21. Act appropriating $30,000 for the suppression of the slave trade, May 24, 1828. 119
22. Crimes.—Act more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain crimes
against the United States, and other purposes o © March 3, 1825, 119
[General act for punishing offenders.]
23. Piracy.—Act to continue in force “an act to protect the commerce of the United
States, and punish the crime of piracy;” and also to make further provision for
punishing the crime of piracy Q. © e © May 15, 1820, 122.
24. Act concerning Discriminating Duties of tonnage and impost January 7, 1824, 124
[Netherlands, Prussia, Hanseatic Cities, Oldenburgh, Norway, Sardinia and
Russia, exempt from discriminating duties.]
25. Proclamation declaring discriminating duties to be suspended so far as they relate
to the subjects of the Pope, June 7, 1827. ge .* e © • 126
26. Act in addition to “an act concerning discriminating duties” &c., to equalize duties
on Prussian vessels and cargoes, . e e º May 24, 1828, 126
27. Proclamation suspending discrim. duties on vessels &c. of the kingdom of Hanover 127
28. Pioclamation suspending discriminating duties on vessels, &c. of Austria, June3,1829 128
29, Proclamation suspending discriminating duties on vessels, &c. of Oldenburg
September 18, 1830 129
30. France.—Act for carrying into effect the convention of Navigation and Commerce,
between the United States and France, º e & March 3, 1823, 131
31. Act regulating commercial intercourse with the islands of JMartinique and Gua-
daloupe, e º e º e º May 9, 1828, 132
32. Apprehension of Deserters.-Act to provide for their apprehension, March 2, 1829, 132
33, Russia.-Act for the punishment of contraventions of the 5th article of the treaty
between the United States and Russia, (see page 446 Vol. 1.) May 19, 1828, 135
34. Denmark.-Act to provide for the adjustment of claims, etc., under the convention
of March 28, 1830, (see page 453, Vol. 1.) tº © Feb. 25, 1831, 134
35. France.—Act to carry into effect the convention, concluded at Paris, on the 4th of
July, 1831–(see page 524, Vol. 1.) c º © July 13, 1832 137
36. Colombia.-Act giving effect to a comm. arrangement with the U. S. May 19, 1832 139.
37. Portugal.-Act to exempt Portuguese vessels from the payment of duties on
tonnage, . © © © & © © May 25, 1832, 139
38. pain. Act concerning tonnage duties on Spanish vessels, July 13, 1832, 139
8
INDEX.--AUSTIVA-X. T.&IA—BºAZIL.
T
R
E.
£,
T
Z C S : B E TV E O N F C REIGN. F. O'W'. º S.
AJSTRIA.
Emperor Francis a party to the treaty of the Holy Alliance, 26 Sept. 1815 . . . . .
A party to the secret treaty of Verona, the 22nd of November, 1822 . . . .
Declaration of Congress, eight powers—abolition of the Slave Trade, 8th of February 1815
General Treaty of Congress, Vienna, 9th of June, 1815. Navigation of rivers—river Po, du-
ties, Towing paths, rivers Rhine, Neckar, Maine Moselle, Meuse, Scheldt . . .
Treaty, Ionian Islands, Paris, Novem. 5, 1815. Independence, Protection of Great Britain
Ld. high commissioner constitutional charter, armed force, national flag, commerce with
Austria, acceding powers, consuls, etc. collectors of customs, naturalization . . . . . . . .
Declaration of Congress, five powers, Slave Trade, Verona, on 18th of November, 1822 - .
Treaty with Switzerland for the mutual surrender of criminals, 14th of July, 1828 . . .
Treaty with Brazil, Vienna, 16th of June, 1827 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Necessity of a public minister at Vienna, in 1781. p. 484. Wm. Lee, commissioned to repre-
sent Congress of the United States at Vienna. p. 471.-Retires from Vienna . . . .
Holy Alliance, treaty of, between 1. Austria, 2. Prussia, 3. Russia, to lend one another, on
every occasion, and in every place, assistance and support; other powers may be received
into the Holy Alliance e O e e e & & ©
Holy Villiance, additions to Secret Treaty of Verona, 22d November, 1822, ratified by Aus-
tria, France, Prussia and Russia º º º - © º ©
See Great Britain.
IºE,GIA.
Deelaration of Independence, 18th of November, 1830 e © te e º
Treaty acknowledging Independence by the five great powers, to wit: Austria, France, Great
Britain, Prussia and Russia–Provinces, boundaries &c. te e º º
BRAZIL.
Independence, act of August 1, 1822. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Treaty of Commerce and Navigation, between his Britannic Majesty and the Emperor of
Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, August 17th, 1827. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tight of naming and placing cousuls, liberty of conscience, British to enjoy same rights
in civil and criminal matters, as Brazilians—deserters to be dismissed, or given up-re-
ciprocal liberty of commerce and navigation—duties same as most favored nation-
contraband—ports in Asia open to Brazil.
Treaty between Brazil and the Hanse Towns, November 7th, 1827. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
On the footing of the most favored nation, [consuls, religion, &c. as in the above with G.B.]
Prelim”y treaty of peace, betw. }_a Platte and emperor of Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, Aug. 28.1828
Emancipation—A Brazilian to Mr Jefferson on the emancipation of his country, May 4, 1787
Brazilian Bluckade. Mr Raguet, minister to Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
JDeserters, mutual delivery of Capt. Biddle to Admiral Guedes, 21st December, 1827. . . . .
Right of search, Captain Biddle to Admiral Guedes, January 25th 1828. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proposal to search for Deserters, Commodore Du Plantys, of French navy, to Commodore
a Elliott, United States navy, June 11, 1826. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Departure of the United States Diplomatic agent, Mr Raguet, from Rio Janeiro, Mr Clay’s
letter to, Jan. 20, 1827. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "
$.
...) 9
173
17:
180
181
183
187
692.
692
473
173
179
603
68 .
24.1
247
251
51 ()
655
667
668
669
671
INDEX.—BOLIVIA—BUENOS AYRES–CHILI.
Treaty of Commerce and Navigation, with JAustria, Vienna, June 16th, 1827..............
Friendship, Commerce and Navigation, with Prussia, Rio de Janeiro, July 9th, 1827
Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation, with Netherlands, Rio. de Jan. Feb. 20, 1828
Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation, with Portugal, concerning the recognition of
the Independence of Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, August 29th 1825: ..... * * * * * * g e e º 'º & © &
Convention—Abolition of the slave trade, Rio de Janeiro November 23d, 1826
See Great Britain.
| B60'ſ, HWHA.
Treaty between Peru and Bolivia, Pequisa July 6, 1828, - º e
Treaty of Federation with Peru, Chiquisaca, November 15, 1826, e e º
Tºſº NG)& AYREES.
Independence, act of, July 9, 1816, º º º g º & •
Treaty of Amity Commerce and Navigation between His Britannic Majesty and La Plata,
Buenos Ayres February 2, 1825. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Independence, recognition of, a topic at Aix la Chapelle in October 1818, . . .
Independence—Aguirre, Thompson, and De Forrest’s applications to the government
of the United States for recognition of Independence, 63% De Forrest’s creden-
tials, and application for an Exeguatur as Buenos Ayrean Consul General, . .
Mission of Messrs Biand, Rodney and Graham to the La Platte in 1820, . . .
Extracts from their instructions from the Department of State—the abuse of Privateer-
ing, 638. Mr Forbes efforts successful in forbidding the granting of Privateer Com-
missions, 638 United States proposition to acknowledge its Independence, March 8,
1822. 640. Congressional Report on the above. 6 12. Minister Pienipotentiary
appointed to Buenos Ayres, (with same Instructions as furnished to the Ministers on
the Panama mission,) - º e e o º o tº gº
Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, Commerce and Navigation with Chili Santiago, Nov. 20, 1826
Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with Chili, and Buenos Ayres Jan. 1819. . .
See Great Britain.
ÖğHH, i.
Independence act of Jan. 1, 1818, 633. Aguirre, private agent from, to the C. States
in 1817, 634. Political Mission of Messrs ISland, Rodney, and Graham in 1817. . .
Privateers, Instructions relative to, 638. Public Minister appointed by U. S. to Chili. .
Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, Commerce, and Navigation, Santiago, November 20, 1826.
Treaty of Friendship and Alliance, between the United Provinces of the Rio de la Plata, Buenos
Ayres, January 1819, e & g © & º º -
Treaty of Perpetua, Union, League, and Confederation, between Colombia, and Santiago
de Chili, October 21, 1822, º º e e º e g e
See Chili.
La Platte. Prelim”y treaty of peace betw. the republics of the United provinces of La Platte
and the Emperor of Brazil, August 28, 1828. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Indedependence of Montevideo declared—election of deputies to take place—govern-
ment of Banda Oriental to cease, &c.—constitution to be formed—troops of both parties
to remain temporarily, but not to interfere in politics—navigation of the river Platte to
be free to both.
See Brazil.
Peru. Treaty of peace betw. the Republic of Colombia and Repl’c of Peru, Sep 29, 1829
Solemn promise to forget the past, and to promote mutual good and wellbeing-military
to be reduced—limits same as ancient vice-royalties of New Grenada and Peru, line to
commence from river Tumbes on the Pacific ccean—river navigation to be free, duties
same to each as natives
See Peru.
692
692
692
602
237
96 ſ.
658
691
692
251
10
INDEX.--CHINA--DENM ARK–GREECE–GREAT BRITAIN.
{}}#HNA,
Laws, extracts from the Criminal and Civil Code. tº tº g tº e ge
Edict of Faou Kwang, concerning the United States Ship Vincennes on her visit to Canton
}}}}|Nº|| AR}{\.
Treaty. Peace, friendship and Commerce with Great Britain, Kiel, 14th January, 1814.
Prizes, prisoners, Danish Colonies, etc. Commercial relations, slave trade abolition, Se-
questrations on property: privileges of Depot at Straslund, renewal of ancient treaties
See Great Britain.
Claims—Act of February 25th 1831 to provide for the adjustment of Claims, under the
Convention of the 28th March, 1830. * tº e º º ſº
. &#&#EEE6Dº.
Greece—Treaty of Settlement, London, July 6, 1827, º © tº º ge
Mediation of the friendly powers, Greeks to hold of the Sultan as of a superior Lord, to
pay tribute, territorial limits to be settled at a future negotiation—restoration to be
guaranteed, etc.
Additional article, limitted time of one month for acceptance by the Porte of the Treaty. .
Convention. Sovereignty of Greece, London, May 7 1832. * e e tº
Crown offered to Prince Otho of Bavaria, and accepted etc.
Greek Protocol of February 3, 1830. tº tº * * * tº
See Great Britain.
{{#&#EAT Fººl'AHN.
See Austria, 178,181,183, 187 See Muscat, - - - 204
Brazil, - - - - - 684 Netherlands, - 165
Buenos Ayres, - - 237 Persia, - - - 206
Colombia, - - - 229 Portugal, - - 189
Denmark, - - 166 Russia, - - - 190
France, - - - - 157 Sardinia, - - - 200
Greece, 175, 217, 227 Sicily, - - - - 198
Hanseatic Repub. 202 º Spain, - - - - 192
Madagascar, - - 206 Turkey, - - - 207
Mexico, - - - 223 West Indies, - - 158
Treaty of Peace, between Great Britain and France. Sigued at Utrecht, 31st March, (11th
April) 1713, restoration of the bay and straits of Hudson, buildings, forts, satisfaction
to the Hudson Bay Company, also St.Christopher, Nova Scotia, Port Royal or Annapo-
lis Royal–French subjects excluded from fishing on the eastern coasts of Nova Scotia,
within 30 leagues of the coast, beginning from Sable island. France at liberty to catch
and dry fish, on Cape Breton, etc. tº tº e gº * * ſº
Definitive Treaty. Newfoundland Fishery, Paris, 10th February 1763. e •º &
Cape Breton Fishery in the Gulf St. Lawrence;
Definitive Treaty. Newfoundland Fishery,Versailles, 3d September, 1782. Limit of Fishery
off Newfoundland, and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, declaration, etc. g © e
Declaration. British Versailies, 3d September, 1783, to prevent disputes, procuring wood,
shelter, etc.” tº g o tº tº & & e g te o
Counter Declaration. French, same date,fully satisfied,neither party to fish beyond the mid-
dle of the Newfoundland chanael, e tº tº º º re º
Definitive Treaty of Paris. Peace and Amity. Paris, 30th May 1814. Navigation of the Rhine
and other rivers. Malta. Restoration of the French Colonies and fisheries, cession of
Tobago, St. Lucia, Isle of France, Spanish part of St. Domingo, Guadaloupe, French
Guyana, property, etc. and fortifications in India, Newfoundiand, St. Lawrence fisheries,
Antwerp, private claims domains of France in ceded countries, bonds and deeds, archives,
maps, etc. belonging to different countries, Slave Trade, Confiscations etc. & tº
696
696
163
145
146
147
147
11
IXDEX—GREAT BRITAIN.
&ave Trade, add. Article, between Great Britain and France,Abolition of the Slave Trade
Imperial Decree of Napoleon abolishing the Slave Trade, 29th March, 1815, * @
Convention between Great Britain and France; Commerce and Navigation, London, 27th
January 1826. Reciprocity, tonnage and other duties, reciprocal duties on goods im-
ported or exported, direct re-exporting produce to Asia, Africa, or America; bounties,
drawbacks, privileges of navigation of the most favored nation, extention of Convention
to all possessions in Europe, trade with British and French Colonies, e As
Treaty of Commerce and Navigation, between Queen Anne of Great Britain, and Louis, XIV
of France, concluded at Utrecht, 11th of April, 1713. .................. ...........
Free ships shall make free goods—contraband specified.
West Indies—British Order in council granting to French vessels, certain privileges, June
1st 1826; table of articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Duties, repeal of. An act to amend an act of 6th year of his late Majesty to regulate the trade
of the Britsh possessions abroad, 22d April, 1831—repeal of duties on meal, bread, rice,
live stock, bacon, wood, lumber, imported into British possessions in America, or in
the W. Indies—certain temporary additional duties on lumber from foreign countries &c.
JDuties, tonnage. Act of the British Parliament to regulate the trade of the British possess-
ions abroad, 5th.July, 1825—reciprocal tonnage duties between Canadian & U.S. vessels.
Fisheries. Act of the British Parliament relating to the fisheries carried on upon the banks
and shores of Newfoundland, 3d June 1824. Privileges of Foreigners under treaty—
fulfilment of treaties with foreign powers............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hradia..—Trade of foreign nations with India, 1th July, 1797, Imports and Exports of
countries in amity—Regulations of the East India Company, . e o e
Note. To satisfy inquiries that have been made,as to the extent to which American ves-
sels are admitted in the British Possessions,at and beyond the Cape of Good Hope,it
is deemed proper to state, that vessels of the United States are entitled, by the third
article of the Treaty of Commerce of 1815, to trade with Calcutta, Madras, Bombay
and Prince of Wales’ Island; but not with Singapore;—and that they are also ad-
mitted to trade with the free ports at the settlement of the Cape of Good Hope,
which are Cape Town, Simon's Town, and Port Elizabeth; and with any other free
ports in the Mauritius, in Ceylon, or in Australia, which may be established by or-
der in Council. Department of State, Washington, December 21, 1833.
Treaty º: Peace between Great Britain and Denmark, Kiel, 14th January 1814, (see Den-
II) al” º º © e g º o e º
canº. Colonies of the JWetherlands, London August 13, 1814. o e de
Colonies Restored. Cape of Good Hope, Demerara, Essequibo and Berbice excepted,
cession of Bauld in exchange for Cochin, Commerce with British India, Security of per-
Sons, ete. abolition of Slave Trade, e * º & & wº ©
./ldditional.ſlrticles—Compensation to Sweden for Guadaloupe; Cession of Bernagore,etc.
Treaty—JWetherlands with Great Britain. Prevention of Slave Trade, Hague 4th May, 1818.
Reciprocal right of visit, indemnity for illegal detentions, instructions, judgment without
appeal, disposal of condemned vessels, and Slaves, etc.
Portugal. Treaty of Friendship and Commerce, Lisbon, 27th December 1703, & tº
Perpetual admission of British woollens and of Portuguese wines, duty
Prussia—Convention. Commerce and Navigation, London, April 2, 1824. o tº
Reciprocal abrogation of discriminating and countervailing duties on ships and produc-
tions, import and export of national produce and manufactures, duties on in ports and
exports, drawbacks.
Sicily. Commerce and Navigation, London, September 26, 1816. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e º e º 'º º
Abolition of privileges,&c. in favor of Great Britain and other powers, on footing of the
most favored, personal privileges, security of property, visits, reduction of duties, vessels
and subjects of the Ionian Islands.
Sardinia. Treaty. Territory and Commerce, Vienna, May 20, 1815. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Union of Genoa and the Imperial fiefs to the Sardinian States, island of Capraja—rights
and privileges of the Genoese—free port of Genoa-Duty of transit-tribunal and cham-
ber of commerce.
152:
152
153
1.37
160
160
161
162
163
165
165
167
168
189
190
198
200
INDEX – HANSFATIC REPUBLICS--HAYT1––RUSSIA.
Colombia. Treaty. Amity, Commerce and Navigation, Bogota, 18th April, 1825. . . . . º, º e
Freedom of commerce and trade with the British colouies, duties, pilotage. Salvage, &c.
national vessels, brokers, consuls, personal Security in case of rupture, religion, funerals
abolition of the slave trade.
JBuenos Ayres. Treaty. Arnity Commerce and Navigation, Buenos Ayres, 2d Feb. 1825.
Freedom of commerce—trade with Britain—-colonies, duties, prohibitions, Salvage, &c.
on vessels of above 120 tons, national vessels, property administration of justice, taxes,
consuls, security of persons, religion, burial places, abolition of slave trade, &c.
JMuscat. Treaty. Abolition of Slave Trade, Muscat, September 10, 1822. º e
Prohibition against sale of Slaves, punishment of offenders, British agent in Zarnzibar,
seizure of slave vessels by British cruizers, ship’s passes.
Persia—Definitive Treaty, Commerce, Tehran, 25th November, 1814. - e Q
JMadagascar—Treaty, Slave 'Trade and Piracy, Tamatave, 23d October, 1817. tº º
Cession of sale, or transfer, of slaves or other persons, consideration for loss of revenue,
protection of the King Johanna, suppression of piracy, etc.
Meacico–Treaty of Amity Commerce and Navigation, London, 26th December, 1826. .
Reciprocal freedom of Commerce, Post Office packets,Coasting trade, British Colonies,
duties, salvage, etc. national vessels, brokers, agents, etc. Police of ports, Diplom.atic
agents and consuls, personal security, religion, privileges in the Bay of Honduras under
Convention with Spain of 1786, (see Spain) abolition of the Slave Trade.
HANSFEATHC RE:Pljº, HCS.
Convention. Commerce and Navigation, London, September 29th, 1825. tº e e
Reciprocal duties and charges on vessels, freedom of trade, reciprocal dutier, on imports
and exports, bounties etc. duties on personal property.
See Great Britain
JNote on the Germanic confederation, º º e tº 4- * e
F#, ſº Y"; "H.
Report laid before the British Parliament on the civil and political condition of Hayti, cr St
Domingo, by Charles McKenzie, British Consul Ge:Aeral, September 9, 1826 .
MAE 3}}{3},íl.
Relation of the Colony of Liberia towards the United States e e º º tº º
Opinion of the Atty Genºl of United States as to the powers of the agency on the coast Africa
RUSSHA
Convention. Pacific Ocean and North West Coast of America—St. Petersburgh, 16 (28th)
February 1825. Navigation and fishing line of demarcation, trade to Sitka or Novo
Archangelsk, liquors, arms, victualling, shelter, c.c. Duties, g º o «»
Treaty [of Akerman] between Russia and Turkey, explanatory of the treaty of Bucharest,
Akerman, October 25, 1826. Sublime Porte promises to repair damages done by the
Barbary Corsairs to Russian vessels, and use his endeavors to preventfuture depredations,
free passage of the Canal of Constantinople, etc. e * º º e
Treaty of Peace between Russia and Turkey, Adrianople,September 14th,1829. Enmity and
differences to cease, Moldavia, Wallachia, the Banat of Crayova, Balgaria, Dobridge
from the Danube, Silistria, Hirsova,Matzia, Isakiya, Toulza, Babadag, Bazardjik, Var-
na, Pravedy, and the whole extent of the Balkan, from Emine Bouzoun to Kazan, Jom-
boli, Adrianople, &c. to be restored; Pruth the limit of the two empires, Russian subjects
to enjoy liberty of Commerce, Dardanelles open to them;for losses since 1806,1,500,000
ducats of Holland to be paid Russia, and, also, a sum of money to be regulated by mutual
accord. The Porte declares his adhesion the treaty of London, 6th July 1827, etc. .
2:29
204
206
$206
203
673
695
171
174
209
13
IN i)£X...—TURKEY-FOREIGN RELATIONS.–LAW OF NATIONS.
- r
. . . . - §§PAHN.
Convention. Djærences in dºlerica, i,ondon, July 14th, 1786,
Evacuation of the Mosquitos, privileges in the bay of Honduras, limits, wood and natural
produce, plantations of Sugar, coffee, &c. 1.12: uſactures, navigation of rivers, Casina,
naval establishment, rights of Sovereignty, purchase of dyeing-wood, and mahogany,
smuggling warlike stores to Indians, &e. ſº & & . . ge
See Great Britain.
Pi eliminary and Secret Treaty, between the French Republic and the King of Spain, relat-
ing to the recession of Louisiana October 1, 1800, certain provinces in Italy to be given
to Duke of Parina, and the King of Spain engages to recede to the French Repablic
“the Colony or Province, of Louisiana, with the same eactent that it mov has in the hands
of Spººn, and had while in the possession of France, and such as it ought to be, in con-
fºrmity with the treaties subsequently concluded between Spain and other States,” sik
74’s also to be given to the French, &c. tº te & e * e
Sºsſ, ºf Cººſ ºf ŠMZeff,\ }}S.
Proclamation of the King of the Sandwich Islands, respecting the trade and treatment of ſo-
reigner's Oahu, October 7, 1829 ſº & gº tº te § tº e º
The Secretary of the United States Navy, to the King of the Sandwich Islands © º
Tºjº Y.
Treaty—Peace and Friendship, Dardanelles, 5th January, 1809. g tº tº *
Restoration of foruresses and property, renewal of privileges, commerce of the Black
Sea, Consuls at Malta and in British Dominions, tariff at Constantinople, honors to Am-
bassadors, dragomen, English patents and passports, prohibition against ships of war
entering the Dardanelles and Black Sea.
Mexico—see Great Britain, • e e s e e o a e < * * * * *
Buenos Ayres; see Great Britain, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Chili, - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 691,
La Platte and Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Chill—see Buenos-Ayres, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 691,
Peru—see Bolivia, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235,
F. C. Riºs II G. N. H. º. I. A. Tº I O IWTS,
Foreign Relations—References to the principal cases decided in the courts of the
United States, and in some of the State Tribunals in regard to points or prin-
ciples connected with our Foreign Relations. o © tº tº
Names of the Cases referered in the abstract. º & gº e gº
Index to the preceding abstract of cases {e & e * * *
†, A. W.;" O ſº ºf A **I tº ºf $.
Authorities from the Law of Nations, and other sources, touching Matters in
Reference to the Diplomatic Character of a Public Minister and his official
Duties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page
. Rights of Embassy. 2. Public Minister, definition ... JMartens’s Law of JVations
. and 4. Right of sending Ministers. 5. Right of receiving Ministers . . . . *=e
6. Origin of the different orders of Ministers. Ministers Plenipotentiary and Envoy, Min-
isters, Ministers resident, residents, Charges d’Affaires. . . . . . . . . . . . . . JMurtens
Ministers of the first order–8. of the second order—J. of the third order —
10. Deputies and Commissioners—11. Agents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Martens’ Mºttal
.
7.
12 Order of Ministers and right of sending them. . . . . . . . . . . JMurtens’ Law of JVations:
13. May Ministers be received from, or sent to, an usurper. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pattel
14. Whether usurpers or governors in chief can send Ambassadors?... . . . . Wicquefort
15. Choice between the different orders.......... . . . . . . . . JMartens’ Law &f Aſations
17. Age of a man qualified for an embassy........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Węcquéfort
18. Strangers may be employed in embassies......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . gmsº
197
678
Ü79
207
223
237
692
2.5 L
692
692
257
358
354
369
370
371
371
37.2
373
373
373
373
14
INDEX.—PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS.–LAw OF NATION3.
19. Despatch of the Dip. Agent, and of the establishment of his public character JMartens 374
2(). Oſ the Credentials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * - - - - - - - - - - , * 374,
21. Ceremony of Reception. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rush's Jºſemoratida 376
23. Form of receiving and accrediting in the United States. . . . . . . . . Lyman 376
24. Credentials, presentation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forsyth 376
25. Letters of credence, may be countersigned or not. . . . . . . . . Jºicquºſo, t 377
26. Form of a Letter of Credence. . . . . . . . . . Ritsh's Jºſeºnoranda 377
27. Charges d’Aſfaires, Credentials to secretary of state. . . . . . . . — 377
28. Queen, Letter of Credence to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 377
[Jyotes. Presentation of Dr Franklin by Vergennes to the King and Queen of France,
the King’s address. Ceremonial of Reception of M. Gerard in '78, by Congress. . 378
Ceremony of Reception of Mr Adams, at the Court of St.James.] . . . . . .380
29. Visits, to the mentbers of the Diplomatic Corps. Congress of Vienna extirpated forms
as relates to precedence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
30. Visits, between Ambassadresses, H3ame footing as their husbands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
31. Precedence—arrangement signed by the Eight f°owers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .382
32. Classes of Ministers established by the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lyman 382
3
3
. Ambassadors’ privileges—expediency of acknow’g the Amb. of the ruling party during
civil war—how far the sovereign is bound by the act of his Minister. Kent’s Com. 383
3%. Discretionary power to receive Ambassadors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Story’s Commentaries 386
35-38 Instructions should be precise, and detailed JMurtens’. Manital—JPicqueſort—Pattel 386
39. Personal Instructions to the Diplomatic Agents of the United States in Foreign
g sº ©
Countries, adopted by the Department of State [inserted at large] . . . . . 388
40, Presentation—41. Uiliform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
42 Compensation—#3. Acco n's—ii. Archives and Books of the Legation. . . . . . . . . . . . 389
45. Cypher—46. Commercial Regulations—47, information to be submitted to the Dept. 390
48. Signing of treaties, &c. —49. Consuls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
50. Passports—51. Presents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392
52. Form of Despatches—a strict adherence to these Instructions enjoined . . . . 393
53 Ambassador’s Powers—essential instrument of a treaty. Hºcyſt fort. Jºf tries. 393 & 395
54–55. Public Minister's Privileges—Ambassadors inviolable in their persons—i)eclar-
ation of Holland in 165 i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396
56. Rights, and immunities of a Public Ministers . . . . . . . . . Wałęel 396
57. Minister’s person sacred and inviolable . . . . . . . . . . . — 395
58. Particular protection due to Ministers—59. Time when Minister’s rights commence.— 397
60. What is due to Ministers in the countries through which they may pass . . . — 398
61.-62. Independence or Immunities of Foreign Ministers . . . . . . . — 399
(Note. On the case of Bishop toss, an Ambassador from Mary Queen of Scotland. The
questions at large, propounded on the occasion to Lewis, Dale, Aubrey, and Jones,
learned civil lawyers.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P/ard 400
63. Coke's opinion on the privileges of Ambassadors—insists that nothing can prevent them
from being responsible for crimes against the Law of Nations, which are mala per se. 402
JVote All nations, by positive agreement, have made an exception in favor of Am-
bassadors—to be considered in the territory of the nation which receives him, as a
7.2ember of the nation which sends him.
The general consequence is, that an Ambassador, when he commits any crime, cannot be
punished for it, by the nation where he resides, when he commits it. The nation is
is bound to treat him, in all respects, as if he was a resident of his own country. He
can, therefore, be proceeded against no otherwise, than by a complaint to his own
nation. Privileges of Ambassadors—Rutherforth’s Institutes, Chap. IX. Art. XIX.
64. Rights and Privileges enjoyed by Diplomatic agents . . . . JMartens’ JManual 403
65. Exterritoriality—66. Independence . . . . . . . . . . . — 403
15
iN DEX.—IMMUNITIES OF PUBLIC MINISTERS.
67. Immunities from civil Jurisdiction enjoyed by Diplomatic agents JMartens’ JManual 404
68. Immunities from criminal jurisdiction, enjoyed by the Diplomatic agent — 404
69. The Ambassador is exempt from the Civil Jurisdiction of the country near where he
resides. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e º e º e º a c e s tº e º sº e º e º e * * * * * * * * * * * * e s e e o e s e e s e Wattel à04
70. How the exemption extends to his possessions—71. The exemption cannot extend to
effects of any trade he may carry on. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * e e s a e e e ... Wattel 405
72. Nor to immoveables which he possesses in the country. . . . . . . . . . . ......... — 405
See Rutherforth’s Institutes, page 553. Baltimore Edition.
73. How justice may be obtained against an Ambassador . . . . . . . . — 405
74. Ambassador’s house and domestics . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 406
75.—76, Ambassadors owe no subjection to any laws but those of their own country. Story 406
(Vote. Chief Justice JMarshall’s opinion on the immunity of Foreign Ministers) 406
77. Ministers have no concern in the event of a prosecution against them. Story’s Comm, 408
78. Jurisdiction does not depend on the party named in the record . . . . — 408
79. Jurisdiction over the retinue of a Foreign Minister . . JMartens’ Law of Nations 408
80. Ambassadors not always inviolable . . . . . . . . . . . Wicquefort 409
81. Retinue: that part exempt from civil jurisdiction who are returned on arrival. JMartens, 409
(JVote. Ambassador’s consort, his children, secretary of embassy, and private secre-
tary, all partake of the Minister’s privileges.)
82 & 83. Negotiation—opening a conference . . . . . . . . . . . Martens 409
84. Ratification not an essential part of a treaty . . . . . . . . . Wicquefort 409
85. Letters and despatches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 410
86 and 87. Passports and safe conducts . . . . . . . . . . . . JMartems 410
88. Termination of an Ambassadors functions . . . . . . . . . . . Wicquefort 410
89. Devotion, custom relative to—90. FXtent of the right of Devotion . . . JMartems 411
91. Means of ending an embassy © e e º º e º º — . 411
92. Recall p. 412–93. Departure without being recalled (connected with this head, see
also page 667, of this volume e tº º • • e . Wicquefort 412
94. Death of a Min.-95. The Seal–96. Depart’e of the retinue & effects of a Min. JMartens 413
97. Embassies which terminate in part—98. Ambassador’s expenses e ... — . 413
(JVote, Salaries varied under the Old Confederation—Dr Franklin’s expenses, &c.
see also page 691 e & e & e e e º e e . . 414
99 to 106. Privileges claimed in the case of D’Azambuja vs. Barrozo in the Dist.
Court of Philadelphia, º g 2 e º e . 415
107 to 119. Assault on a public minister of the United States, vs. J Galberto de
Ortega. Circuit Court, United States, Philadelphia, October Session, 1825, 417
JVotes—Illustrative of the immunities of public ministers—David’s messengers to the
Ammonites—Xerxes' retaliation on Athens—Sack of Rome by Brenus, and of
Philomela by Frederick Barbarossa, in the 13th century, etc. Indians, Chinese, and
Mexicans, unite in allowing immunities to ambassadors. g º º . 420
1. 1708, July 21—Case of the Russian ambassador, backed by the Count de Gallas, Swedish
ambassador, and Baron Spanheim, Prussian ambassador . . º e . 420
2. 1627–Danish ambassador, Lord Rosenbranck and Philip Weiseman, related by Finet 421
3. 1584–Mendoza, Spanish ambassador, though a conspirator, could not be put to death;
but only ordered to depart the realm e e º e e º & . 422
4. 1587–L’Aubespine, French ambassador, escaped punishment for a conspiracy, Lord
Burleigh declining trying him . . © e º e e e º , 422
5. 1601–Rochpot, French ambassador to Spain—a quarrel, where two Spaniards were slain. 422
6. De Zuniga, Spanish ambassador to France, under Henry IV. ſº © e . 422
7. A secretary to another Spanish ambassador, in the same king’s time . & . 422
8. 1603–An attendant of Rosny, (Sully) French ambassador in England º º . 422
9. 1618–Bedmar, Spanish ambassador at Venice, the conspirator sent to Milan and recalled 423
16
INDEX. —U. S. CONSULS, &c.
10. Inoyosa and Colonna, Spanish ambassadors sent to England, not proceeded against,
in the reign of James I. . º g & © Q gº * > º e . 423
11. Sir Robert Cotton’s opinion on the above case not treason tº © e . 423
12. 1657–A domestic of De Thou, French ambass, at Hague, demanded as a privilegd person 423
13. 1666–One of the suite of Spanish ambassador to France . * ſº * º . 423
14, 1654–De Bass, minister to Cromwell, accused of a conspiracy tº tº de . 424
15. Spanish ambassador to Charles IL of England, endeavored to raise a sedition . 424
16. 1646–This right sometimes acknowledged even by the Turks, Case of the Eng, ambass. 424
See Lord Coke's opinion, page 402
17. 1653–Case of Don Pantaleon Sa, whether contrary to the above practice . e . 424
18. 1717, Jan. 28–Gyllenburg, Swedish ambassador to England, punishable by way of self-
defence, not by regular trial . * º tº & * e © gº . 426
19. Case of a criminal taking refuge in the house of the Venetian ambassador, at Madrid,
instance in which the privilege was waived—Badoaro, a relative of the ambassador's
and several valets beheaded, in the time of Philip II. Conclusions from the case
found in Vera’s Parfait Ambassador . º º tº te ſº e . 426
120. Report on the Consular Establishment of the United States, by the Secretary of
State, March 2, 1832. e tº * y o tº . 427
General Instructions to the Consuls and Commercial ſlgents of the United States,
intended to supersede those which have hitherto been issued from... the Department
of State (inserted at large.) . g o * * tº . 430
121. Duty of a Consul on his appointment before he enters on the exercise of official dutie: 330
122. Formalities to be observed by a Consul or Vice-Concul after entering on the duties 430
123. Records and papers of the Consular offices, e e g s . 431
124, Duties required to be performed by Consuls and Vice-Consuls in the United States. 431
125. Duties of Consuls in relation to Intestate’s Estates gº ge o g . 433
126. Duties of Consuls in relation to Wrecks, tº e g e tº . 433
127. Duties of Consuls in relation to JMasters of Ameriean vessels . te tº • 435
128. Duties of Consuls in relation to Seamen of the United States, © e . 438
127. Duties of Consuls in granting Certificates and Passports sº te tº . 440
128. Duties of Consuls with respect to the Appointment of Consular Agen: º . 440
129. Rules for the general Conduct of Consuls not reducible to the preceding head 446
130. Consular Uniform, prescribed by Circular of August 8, 1815, e tº o • 442
131. Intercourse between the consuls of the United States, and the officers of the Navy, 442
132. Fees to be received by the consuls of the United States, e e ge wº • 442
133, Expenses to be allowed to consuls, & º © “e ſº & * . 443
134, 135. Laws concerning consuls g tº April 11, 1792, February 25, 1803, 444
136, Passports, -137. Circular—Uniform, 138, Visits—-139, 140. Regulations,—-
141, Commission,-142, Bond,-143, Fces, Blank Forms, 14%. Returns, p. 444 to 447
145. Consuls, Commercial Agents, powers, functions, &c. Kent's Commentaries, 448
146. Consuls have not, in strictness, adiplomatic Character. Story’s Commentaries, 450
147–148. Under the special protection of the Law of Nations. Martens. . . . 451
149–158. Case of Kosloff, Russian Consul General, Philadelphia, Jan. Sess. 1816, 451
159–163. Case of C.A.Davis, Con.Gen. of Saxony, U.S.Sup. Court, Jan. Term,1833, 454
164. Notes—Warden on Consular Establishments, . . . . . . . . . . 435
INDEX. —DIPLOMATIC W RITINGS-PEACE OF '83.
1) IPI, OTMIATI O W RITINGs.
Extracts from the Correspondence of the Diplomatic Agents of the United States
of America, furnishing a brief view of their Foreign Relations from 1776 to 1834
1. Instructions to Silas Deane on his departure to France Philadelphia, March 3, 1776,
2, Silas Deane’s first interview with Vergennes–Conversation on American Affairs
Paris, August 18, 1776,
3. S. Deane on the acknowledgment of American independence by foreign powers. Extract
Paris, November 28, 1776,
4. S. Deane on Lafayette’s offer of service to the U. States Paris, December 6, 1776,
5. The favorable but cautious policy of France, Franklin & Deane Paris, March 12, 1777,
6. France decided to acknowledge independeuce, and frame a treaty, Pranklin Dean & Lee
- Paris, December 18, 1777,
7. Treaty with IIolland, Franklin, Lee and Adams, to Dumas. Passy, October 16, 1778,
8. American commerce, the Colonies, &c. Lee, Minister to the Court of Spain,
Burgos, March 8, 1777,
9. Marquis Grimaldi’s brief reply, from Vittoria, Spain © e tº e º e
10. Proposal to send a minister to Berlin, Deane, Franklin and Lee to Prussian minister
Paris, April 19, 1777,
11. James Lovell to S. Deane, announcing Deane’s recall, New-York, Dec. 8, 1777,
12. Approbatory of 1)cane's conduct, Vergennes to Congress, Versailles, March 29, 177s,
13. Commendatory of 1)eane's course, Vergennes to Deane March 26, 1778,
14. Propriety of determining the future diplomatic rank of the U. States, Lee to Vergennes
Paris, April 2, 1778,
15. Explanation of the 12th art. of the treaty, Lee to Vergennes, Chaillot, June 14, 177 8,
16. Lee's Instructions to Vienna and Berlin, to solicit acknowledgment of independence,
Philadelphia, July 1, 1777,
17. Open acknowledgment of indep’ce by France, Lee to Congress, Paris, March 23, 1778,
18. Treaty between Holland and the United States, Lee to Congress. Leaves Vienna,
Paris, September 12, 1778,
19. French treaties of Com'rce, and alliance, signed, Franklin & Deane, Passy, Feb. 8, 1778,
Letter of Credence, furnished by the old Congress to the three commissioners,
Philadelphia, Sept. 30, 1776,
20. Laurens' conference with Fox and Duke of Portland London, August 9, 1783,
21. Franklin’s Instructions as minister to France Philadelphia, October 26, 1778,
22. Rule, that free ships make free goods, adopted in Europe, Franklin to Congress,
Paris, May 31, 1780,
23. Communicating his instructions to Vergennes, Franklin to Congress, Passy, Sept13, 1780
24. Sweden expresses a desire to treat with the U. States, Franklin, Passy, June 25, 1782,
25. Grenville’s full powers to treat with any state w e • Passy, June 15, 1782,
26. Preliminaries agreed to between France and England, Franklin, Negotiator,
Passy, Dceember 5, 1782,
27. Franklin to Vergennes, informing him of a Brit. passport received, Passy, Dec. 15, 1782,
[Copy of the passport given to the Washington, to convey the preliminary articles]
28, Vergennes to Franklin—expresses his surprise, and remonstrates, that preliminaries
have been concluded without thc knowledge of France, . o e e e
29. Franklin’s eacplanation—acknowledges being “guilty of neglecting a point of bienseance,”
30. Livingston to commissioners in Europe; on the 5th article, and the separate article,
Philadelphia, March 23, 1783,
31. Vergennes on the departure of Franklin for America, Versailles, May 22, 1785,
32. Duties of diplomatic agents and consuls, Adams to Congress Paris, June 29, 1780,
33. Necessity of a minister at Vienna, Adams to Congress Paris, July 19, 1781,
34. Diplomatic dinner in honor of the United States, Adams to Livingston, , ,
Hague, April 23, 1782,
459
459
460
463
464
264
466
467
468
468
469
469
470
470
470
47 1
471
472
473
474.
474,
475
476
476
476
478
478
479
481
481
481
481
482
484,
484
484
485
18
INDEx.—DIPLOMATIC writings—NEUTRALITY.
$5.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46
47.
48,
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
82.
Dutch treaty, concerning recaptures executed, Adams to Livingston, Hague, Oct. 8, 1782,
Desires to resign his commission, Adams to Livingston Paris, Dec. 4, 1782,
Sardinian minister advises an official circular to European powers, on the Declaration of
Independence, Adams to Livingston . tº * > tº Hague, July 31, 1785,
Friendly disposition of Tuscany, Izard to Congress . * > Paris, Dec. 18, 1777,
Titles of American ministers in lºurope, Izard to Laurens, Paris, April 11, 1778,
To insist on the navigation of the Mississippi, Jay’s instructions to Spain, Oct. 4, 1780,
Spanish minister declines entering on diplomatic business, Jay to Livingston
Madrid, November 21, 1781,
Carinichael to Livingston, his presn’tion at the Span. court, St. Idlefonso, Aug. 30, 1783,
H. Laurens’ confinement in the Tower, J. Laurens to Congress, Phila, Sept. 6, 1781,
His past services, Dumas to Congress, e o * ." Hague, July 25, 1780,
Foreign envoy should not be a political partizan where he resides, Livingston to Dumas,
Recommends Dumas for a diplomatic office, Jefferson to Jay Paris, May 22, 1786,
Russia refuses to receive a minister, Dumas to Livingston, St. Petersb’g, April 25, 1783,
Deſects inform of Italiſtcation, Iſartley to Pranklin, Paris, June 6, 1784,
Replies to the objections, Franklin to llartley º G º Paris, June 2, 1784,
Longchamp’s insult to M. de Marbois, at Philadelphia, Philadelphia, May 28, 1784,
Portugues treaty, Holland, &c., Jeſterson to Jay tº tº Paris, Oct. 11, 1785,
Commercial reciprocity, Jefferson to Vergennes, . . Paris, November 20, 1785,
Luzerne to Congress. His recall, e tº e . Paris, 1787,
Consular evenptions, claimed by British consul general, New York, Sept. 25, 1787,
Present from a foreign power, Jay to Gardoqui, e New York, March 1, 1786,
Rank of de Gardoqui, Blanca to Carmichael, • St. Lawrens, October 7, 1784,
Spanish Negotiation, Carmichael to Jay, & • . . . Aranjuez, May 6, 1780,
South American Affairs, Adams to Jay, tº © * • London, May 28, 1786,
Presentation to the British Queen, same, . e . . London, June 10, 1785,
Inpressment of American seamen, same, e tº London, September, 22, 1787,
Commercial treaty with United States Federal Constitution, same, Lond. Feb. 14, 1788,
England reluctant to Negotiate a commercial treaty, same, London, June 26, 1785,
Management of the British press, same, © ge 49. London, August 31, 1785,
Jiudience of Leave, address and reply of the King, . London, February 21, 1788,
Violation of Public.jfinister’s Privilege, J. Duane to Jay, New York, August 3, 1788,
Exemplary punishment of the offender, named Wessels, Jay to Van Berckel
Brazilian Emancipation, Jefferson to Jay, e * g Marseilles, May 4, 1787,
Jirrest of JMr Barclay ſlinerican consul, for debt, same, • Paris, June 21, 1787,
JMoustier’s conduct personally odious in America, tº . Paris, February 4, 1789,
President’s Proclamation of Neutrality, e tº Philadelphia, April 22d, 1793,
Circular to Foreign Ministers on promulgating the above g tº Q e tº
M. Duplaine’s Eacequatur revoked, ſe º sº ſº º tº ſº . 1793,
Jay’s Iustructions to the court London, © e te g ſº . April, 1793,
Monroe’s Instructions to the Republic of France, ſº ſº tº . June 10, 1794
Carletti, the Tuscan Envoy dismissed from Paris, Monroe to the Secretary of State,
December 22, 1795,
Monroe to the Directory, on his recall, o º ge * > December 30, 1796
Reply of the President of the Directory, on Monroe’s recall e © tº © e
Opinion of E. Randolph on the property of rivers º gº gº May 15, 1793,
President Washington. on the treaty-making power, * * > • March 30, 1796,
Representation on the western posts, Jefferson to Hammond, o June 19. 1793,
Western Posts, Hammond to Jefferson, * tº • e & June 20, 1793,
Remonstrance on Genet’s proceedings, Jefferson to Morris, tº August, 16, 1793,
Hostile armaments, by foreigners, in Kentucky, Opinion of E. Randolph, tº © e
485
486
487
487
488
488
489
4.90
402
492
493
493
495
407
408
409
400
500
501
502
503
503
503
504
505
506
506
507
507
508
509
510
510
510
511
512
513
513
513
515
517
517
518
518
520
521
521
521
526
19
INDEx—BLockADEs—Boundary—IMPRESSMENT—FISHERIES
84. Refusal of the Directory to receive him as a public Minister, Pinckney to Secretary of * *
State, O e o e º º º & Paris, December 20, 1796,
85. Disclosing the attempt of a Lady to procure a gratuity from the American Ministers for
secret services towards the mission º e tº º & e e tº e
86. Depredations on JVeutrals, &c., Secretary of State to Pinckney, . June 12, 1797,
87. Surrender of Jonathan Robbins, same to Judge 13ee, . & & June 3, 1799,
88. Right of search —impressment, Madison to Monroe, º O January 5, 1804,
89. British East and West India commerce—.ſldmission of Consuls, same, March 5, 1804,
90. Blockades, Madison to Monroe and Pinckney, ſº e e February 3, 1807
91. Blockades, Madison to British Charge d’Affaires, . º . October 27, 1803,
92. Paper Blockades, Smith to Pinckney, e e e © tº July 19, 1810,
93. Law of Blockade, King to Lord Grenville, . dº e London, May 23, 1799,
94. Principle of Blockade, Marshall to King, . o e . September 29, 1800,
95. What characterises a Blockade? Sec. Smith to Commodore Preble, February 4, 1804,
96. Instructions for purchase of Louisiana, Madison to Livingston, . March 2, 1803,
97. Conversation on the Louisiana purchase, Livingston to Madison, Paris, April 11, 1803,
98. Erskine’s Arrangement, Canning’s Instructions, . . London, January 23, 1800,
99. On Erskine’s Instructions, Jackson to Smith, e e e October 11, 1809,
100. Jackson’s Vindication, same, & e tº e © g November 4, 1809,
101. Termination of Official intercourse, same to Jackson, © November 8, 1809,
102. French JD2cree, 3erlin, g ſº e © © d November 21, 1806,
103. British orders in Council, ºr © º te te e November 11, 1807,
104. (French) JMilan Decree, & o e e º e November 11, 1807,
105. Spanish Decree of Ananjuez, • • e e e © February 19, 1807,
106. (French) Rambouillet Decree, . . e e º March 23, 1810,
107. Manifesto, or exposition of the Motives and Causes of the War, June 3, 1812,
108. Declaration of War, . & e e o e e º . June 19, 1812,
109. Instructions on the Spanish treaty of Indemnity º ſº tº - . 1819,
110. On Spanish Affairs, Nesselrode to Poleteca, e o º º e e e
111. Conclusion of the Spanish Treaty & º & º O * e & ©
112. On the Swedish Claims, ièussel to d’Engertroem, • e o e June, 1818
113. Mr Russell to the Secretary of War. tº © & o e © c © e.
114. Danish Claims, Erving to de Rosenkrantz, º © Copenhagen, June 7, 1811,
115. Impressment, outline of the question, º © e º lº º . Rush
116. American proposal, for abolishing Inpressment * * º º © Rush
117. British projet for regulating Impressment, e e e © Rush
118. The Fisheries, º e > e e º © o & o º Jęush
119. Same, From the Fisheries and the Mississippi, O o . J. Q. Adams
120. The Boundary, © 0 © e e & º e º º . Rush
121. W.EST INTRYIA TRAT3:... Statement on the side of U.S. 1818. Rush
122. Mr McLane's arrangement for opening the West India Trade. Mr McLane
to the Earl of Aberdeen on the West India Trade, London, July 12, 1830,
123. Successful close of the Negotiation on the Colonial Trade, Mr McLane to Mr Van
Buren, º e e e e e o º London, August 20, 1830,
124. Earplanation of the construction of the consent to restore a direct intercourse with the
American Colonies
e tº º & e
125. FRENICH CIATIVIS for spoliations on American commerce, since Sep-
tember, 1800, historical sketch of . e e © º o e
•Note:-About 15,000 livres only were left in the United States Treasury, not
20,000,000, as stated by Lyman. -
523
524,
524
524
527
527
528
329
530
531
531
532
533
533
538
539
540
541
546
547
552
553
553
554
556
556
558.
561
563
569
57.1
585.
575
126. Gallatin’s Earposition of the French claims in 1816, e e e e ©
127. Gallatin’s last letter to the French government on the the subject, .
598
602
20
INDEx—CLAIMs—FRANCE–NAPLEs.
128. Instructions of M. Van Buren to Mr Rives, on the French claims, July 20, 1829,
129. Mr Rives to Mr Van Buren, ‘Principle, peculiarity, and responsibility of the cases,”
Paris, February 25, 1830,
130. Mr Rives to Mr Van Buren. French proposition to adjust the claims June 14, 1831,
Arrangements agreed upon . ©
Eacplanation of the Beaumarchais claim, in favor of the heirs . * > © º
131. Mr Rives to Mi Livingston. Successful result of the negociation, Paris, July 5, 1831,
132. Classification of French Claims. See list of commissioners, vol. I. page 24, . ©
133. CLAIRWIS ON NAPLES. Instructions to Mr Nelson, Oct. 27, 1831,
134. Mr Pinkney to the Marquess of Circello G gº . Naples, August 16, 1816,
135. Mr Nelson to the prince of Cassaro tº º . Naples, January 31, 1832,
136. Prince of Cassaro to Mr Nelson. Endeavors to exonerate Naples from the responsibility
of the claims * o © tº © ** e Naples, May 30, 1832,
137. Reply of Mr Nelson to the Prince of Cassaro, stating the principles maintained by the
United States † e tº g & ſº gº Naples, June 29, 1832,
138. Mr Nelson demands an answer—Whether satisfaction will be rendered for the Nea-
politan seizures? . e gº Q te * Naples, Sept 12, 1832,
139. On the rejection of Mr Nelson’s proposition, the Sicilian government is notified, that it
will be held fully recponsible for the whole damages Naples, Oct. 1, 1832,
140. Passports sent to Mr Nelson—further negotiation to be removed to the United States
Naples, Oct. 2, 1832,
141. Successful issue of the negotiation, 2,115,000 ducats in instalments, with interest to be
to be paid, Mr Nelson to Mr Livingston, See list of conymissioners, vol I. p. 24
142. Our relations with the Metherlands,-reference to the “Antwerp, " and the
“ Holland ” claims, &c. º wº tº- e & e ſº tº ©
143. Intercourse with l’ortugal. Instructions to Gen. Dearborn in 1822 * * *
144. Greek I’atriots, Mr Adams to Mir Rush, * e gº tº August 18, 1823,
145. The independent States of SOUTH ARTERRCA and MEXICO. Sketch of
early efforts at independence, Lino de Clemente, representative from Colonibia,
refused official intercourse with the United States, . * tº * & º
Mission of Messrs Bland, Rodney and Graham, to Buenos-Ayres Q tº tº
Mr Rush’s interview with Lord Castlereagh, on South American Independence
146. Mr Monroe's proposition to Congress, to recognize the independence of the
new nations of South America, and Mexico & g March 8, 1822,
147. Report of the House of lèepresentatives, on the above proposition * ſº tº
148. Protest of the Spanish minister, Don Joaquin d'Anduaga, against the recognition of
South Aunerican Independence . * * * tº tº March 9, 1822,
149. Reply to the protest of Anduaga, by Mr Adams e gº se tº e º
150. Spanish JManifesto, addressed to the courts of Europe, in 1823, in consequence of the
president’s message, of March 8, 1822. Extract . & e © te Çe
151. Instructions of Mr Adams to Mr Anderson, Minister Plenipotentiary to Co-
lombia, disclosing an exposition of the principles upon which the United States
are desirous of founding their future political intercourse with the New
Nations of America, tº e g ſº & g e ſe & e
152. Friendly JMediation, of the Emperor of Russia, for terminating the contest between
Spain and Spanish America, Air Middleton to Mr Clay, St Petersb'g, Sept. 8, 1828,
153. Count Nesselrode to Mr Middleton tº * St. Petersburgh, August 20, 1825.
154. Pemama JMission-President Adams’ motives for approving of the mission, . tº
JVote. Result of the Panama meeting e tº e © o tº e * >
155. Brazilian Blockade. Mr leaguet to Brazilian minister * © e º
156. Deserters. American to Brazilian naval Commander, M. Video, 21 December, 1827,
157. Ieight of search. Do Monte Video, . e * > © & . 25 January, 1828,
158. French Comm’s proposal to search for deserters, to Comm. Elliot, lêio Jan. June 11, 1826
159. Venezuela. Decree of General Morales º e ſe ſº e e dº te
151. Protest of Captain Spence against the above Decree, e . November 15, 1822,
161, Departure of the United States Charge d’Affaires from Brazil. Mr Clay to Mr Raguet
January 20, 1827,
603
607
613
613
616
617
617
618
620
624
624,
625
625
630
633
636
637
639
640
642
645
646
647
21
INDEX.—BELGIA—HAYTI—LIBERIA—SANDWICH ISL.—CHINA.
Appendix.
162. EIAYTI—Its civil and political condition, by the British Consul General,
C. MacKenzie in 1826. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 671
163. Importation and egress of persons of Color. Opinion of Mr Wirt, May 8, 1824, in eon-
sequence of an act of the 9tate of South Carolina, of the 20th of December, 1820, 676
164. Fugitive Slaves and Deserters--proposition of the American Government to Great
Britain, e tº tº © e © º o © June 19, 1826, 678
166. SAND WICH ISLANDS–Proclamation of the King repecting the treatment
of Foreigners within his territories . e º e e o e e . 678
167. Secretary of the United States Navy, to the king of the Sandwich Islands e . 678
Declarations of Independence of the new Nations of South America and Mexico:
168. Venezuela, July 5, 1811, 681 169. Buenos Ayres, July 9, 1816, 682
170. Chili, . . Jan. 1, 1818, 683 171. Peru, . . July 15, 1821, 683
172. Mexico, . . Oct. 13, 1821, 684 173. Brazil, . . Aug. 1, 1822, 684
174. CentralAmerica,July 23, 1823, 687
175. Colombia & JMeazco. Treaty of perpetual Union League and Confeder'n, Sept. 20, 1825, 688
176. Peru and Equator. Treaty of Commerce and Navigation, Lima, December 27, 1832, 689
177. La Platte and Chili. Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, Com. and Navig’n. Nov. 20, 1826, 690
178. Colombia. Compensation of the Corps Diplomatique, . e . August 7, 1823, 691
179. Buenos Ayres.—Treaty of Friends’p and Alliance with Chili. Buenos Ayres, Jan. 1819,
1. Chili,-Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with the United Provinces of the Rio
de la Plata. Buenos Ayres, January 1819.
3. Treaty of perpetual Union, League, and Confederation, with Colombia. Sant-
iago de Chili, October 21st, 1822.
3. Colombia.-Treaty of perpetual Union, League, and Confederation, with Peru.
Lima, July 6, 1822.
4. Ditto, additional do.
5. Treaty of Friendship and Alliance wilb Buenos Ayres, B. Ayres, Mar. 8, 1823.
6. Treaty of perpetual Union, League, and Confederation with the United provinces
of Central America. Bogota, March 15, 1825.
7. Treaty of Friendship, Navig'n, & Comm. with the Netherlands. Lond. May, 1829
8. Guatemala.—Treaty of perpetual Union, League, and Confederation with Colom-
bia. Bogota, March 15, 1825.
9. Portugal.--Treaty with Brazil, concerning the recognition of the Independenee
of Brazil. Rio de Janeiro, August 29, 1825.
10. Bolivia.-Treaty of Federation with Peru. Chequisaca, November 15, 1826.
11. JMexico.—Convention of Commerce and Navigation with France. London,
June 20, 1827.
12. Brazil.—Treaty of Commerce and Navigºn with Anstria. Vienna, June 16, 1827
13. Treaty of Friendship, Comm. & Navigation with Prussia. Rio Jan. July, 9, 1827
14. Treaty of Friendship, Comm. & Navigºn with Netherlands. Rio Jan., Dec. 20, 28
180, Austria and Switzerland. Treaty for mutual surrender of criminals, Turich,July 14, 28 692
181, IBELGIA. Declaration of 1ndependence, º e ſº November 18, 1830, 693
182. Treaty Acknowl'g the Independ’e of Belgia, by the five great powers, Lond. Nov. 5, 1831, 693
183. LIBERIA. Agency for recaptured Africans, e e © º e • 695
184. Opinion of the attorney General of the United States as to the Powers of the agency
on the coast of Africa -> e º e o e te © e e e
CHINA.—Criminal Laws from the Chinese Code . o & • 696
Government Edict, concerning the visit of the United States' ship Vincennes, 696
APPENDIX.—Foreign Relations—Extracts from the President's Message to
Congress, of the 3d of December, 1833, . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
22
DIBLOMATIC CODE
OF
wit ºutitto states of Nortſ, anterita.
* : *
IPART I I II.
TREATIES WITH THE NEW NATIONS OF SOUTH
AMERICA.
--
3
8
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
. TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
By the President of the United States. A Proclamation:
Whereas a General Convention of Peace, Amity, Navigation, and Commere,
between the United States of America and the Republic of Colombia, was
concluded and signed at Bogota, on the third day of October, in the year of
our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four; which Convention,
being in the English and Spanish languages, is word for word, as follows
Convencion Jeneral de Paz, Álmistad, Navegacion, y Comercio,
entre la Republica de Colombia y los Estados Unidos de
flmerica, 1ño de 1824.
En el nombre de Dios Autor y Lejislador del Universo.
La Republica de Colombia, y los Estados Unidos de Ameri-
ca, deseando hacer duradera y firme la amisted y buena in-
teligencia que felizmente existe entre ambas potencias, han
resuelto fijar de una manera clara distinta y positiva las reglas
que deben observar religiosamente en lo venidero, por medio
de un tratado, ó convencion general de paz, amistad, comercio
y navegacion.
Con este muy deseable objeto, el Vice-Presidente de la Re-
publica de Colombia encargado del podér Ejecutivo, ha con-
ferido plenos poderes á Pedro Gaul, Secretario de Estado y
del despacho de relaciones esteriores de la misma, y el Presi-
dente de los Estados-Unidos de America á Ricardo Clough
Anderson, el menor, Ciudadano de dichos Estados, y su Mi-
nistro Plenipotenciario cerca de la dicha Republica; quienes
despues de haber canjeado sus espresados plenos poderes en
debida y buena forma, han convenido en los articulos sigui-
entes.
ARTº. 1.º Hebra una paz, perfecta, firme é inviolable y
amistad sincera, entre la Republica de Colombia y los Estados-
Unidos de America, en toda la estencion de sus posesiones y
territorios, y entre sus pueblos y Ciudadanos respectivamente
sin distincion de personas, ni lugares.
ARTº. 2º. La Republica de Colombia, y los Estados-Unidos
de America, deseando vivir en paz y harmonia con las demas
Naciones de la tierra, per medio de una politica franca, é igual-
mente amistosa con todas, se obligan mutuamente à no con-
ceder favores particulares à otras naciones, con respecto á
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
19
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
By the President of the United States of America. A Proclamation:
Whereas a General Convention of Peace, Amity, Navigation and Commerce,
between the United States of America and the Republic of Colombia, was
concluded and signed, at Bogota, on the third day of October, in the year of
our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four; which Convention,
being in the English and Spanish languages, is word for word, as follows:
General Convention of Peace, flmity, Navigation, and Com-
merce, between the United States of America and the Republic
of Colombia.
In the name of God, Author and Legislator of the Universe.
The United States of America, and the Republic of Colom-
bia, desiring to make lasting and firm the friendship and good
understanding which happily prevails between both nations,
have resolved to fix, in a manner clear, distinct, and positive,
the rules which shall in future be religiously observed between
the one and the other, by means of a treaty or general con-
vention of peace and friendship, commerce, and navigation.
For this most desirable object, the President of the United
States of America has conferred full powers on Richard Clough
Anderson, junior, a citizen of the said states, and their minis-
ter plenipotentiary to the said republic, and the Vice-Presi-
dent of the Republic of Colombia, charged with executive
power, on Pedro Gaul, secretary of state and of foreign rela-
tions, who, after having exchanged their said full powers in
due and proper form, have agreed to the following articles:
ART. 1. There shall be a perfect, firm, and inviolable peace
and sincere friendship between the United States of America
and the Republic of Colombia, in all the extent of their pos-
sessions and territories, and between their people and citizens
respectively, without distinction of persons or places.
ART. 2. The United States of America and the Republic
of Colombia, desiring to live in peace and harmony with all the
other nations of the earth, by means of a policy frank and
equally friendly with all, engage mutually not to grant any
particular favor to other nations in respect of commerce and
1824.
October 3.
*—s sººn
Rules of cor-
respondence
between the
two nations.
Negotiators:
Firm and inviol
able peace, &c.
Favors of com-
merce to be
common to both
parties.
20
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
comercio y navegacion, que no se hagan inmediatamente co-
mun á una ú otra, quien gozará de los mismos libremente, si
la concession fuese hecha libremente, ó prestando la misma
compensacion, si la concesion fuere condicional.
ARTº. 3º. Los Ciudadanos de la Republica de Colombia
podrán frecuentar todas las costas y paises de los Estados-
Unidos de America, y resider, y traficar en ellos con toda
suerte de producciones, manufacturas, y mercaderías, y no
pagarán otros, ó mayores derechos, impuestos, ó emolumentos
cualesquiera que los que las naciones mas favorecidas están ó
estuvieren obligadas á pagar; y gozarán todos los derechos, pri-
vilejios y esenciones, que gozan ó gozaren los de la nacion mas
favorecida, con respecto á navegacion y comercio, sometien-
dose, no obstante, á las leyes, decretos y usos establecidos, á
los cuales estan sujetos los subditos ó Ciudadanos de las
naciones mas favorecidas. Del mismo modo los Ciudadanos
de los Estados-Unidos de America podrán frecuentar todas las
costas y paises de la Republica de Colombia, y residir y tra-
ficár en ellos con toda suerte de producciones, manufacturas, y
mercaderias, y no pagarán otros ó mayores derechos, impuestos,
ó emolumentos cualesquiera, que los que las naciones mas
favorecidas, están ó estuvieren obligadas á pagár, y gozarán
de todos los derechos, privilejios y esenciones, que gozan ó
gozaren los de la nacion mas favorecida con respecto á navega-
cion y comercio, sometiendose, no obstante, á las leyes, de-
cretos y usos establecidos, á los cuales estan sujetos los sub-
ditos ó ciudadanos de las naciones mas favorecidas.
ARTº. 4°. Se conviene ademas, que será enteramente libre
y permitido, a los comerciantes, comandantes de buques, y
otros Ciudadanos de ambos paises el manejar sus negocios,
por si mismos, en todos los puertos y lugares sujetos á la ju-
risdiccion de uno ú otro, asi respecto á los consignaciones y
ventas por mayor y menor de sus efectos y mercaderias, como
de la carga, descarga y despacho de sus buques, debiendo en
todos estos casos, ser tratados como Ciudadanos del pais en
que residan, ó al menos puestos sobre un pie igual con los sub-
ditos ó Ciudadanos de las naciones mas favorecidas.
AR rº. 5º. Los Ciudadanos de una ú otra parte, no podrán
ser embargados ni detenidos con sus embarcaciones, tripula-
ciones, mercaderias, y efectos comerciales de su pertenencia,
para alguna espedicion militár, usos publicos, ó particulares
cualesquiera que sean, sin conceder á los interesados una
suficiente indemnizacion.
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
21
navigation, which shall not immediately become common to
the other party, who shall enjoy the same freely, if the con-
cession was freely made, or on allowing the same compensa-
tion, if the concession was conditional.
ART. 3. The citizens of the United States may frequent all
the coasts and countries of the Republic of Colombia, and re-
side and trade there, in all sorts of produce, manufactures,
and merchandise, and shall pay no other or greater duties,
charges, or fees, whatsoever, than the most favored nation is
or shall be obliged to pay; and they shall enjoy all the rights,
privileges, and exemptions in navigation and commerce, which
the most favored nation does or shall enjoy, submitting them-
selves, nevertheless, to the laws, decrees, and usages, there
established, and to which are submitted the subjects and citi-
zens of the most favored nations.
In like manner the citizens of the Republic of Colombia may
frequent all the coasts and countries of the United States, and
reside and trade there, in all sorts of produce, manufactures,
and merchandise, and shall pay no other or greater duties,
charges, or fees whatsoever, than the most favored nation is
or shall be obliged to pay, and they shall enjoy all the rights,
privileges, and exemptions in navigation and commerce, which
the most favored nation does or shall enjoy; submitting them-
selves, nevertheless, to the laws, decrees, and usages, there
established, and to which are submitted the subjects and citi-
zens of the most favored nations.
ART. 4. It is likewise agreed that it shall be wholly free
for all merchants, commanders of ships, and other citizens of
both countries, to manage themselves their own business in all
ports and places subject to the jurisdiction of each other, as well
with respect to the consignment and sale of their goods and
merchandise by wholesale or retail, as with respect to the load-
ing, unloading, and sending off their ships, they being in
all these cases to be treated as citizens of the country in
which they reside, or at least to be placed on a footing with
the subjects or citizens of the most favored nation.
ART. 5. The citizens of neither of the cºntracting parties
shall be liable to any embargo, nor be detained with their
vessels, cargoes, merchandises, or effects, for any military
expedition, nor for any public or private purpose, whatever,
without allowing to those interested a sufficient indemnifica-
1824.
October 3.
Citizens of the
U. States at li-
berty to fre-
quent all the
coasts & coun-
tries of the Re-
public of Col-
ombia, to re-
side and trade
there, &c.
Samein relation
to citizens of
Colombia.
Merchants,
commanders of
ships, and other
citizens of both
countries, &c.
to manage their
own business;
to be treated as
citizens of the
most favored
nation.
Citizens of mei-
ther of the con-
tracting parties
shall be liable
to any embar-
go, &c.
tion.
22
DIPLOMATIC coDE.
1824.
October 3.
ARTº, 6”. Siempre que los Ciudadanos de alguna de las
partes contratantes se vieren precisados á buscár refujio, ó
asilo en los rios, habias, puertos, ó dominios de la otra, con sus
buques, ya sean mercantes, ó de guerra, publicos ó particu-
lares, por mal tiempo, persecucion de piratas ó enemigos, serán
recibidos y tratado con humanidad, dondoles todo favor
y proteccion para reparar sus buques, procurár viveres,
y ponerse en situacion de continuar su viaje, sin obstaculo ó
estorbo de ningun genero.
ARTº, 7”. Todos los buques, mercaderias y efectos per-
tenecientes a los Ciudadanos de una de las partes contratantes,
que sean apresados por piratas, bien sea dentro de los limites
de su jurisdiccion, ó en alta mar, y fueren llevados, ó hallados
en los rios, radas, bahias, puertos, ó dominios de la otra, seràn
entregados á sus dueños, probando estos en la forma propia y
debida sus derechos ante los Tribunales competentes; bien
entendido que el reclamo ha de hacerse dentro del termino
de un año, por las mismas partes, sus apoderados ó Agentes
de los respectivos Gobiernos.
ARTº, 8º. Cuando algun buque perteneciente á los ciudad-
nos de alguna de las partes contratantes, naufrague, encalle,
ó sufra alguno averia, en las costas, ó dentro de los dominios
de la otra, se les dará toda ayuda y proteccion, del mismo
modo que es uso y costumbre, con los buques de la nacion en
donde suceda la averia; permitiendoles descargár el dicho
buque (si fuere necessario) de sus mercaderias y efectos, sin
cobrar por esto hasta que sean esportados, ningun derecho,
impuesto ó contribucion. es
ARTº.9º. Los ciudadanos de cada una de las partes contra-
tantes, tendrán pleno podér para disponér de sus bienes per-
sonales dentro de la jurisdiccion de la otra, por venta, dona-
cion, testamento, ó de otro modo; y sus representantes, siendo
ciudadanos de la otra parte, succederán á sus dichos bienes
personales, ya sea por testamento ó ab intestato, y podran
tomar posesion de ellos, ya sea por si mismos, ó por otros, que
obren por ellos, y disponer de los mismos, segun su voluntad,
pagando aquellas cargas solamente, que los habitantes del pais
en donde estan los referidos bienes, estuvieren sujetos, á pagar
en iguales casos. Y si en el caso de bienes raices, los dichos
herederos fuesen impedidos de entrár en la posesion de la he-
rencia por razon de su caracter de estrangeros, se les dará el
termino de tres años, para disponer de ella como juzguen con-
veniente, y para estraér el producto sin molestia, y esentos de
todo derecho de deduccion, por parte del Gobierno de los re-
spectivos Estados.
pº
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
23
ART. 6. Whenever the citizens of either of the contracting
parties shall be forced to seek refuge or asylum in the rivers,
bays, ports, or dominions, of the other, with their vessels,
whether merchant or of war, public or private, through stress
of weather, pursuit of pirates, or enemies, they shall be re-
ceived and treated with humanity, giving to them all favor
and protection for repairing their ships, procuring provisions,
and placing themselves in a situation to continue their voyage
without obstacle or hindrance of any kind.
ART. 7. All the ships, merchandise, and effects belonging to
the citizens of one of the contracting parties, which may be cap-
tured by pirates, whether within the limits of its jurisdiction or
on the high seas, and may be carried or found in the rivers,
roads, bays, ports, or dominions, of the other, shall be deli-
vered up to the owners, they proving in due and proper form
their rights before the competent tribunals; it being well un-
derstood that the claim should be made within the term of one
year by the parties themselves, their attorneys, or agents of
their respective governments.
ART. 8. When any vessel belonging to the citizens of either
of the contracting parties shall be wrecked, foundered, or
shall suffer any damage on the coasts, or within the domin-
ions of the other, there shall be given to them all assistance
and protection in the same manner which is usual and custom-
ary with the vessels of the nation where the damage happens,
permitting them to unload said vessel, if necessary, of its mer-
chandises and effects, without exacting for it any duty, im-
post, or contribution whatever, until they may be exported.
ART. 9. The citizens of each of the contracting parties
shall have power to dispose of their personal goods within the
jurisdiction of the other, by sale, donation, testament, or other-
wise, and their representatives, being citizens of the other
party, shall succeed to their said personal goods, whether by
testament or ab intestato, and they may take possession there-
of, either by themselves or others acting for them, and dispose
of the same at their will, paying such dues only as the inhabi-
tants of the country, wherein the said goods are, shall be sub-
ject to pay in like cases: And if, in the case of real estate,
the said heirs, would be prevented from entering into the pos-
session of the inheritance, on account of their character of
aliens, there shall be granted to them the term of three years
to dispose of the same, as they may think proper, and to with-
draw the proceeds without molestation, and exempt from all
rights of detraction, on the part of the government of the re-
Spective states.
1824.
October 3.
Whenever the
citizens of eith-
er party seek
refuge, in the
dominions, &c.
of the other,
they are to be
treated as
friends, &c.
All ships, &c.
belonging to
the citizens of
either party
captured by pi-
rates, and found
within the do-
minions of eith-
er, to be deli-
vered up to the
OW In eI’S,
Assistance and
protection to be
rendered in
case of wrecks,
&c. within the
dominions of
each other.
Citizens of each
party shall have
power to dis-
pose of their
; and ef-
ects within the
jurisdiction of
the other, by
sale, testament,
or otherwise.
Alien heirs aſ-
lowed 3 years
to dispose of
their property.
24
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
Octob er 3.
ARTº. 10°. Ambas partes contratantes se comprometen y
obligan formalmente á dar su proteccion especialá las personas
y propriedades de los ciudadanos de cada una reciprocamente
transeuntes ó habitantes de todas ocupaciones, en los territo-
rios sujetos á la jurisdiccion de una y otra, dejandoles abier-
tos y libres los tribunales de justicia, para sus recursos judi-
ciales, en los mismos terminos que son de uso y costumbre
para los naturales ó ciudadanos del pais en que residan; para
lo cual, podrán emplear en defensa de sus derechos aquellos
abogados, procuradores, escribanos, agentes, ó factores que
juzguen conveniente, en todos sus asuntos y litigios; y di-
chos ciudadanos ó agentes tendrán la libre facultad de estar
presentes en las decisiones y sentencias de los tribunales, en
todos les casos que les conciernan, como igualmente al tomar
todos los examenes y declaraciones que se ofrezcan en los
dichos litigios.
ARTº. 11º. Se conviene igualmente en que los ciudadanos
de ambas partes contratantes gozen la mas perfecta y entera
seguridad de conciencia en los paises sujetos á la jurisdiccion
de una ú otra, sin quedar por ello espuestos á ser inquietados
ó molestados en razon de su creencia religiosa, mientras que
respeten las leyes y usos establecidos. Ademas de esto,
podrán sepultarse los cadaveres de los ciudadanos de una de
las partes contratantes, que fallecieren en los territorios de
la otra, en los cementerios acostumbrados ó en otros lugares
decentes, y adecuados, los cuales serán protejidos contra
toda violacion ó trastorno.
ARTº. 12º. Será licito a los cuidadanos de la republica de
Colombia, y de los Estados-Unidos de America navegár con
sus buques, con toda seguridad, de cualquiera puerto á las
plazas ó lugares de los que son ó fueron en adelante enemigos
de cualquiera de las dos partes contratantes, sin hacerse dis-
tincion de quienes son los dueños de las mercaderias cargadas
en ellos. Será igualmente licito á los referidos ciudadanos
navegár con sus buques y mercaderias mencionadas y traficár
con la misma libertad y seguridad, de los lugares, puertos y
ensenadas de los enemigos de ambas partes, ó de alguna de
ellas, sin ninguna oposicion, ó disturbio cualquiera, no solo
directamente de las lugares de enemigo arriba mencionados á
lugares neutros, sino tambien de un lugar perteneciente á un
enemigo, á otro enemigo, y sea que esten bajo la jurisdiccion
de una potencia, ó bajo la de diversas. Y queda aqui estipu-
lado, que los buques libres, dan tambien libertad á las merca-
derirs, y que se ha de considerar libre y esento todo lo que se
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA. 25
~&
f
ART. 10. Both the contracting parties promise and engage, 1824.
formally to give their special protection to the persons and October 3.
property of the citizens of each other, of all occupations, who cººl.
gº * , tº wº gº e - © 2 we plete pro-
may be in the territories subject to the jurisdiction of the one tection in per-
or the other, transient or dwelling therein, leaving open and jºy *.
free to them the tribunals of justice for their judicial recourse, ritories of both
on the same terms which are usual and customary, with the jº, sº
natives or citizens of the country in which they may be; for
which they may employ in defence of their rights such advo-
cates, solicitors, notaries, agents, and factors, as they may
judge proper, in all their trials at law; and such citizens or
agents shall have free opportunity to be present at the deci-
sions and sentences of the tribunals, in all cases which may
concern them, and likewise at the taking of all examinations
and evidence which may be exhibited in the said trials.
ART. 11. It is likewise agreed that the most perfect and en- Liberty of con-
tire security of conscience may be enjoyed by the citizens of º ºral
both the contracting parties, in the countries subject to the secured.
jurisdiction of the one and the other, without their being lia-
ble to be disturbed or molested on account of their religious
belief, so long as they respect the laws and established usages
of the country. Moreover, the bodies of the citizens of one
of the contracting parties, who may die in the territories of
the other, shall be buried in the usual burying grounds, or in
other decent or suitable places, and shall be protected from
violation or disturbance.
ART. 12. It shall be lawful for the citizens of the United Both parties at
States of America and of the Republic of Colombia to sail with .º.º.
their ships, with all manner of liberty and security, no dis- enmity with ei-
tinction being made, who are the proprietors of the merchan- ther, &c.
dises laden thereon, from any port to the places of those who
now are or hereafter shall be at enmity with either of the
contracting parties. It shall likewise be lawful for the citi-
zens aforesaid to sail with the ships and merchandises before-
mentioned, and to trade with the same liberty and security
from the places, ports, and havens, of those who are enemies
of both or either party, without any opposition or disturbance
whatsoever, not only directly from the places of the enemy,
beforementioned, to neutral places, but also from one place
belonging to an enemy to another place belonging to an ene-
my, whether they be under the jurisdiction of one power or
under several. And it is hereby stipulated, that free ships Free ships to
shall also give freedom to goods, and that every thing shall **
be deemed to be free and exempt, which shall be found on
4
26
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
hallare á bordo de los buques pertenecientes á los ciudadanos
de cualquiera de las partes contratantes, aunque toda la carga
ó parte de ella pertemezca á enemigos de una ü otra, exceptuan-
do siempre los articulos de contrabando de guerra. Se con-
viene tambien del mismo modo, en que la misma libertad se
estienda á las personas que se encuentren á bordo de buques
libres, con el fin de que aunque dichas personas sean enemigos
de ambas partes ó de alguna de ellas, no deban ser estraidos
de los buques libres, á menos que sean oficiales ó soldados en
actual servicio de los enemigos: á condicion no obstante, y se
conviene aqui en esto, que las estipulaciones contenidas en el
presente articulo, declarando que el pabellon cubre la pro-
piedad, se entenderán aplicables solamente á aquellas poten-
cias que reconocen este principio; pero si alguna de las dos
partes contratantes, estuviere en guerra con una tercera, y la
otra permaneciese neutrál, la bandera de la neutrál cubrirá
la propriedad de los enemigos, cuyos gobiernos reconozcan
este principio y no de otros.
Aatº. 13°. Se conviene igualmente que en el caso de que
la bandera neutrál de una de las partes contratantes protega
las propriedades de los enemigos de la otra en virtud de lo es-
tipulado arriba, deberá siempre entenderse, que las proprie-
dades neutrales encontradas á bordo de tales buques enemigos,
han de tenerse y considerarse como propiedades enemigas, y
como tales, estarán sujetas á detencion, y confiscacion; excep-
tuando solamente aquellas propiedadas que hubiesen sido pues-
tas á bordo de tales buques antes de la declaracion de la guer-
ra, y aun despues, si hubiesen sido- embarcadas en dichos
buques, sin tenér noticia de la guerra, y se conviene, que pa-
sados dos meses despues de la declaracion, los ciudadanos de
una y otra parte no podrán alegár que la ignoraban. Por el
contrario, si la bandera neutrál, no protegiese las propriedades
enemigas, entonces serán libres los efectos y mercaderias de
la parte neutrál embarcadas en buques enemigos.
ARTº. 14°. Esta libertad de navegacion y comercio se es-
tenderá a todo genero de mercaderias, exceptuando aquellas
solamente, que se distinguen con el nombre de contrabando,
y bajo este nombre de contrabando ó efectos prohibidos se
comprehenderán: -
1°. Cañones, morteros, obuces, pedreros, trabucos, mos-
quetes, fusiles, rifles, carabinas, pistolas, picas, espadas, sa-
bles, lanzas, chuzos, alabardas, y granadas, bombas, polvora,
mechas, balas, con las demas cosas correspondientes al uso de
esta armas. -
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
27
board the ships belonging to the citizens of either of the con-
tracting parties although the whole lading, or any part there-
of should appertain to the enemies of either, contraband goods
being always excepted. It is also agreed, in like manner, that
the same liberty be extended to persons who are on board a
free ship, with this effect, that although they be enemies to
both or either, they are not to be taken out of that free ship, i.
unless they are officers or soldiers, and in the actual service
of the enemies: Provided, however, and it is hereby agreed,
that the stipulations in this article contained, declaring that
the flag shall cover the property, shall be understood as ap-
plying to those powers only who recognise the principle; but
if either of the two contracting parties should be at war with
a third, and the other neutral, the flag of the neutral shall
cover the property of enemies whose governments acknow-
ledge this principle, and not of others.
ART. 13. It is likewise agreed, that in the case where the
neutral flag of one of the contracting parties shall protect the
property of the enemies of the other, by virtue of the above stipu-
lation, it shall always be understood that the neutral property
found on board such enemy’s vessels shall be held and consi-
dered as enemy’s property, and as such shall be liable to de-
tention and confiscation, except such property as was put on
board such vessel before the declaration of war, or even after-
wards, if it were done without the knowledge of it; but the
contracting parties agree, that two months having elapsed
after the declaration, their citizens shall not plead ignorance
thereof. On the contrary, if the flag of the neutral does not pro-
tect the enemy’s property, in that case the goods and mer-
chandises of the neutral, embarked in such enemy’s ship shall
be free.
ART. 14. This liberty of navigation and commerce shall ex-
tend to all kinds of merchandises, excepting those only which
are distinguished by the name of contraband, and under this
name of contraband, or prohibited goods, shall be compre-
hended—
1st. Cannons, mortars, howitzers, swivels, blunderbusses,
muskets, fuzées, rifles, carbines, pistols, pikes, swords, sabres,
lances, spears, halberds, and granades, bombs, powder, match-
es, balls, and all other things belonging to the use of these
&TſūS.
1824.
October 3.
All persons on
board, except
those in the ac-
tual service of
an enemy to be
Tee.
Flag covering
the property to
be applied to
those powers,
only, who ac-
knowledge the
principle.
Enemy’s pro-
perty, to be
protected by a
neutral flag,
must be ship-
ped two months
before declara-
tion of war, &c.
Contraband
specified.
28
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
2º. Escudos, casquetes, corazas, cotas de malla, fornituras,
y vestidos hechos en forma, y á usanza militar.
3º. Bandoleras, y caballos junto con sus armas y arneses.
4°. Y generalmente toda especie de armas, é instrumentos
de hierro acero, bronce, cobre, y otras materias cualesquiera,
manufacturadas, preparadas, y formadas espresamente para
hacér la guerra por mar, ó tierra.
ARTº. 15º. Todas las demas mercaderias, y efectos no com-
prehendidos en los articulos de contrabando esplicitamente
enumerados, y clasificados en el articulo anterior, serán te-
nidos, y reputados por libres, y de licito y libre comercio, de
modo, que ellos puedan sér transportados, y llevados de la
manera mas libre, por los ciudadanos de ambas partes contra-
tantes, aun á los lugares pertenecientes á un enemigo de una
ú otras eceptuando solamente aquellos lugares ó plazas, que
están al mismo tiempo sitiadas ó bloqueadas: y para evitar
toda duda en el particulár, se declaran sitiadas ó bloqueadas
áquellas plazas, que en la actualidad estuviesen átacadas por
una fuerza de un beligerante capaz de impedir la en trada del
neutrál. 4.
Arrº. 16º. Los articulos de contrabando antes enumerados
y clasificados, que se hallan en un buque destinado á puerto
enemigo estarán sujetos á detencion y confiscacion; dejando
libre el resto del cargamento y el buque, para que los dueños
puedan disponér de ellos como lo crean conveniente. Ningun
buque de cualquiera de las dos naciones, será detenido, por
tenérá bordo articulos de contrabando, siempre que el maes-
tre, capitan, ó sobrecargo de dicho buque quiera entregár los
articulos de contrabando al apresador, á menos que lo cantidad
de estos articulos sea tan grande y de tanto volumen, que no
puedan sér recibidos á bordo del buque apresadór, sin grandes
inconvenientes; pero en este, como en todos los otros casos de
justa detencion, el buque detenido será enviado al puerto mas
inmediato, comodo, y seguro, par ser juzgado y sentenciado
conforme á las leyes. º
ARTº. 17º. Y por cuanto frecuentemente sucede que los
buques navegan para un puerto ó lugár perteneciente á un
enemigo, sin saber que aquel esté sitiado, bloqueado ó enves-
tido, se conviene en que todo buque en estas circumstancias se
pueda hacer volver de dicho puerto, ó lugar; pero no será de-
tenido, ni confiscado parte alguna de su cargemento, no siendo
contrabando; á menos que despues de la intimacion de seme-
jante bloqueo ó ataque, por el comandante de las fuerzas blo-
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
29
2dly. Bucklers, helmets, breast-plates, coats of mail, infan-
try belts, and clothes made up in the form and for a military
US®.
3dly. Cavalry belts, and horses with their furniture.
4thly. And generally all kinds of arms and instruments of
iron, steel, brass and copper, or of any other materials manu-
factured, prepared and formed, expressly to make war by sea
or land.
ART. 15. All other merchandises and things not compre-
hended in the articles of contraband explicitly enumerated,
and classified as above, shall be held and considered as free,
and subjects of free and lawful commerce, so that they may
be carried and transported in the freest manner by both the
contracting parties, even to places belonging to an enemy, ex-
cepting only those places which are at that time beseiged or
blocked up; and to avoid all doubt in this particular, it is de-
clared that those places only are besieged or blockaded which
are actually attacked by a belligerent force capable of prevent-
ing the entry of the neutral.
ART. 16. The articles of contraband, before enumerated
and classified, which may be found in a vessel bound for an
enemy’s port, shall be subject to detention and confiscation,
leaving free the rest of the cargo and the ship, that the owners
may dispose of them as they see proper. No vessel of either
of the two nations shall be detained on the high seas on account
of having on board articles of contraband, whenever the mas-
ter, captain, or supercargo of said vessel will deliver up the ar-
ticles of contraband to the captor, unless the quantity of such
articles be so great, and of so large a bulk, that they cannot
be received on board the capturing ship without great incon-
venience; but in this and in all other cases of just detention,
the vessel detained shall be sent to the nearest convenient and
safe port, for trial and judgment according to law.
ART. 17. And whereas it frequently happens that vessels
sail for a port or place belonging to an enemy, without know-
ing that the same is besieged, blockaded, or invested, it is
agreed, that every vessel so circumstanced, may be turned
away from such port or place, but shall not be detained, nor
shall any part of her cargo, if not contraband, be confiscated,
unless, after warning of such blockade, or investment from
the commanding officer of the blockading forces, she shall
1824.
October 3.
Goods not con-
traband,
Definition of
blockade.
Contraband on-
ly liable to con-
fiscation.
In cases of
blockade, ves-
sels to be noti-
fied but not de-
tained, &c.
30
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
ºsº-e-a-sas
queadoras, intentase otra vez entrar; pero le será permitido ir
á qualquiera otro puerto ó lugar que juzgue conveniente. Ni
ningun buque de una de las partes, que haya entrado en seme-
jante puerto, ó lugar, antes que estuviese sitiado, bloqueado, ó
envestido por la otra, sera impedido de dejar el tal lugar con
su cargamento, ni si fuere hallado alli despues de la rendicion
y entrega de semejante lugár, estará el tal buqueó su cargamen-
to sujeto á confiscacion, sino que serán restituidos á sus dueños.
ARTº. 18°. Para evitar todo genero de desorden en la visita,
y examen de los buques y cargamentos de ambas partes contra-
tantes en alta mar, han convenido mutuamente, que siempre
que un buque de guerra, publico ó particular se encontrase con
un neutral de la otra parte contratante, el primero permanecerá
fuera de tiro de cañon, y podrá mandár su bote, con dos ó
tres hombres solamente, para ejecutár el dicho examen de los
papeles concernientes á la propiedad y carga del buque, sin
ocasionár la menor estorcion, violencia ó mal tratamiento, por
lo que los comandantes del dicho buque armado serán respon-
sables, con sus personas y bienes; á cuyo efecto los coman-
dantes de buques armados, por cuenta de particulares, estarán
obligados antes de entregarseles sus comisiones ó patentes, á
dar fianza suficiente para respondér de los perjuicios que
causen. Y se ha convenido espresamente, que en ningun caso
se exigira á la parte neutrál, que vaya á bordo del buque ex-
aminadór con el fin de exibir sus papeles, ó para cualquiera
otro objeto sea el que fuere.
ARTº. 19º. Para evitar todo clase de vejamen y abuso en
el examen de los papeles relativos á la propiedad de los buques
pertenecientes á los ciudadanos de las dos partes contratantes,
han convenido y convienen, que encaso de que una de ellas
estuviere en guerra, los buques, y bajeles pertenecientes á los
ciudadanos de la otra, serán provistos con letras de már, o
pasaportes, espresando et nombre, propiedad y tamaño del
buque, como tambien el nombre y lugar de la residencia del
maestre, ó comandante, á fin de que se vea que el buque, real
y verdaderamente pertenece á los ciudadanos de una de las
partes; y han convenido igualmente, que estando cargados los
espresados buques, ademas de las letras de mar, ó pasaportes,
estarán tambien provistos de certificados, que contengan los
por menores del cargamento, y el lugar de donde salió el
buque, para que asi pueda saberse, si hay á su bordo algunos
efectos prohibidos ó de contrabando, cuyos certificados serán
hechos por los oficiales del lugár de la procedencia del buque,
en la forma acostumbrada, sin cuyos requisitos el dicho buque
puede ser detenido, para ser juzgado por el tribunal compe-
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA. - 31
again attempt to enter; but she shall be permitted to go to any 1824.
other port or place she shall think proper. Nor shall any October 3.
vessel of either, that may have entered into such port before
º e Vessels enter-
the same was actually besieged, blockaded or invested, i. i.io.
by the other, be restrained from quitting such place with her º
cargo, nor if found therein after the reduction and surrender, ed., &c.
shall such vessel or her cargo be liable to confiscation, but
they shall be restored to the owners thereof.
-
ART. 18. In order to prevent all kind of disorder in the During a visit
visiting and examination of the ships and cargoes of both the *::: *
contracting parties on the high seas, they have agreed mutual- main out of
* tº reach of cannon
ly, that whenever a vessel of war, public or private, shall meet sho.
with a neutral of the other contracting party, the first shall
remain out of cannon shot, and may send its boat with two or
three men only in order to execute the said examination of
the papers concerning the ownership and cargo of the vessel,
without causing the least extortion, violence, or ill treatment,
for which the commanders of the said armed ships shall be res-
ponsible with their persons and property; for which purpose
the commanders of the said private armed vessels shall, before
receiving their commissions, give sufficient security to answer
for all the damages they may commit. And it is expressly Neutrals not to
agreed that the neutral party shall in no case be required to 5...".
go on board the examining vessel, for the purpose of exhibit-sel.
ing her papers, or for any other purpose whatever.
ART. 19. To avoid all kind of vexation and abuse in the In case of war,
examination of the papers relating to the ownership of the ves. . .
sels belonging to the citizens of the two contracting parties, go, &c., to be
they have agreed, and do agree, that in case one of them .. CX-
should be engaged in war, the ships and vessels belonging to º: pro-
the citizens of the other must be furnished with sea-letters or perty belongs.
passports, expressing the name, property and bulk of the ship,
as also the name and place of habitation of the master or com-
mander of said vessel, in order that it may thereby appear,
that the ship really and truly belongs to the citizens of one
of the parties; they have agreed that such ships being laden,
besides the said sea-letters or passports shall also be provided
with certificates containing the several particulars of the car-
go, and the place whence the ship sailed, so that it may be
known whether any forbidden or contraband goods be on
board the same; which certificates shall be made out by the
officers of the place whence the ship sailed, in the accustomed
32
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824,
October 3.
tente, y puede ser declarado buena presa, ámenos que satisfagan,
ó suplan el defecto con testimonios enteramente equivalentes.
ARTº. 20°. Se ha convenido ademas, que las estipulaciones
anteriores, relativas al examen y visita de buques, se aplicarán
solamente á los que navegan sin convóy y que cuando los dichos
buques estuvieren bajo de convóy, será bastante la declaracion
verbal del comandante del convóy, bajo su palabra de honór,
de que los buques que están bajo su proteccion pertenecen á
la nacion, cuya bandera llevan, y cuando se dirijen á un puerto
enemigo, que los dichos buques no tienen á su bordo articulos
de contrabando de guerra.
ARTº. 21°. Se ha convenido ademas, que en todos los casos
que ocurran, solo los tribunales establecidos para causas de
presas, en el pais á que las presas sean conducidas, tomarán
conocimiento de ellas. Y siempre que semejante tribunal de
cualquiera de las partes, pronunciase sentencia contra algun
buque, ó efectos, ó propiedad reclamado por los ciudanos de la
otra parte, la sentencia ó decreto harâ mencion de las razones
ó motivos en que aquella se haya fundado, y se entregará sin
demora alguna al comandante ó agente de dicho buque, si lo
solicitase, un testimonio autentico de la sentencia, ó decreto,
ó de todo el proceso, pagando por el los derechos legales.
ARTº. 22º. Siempre que una de las partes contratantes
estuviere empeñada en guerra, con otro Estado, ningun ciuda-
dano de la otra parte contratante aceptará una comision ó
letra de marca para el objeto de ayudár ó co-operar hostil-
mente con el dicho enemigo, contra la dicha parte que esté
asi en guerra, bajo la pena de ser tratado como pirata.
ARTº. 23°. Si por alguna fatalidad, que no puede esperarse,
y que Dios no permita, las dos partes contratantes se viesen
empeñadas en guerra una con otra, han convenido y convienen
de ahora para entonces, que se concederá el termina de seis
meses á los comerciantes residentes en las costas y en los
puertos de entrambas, y el termino de un año á los que ha-
bitan en el interior, para arreglár sus negocios, y transportár
sus efectos á donde quieran, dandoles el salvo conducto ne-
cesario para ello, que les sirva de suficiente proteccion hasta
que lleguen al puerto que designen. Los ciudadanos de otras
ocupaciones, que se hallen establecidos en los territorios ó
dominios de la Republica de Colombia, ó los Estados-Unidos
de America, serán respectados,y mantenidos en el plenogozo de
su libertad personal y propiedad, á menos que su conducta par-
ticular les haga perdér esta proteccion, que en consideracion á
la humanidad, las partes contratantes se comprometen á
prestarles.
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
33
form; without which requisites, said vessel may be detained,
to be adjudged by the competent tribunal, and may be de-
clared legal prize, unless the said defect shall be satisfied or
supplied by testimony entirely equivalent.
ART, 20. It is further agreed, that the stipulations above
expressed relative to the visiting and examination of vessels,
shall apply only to those which sail without convoy; and when
said vessels shall be under convoy, the verbal declaration of
the commander of the convoy, on his word of honor, that the
vessels under his protection belong to the nation whose flag he
carries; and when they are bound to an enemy’s port, that they
have no contraband goods on board, shall be sufficient.
ART. 21. It is further agreed, that in all cases the establish-
ed courts for prize causes, in the country to which the prizes
may be conducted, shall alone take cognizance of them. And
whenever such tribunal of either party shall pronounce judg-
ment against any vessel or goods, or property claimed by the
citizens of the other party, the sentence or decree shall mention
the reasons or motives on which the same shall have been foun-
ded, and an authenticated copy of the sentence or decree, and
of all the proceedings in the case, shall, if demanded, be de-
livered to the commander or agent of said vessel, without any
delay, he paying the legal fees for the same.
ART. 22. Whenever one of the contracting parties shall be
engaged in war with another state, no citizen of the other con-
tracting party shall accept a commission, or letter of marque,
for the purpose of assisting or co-operating hostilely, with the
said enemy, against the said parties so at war, under the pain
of being treated as a pirate. ,
ART. 23. If, by any fatality which cannot be expected, and
which God forbid, the two contracting parties should be en-
gaged in a war with each other, they have agreed, and do agree,
now for then, that there shall be allowed the term of six months
to the merchants residing on the coasts and in the ports of each
other, and the term of one year to those who dwell in the in-
terior, to arrange their business and transport their effects
wherever they please, giving to them the safe conduct necessa-
ry for it, which may serve as a sufficient protection until they
arrive at the designed port. The citizens of all other occupa-
tions who may be established in the territories or dominions of
the United States and of the Republic of Colombia, shall be
respected and maintained in the full enjoyment of their per-
sonal liberty and property, unless their particular conduct shall
cause them to forfeit this protection, which, in consideration
of humanity, the contracting parties engage to give them,
1824.
October 3.
Visiting regu-
lations to apply
only to vessels
without convoy
Established
courts only to
try prize causes
Motives of con-
demnation to be
stated.
The neutral
party not to ac-
cept a commis-
sion to cruise
against the
other.
In case of war,
6 months al-
lowed to those
on the coast,
and 12 for those
in the interior
to remove ef-
fects, &c.;
5
34
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
ARTº. 24°. Ni las deudas contraidas por los individuos de
una Nacion, con los individuos, de la otra, ni las acciones ó
dineros, que puedan tenér en los fondos publicos, ó en los
bancos publicos, ó privados, serán jamas secuestrados ó con-
fiscados en ningun caso de guerra, ó diferencia nacional.
ARTº. 25º. Deseando ambas partes contratantes, evitár
todo diferencia, relativa á etiqueta en sus comunicaciones, y
correspondencias diplomaticas han convenido asi mismo, y
convenien en conceder á sus enviados, ministros, y otros
agentes diplomaticos, los mismos favores, inmunidades, y
esenciones de que gozan, ó gozaren en lo venidero los de las
naciones mas favorecidas, bien entendido que cualquier favór,
inmunidad ó privilegio, que la Republica de Colombia ó los
Estados-Unidos de America, tengan por conveniente despensár
á los enviados, ministros, y agentes diplomaticos de otras
potencias, se haga por el mismo hecho estensivo á los de una
y otra de las partes contratantes.
ARTº. 26º Para hacér mas efectiva la proteccion, que la
Republica de Colombia, y los Estados-Unidos de America,
darán en adelante á la navegacion y comercio de los ciudada-
nos de una y otra, se convienen en recibir y admitir consules
y vice consules en todos los puertos abiertos al comercio es-
trangero, quienes gozarán en ellos todos los derechos, prerro-
gativas é inmunidadas de los consules, y vice consules de la
nacion mas favorecida, quedando no obstante en libertad cada
parte contratante, para exceptuar aquellos puertos y lugares
en que la admision y residencia de semejantes consules, y
vice consules no parezca conveniente.
ARTº. 27º. Para que los consules, y vice consules de las dos
partes contratantes, puedan gozar los derochos, prerrogativas,
é inmunidades, que les corresponden por su caracter publico,
antes de entrár en el ejercicio de sus funciones, presentarán
su comision ó patente en la forma debida, al gobierno con
quien esten acreditados, y habiendo obtenido el eacequatur,
serán tenidos, y considerados como tales, por todas los autori-
dades, majistrados y habitantes del distrito consular en que
residan.
ARTº. 28º. Se ha convenido igualmente, que los consules,
sus secretarios, officiales y personas agregadas al servicio de
los consulados (no siendo estas personas ciudadanos del pais
en que el consul reside) estarán esentos de todo servicio pub-
lico, y tambien de toda especie de pechos, impuestos, y con-
tribuciones, exceptuando aquellas que esten obligados á pagar
por razon de comercio, ópropiedad, y á las cuales estan suje-
TREATY WITH Colombia. 35
ART, 24. Neither the debts due from individuals of the one 1824.
nation to the individuals of the other, nor shares, nor moneys, October S.
which they may have in public funds, nor in public nor private And no seques-
banks, shall º f f - º tation of money
s, shall ever, in any event of war, or of national difference, in tankoji.
be sequestered or confiscated. lic funds.
ART. 25. Both the contracting parties being desirous of Official inter-
avoiding all inequality in relation to their public communica- tº. jº
tions and official intercourse, have agreed, and do agree, to ...
grant to the envoys, ministers, and other public agents, the procal footing.
same favors, immunities, and exemptions, which those of the
most favored nation do or shall enjoy; it being understood that
whatever favors, immunities, or privileges, the United States
of America or the Republic of Colombia, may find it proper to
give to the ministers and public agents of any other power,
shall by the same act be extended to those of each of the con-
tracting parties.
ART. 26. To make more effectual the protection which the Each party per-
United States and the Republic of Colombia shall afford in fu- ..","...,
ture to the navigation and commerce of the citizens of each others’ ports.
other, they agree to receive and admit consuls and vice-con-
suls in all the ports open to foreign commerce, who shall en-
joy in them all the rights, prerogatives, and immunities, of the
consuls and vice-consuls of the most favored nation; each con-
tracting party, however, remaining at liberty to except those
ports and places in which the admission and residence of such
consuls may not seem convenient. “
ARt. 27. In order that the consuls and vice-consuls of the Commissions to
two contracting parties may enjoy the rights, prerogatives, and º:
immunities, which belong to them, by their public character, is obtained.
they shall, before entering on the exercise of their functions, ex-
hibit their commission or patentin due form to the government
to which they are accredited; and having obtained their Eaxe-
quatur, they shall be held and considered as such by all the
authorities, magistrates, and inhabitants, in the consular dis-
trict in which they reside. f
ART. 28. It is likewise agreed, that the consuls, their sec- º:
º e rom public ser
retaries, officers, and persons attached to the service of con- vice—their ar-
suls, they not being citizens of the country in which the con- **
sul resides, shall be exempt from all public service, and also
from all kind of taxes, imposts, and contributions, except
those which they shall be obliged to pay on account of com-
merce, or their property, to which the citizens and inhabitants,
36
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
tos los ciudadanos, y habitantes naturales, y estrangeros del
pais en que residen, quedando en todo lo demas, sujetos a las
leyes de los respectivos estados Los archivos y papeles de
los consulados serán respetados inviolablemente, y bajo nin-
gun pretesto los ocupará magistrado alguno, ni tendrá en ellos
ninguna intervencion.
ARTº. 29º. Los dichos consules tendrán podér de requerir
el auxilio de las autoridades locales, para la prision, detencion
y custodia de los desertores de buques, publicos y particu-
lares de su pais, y para este objeto se dirigirán á los tribu-
nales, jueces, y oficiales competentes y pedirán los dichos
desertores por escrito, probando por una presentacion de los
registros de los buques, rol del equipage, ú otros documentos
publicos, que aquellos hombres eran parte de las dichas tripu-
laciones, y á este demanda asi probado (menos no obstante
cuando seprobare lo contrario) no se reusará la entrega. Se-
mejantes desertores, luego que sean arrestados, se pondrán á
disposicion de los dichos consules, y pueden ser depositados
en las prisones publicas, a solicitud y espensas de los que los
reclamen, para ser enviados á los buques á que corresponden,
ó á otros de la misma nacion. Pero si nó fueren mandados
dentro de dos meses contados desde el dia de su arresto,
serán puestos en libertad, y no volverán a ser presos por la
Il SII13. CàUlSale
ARTº. 30°. Para protegérmas efectivamente su comercio y
navegacion, las dos partes contratantes se convienen en for-
mar luego que las circumstancias lo permitan, una convencion
consulár, que declare mas especialmente los poderes á inmu-
niades de los consules y vice consules de las portes respec-
tivas. º
ARTº. 31º. La Republica de Colombia y los Estados Unidos
de America, deseando hacer tan duraderas y firmes, como las
circumstancias lo permitan las reclaciones que han de estable-
cerse entre las dos potencias, en virtud del presente tratado
ó convencion general de paz, amistad, navegacion y comercio,
han declarado solemnemente y convienen en los puntos sigui-
entes:
1º. El presente tratado permanecerá en su fuerza y vigor
por el termino de doce años contados desde el dia del cange
de las ratificaciones, en todos los puntos concernientes á
comercio y navegacion, y en todos los demas puntos que se
refieren á paz y amistad, será permanente, y perpetuamente
obligatorio para ambas potencias.
2° Si alguno, ó alguños de los ciudadanos de una ú otra
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA.
37
native and foreign, of the country in which they reside are
subject; being in every thing besides subject to the laws of
the respective states. The archives and papers of the consu-
lates shall be respected inviolably, and under no pretext
whatever shall any magistrate seize, or in any way intefere
with them. r
Aler. 29. The said consuls shall have power to require the
assistance of the authorities of the country for the arrest, de-
tention, and custody of deserters from the public and private
vessels of their country, and for that purpose they shall ad-
dress themselves to the courts, judges, and officers competent,
and shall demand the said deserters in writing, proving by an
exhibition of the registers of the vessel’s or ship’s roll, or other
public documents, that those men were part of the said crews;
and on this demand, so proved, (saving, however, where the
contrary is proved,) the delivery shall not be refused. Such
deserters, when arrested, shall be put at the disposal of the
said consuls, and may be put in the public prisons at the re-
quest and expense of those who reclaim them, to be sent to the
ships to which they belonged, or to others of the same nation.
But if they be not sent back within two months, to be counted
from the day of their arrest, they shall be set at liberty, and
shall be no more arrested for the same cause.
ART. 30. For the purpose of more effectually protecting
their commerce and navigation, the two contracting parties do
hereby agree, as soon hereafter as circumstances will permit
them, to form a consular convention, which shall declare spe-
cially the powers and immunities of the consuls and vice-con-
suls of the respective parties.
ART, 31. The United States of America and the Republic
of Colombia, desiring to make as durable as circumstances will
permit, the relations which are to be established between the
two parties by virtue of this Treaty, or General Convention of
Peace, Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, have declared
solemnly, and do agree to the following points:
1st. The present Treaty shall remain in full force and virtue
for the term of twelve years, to be counted from the day of the
exchange of the ratifications, in all the parts relating to com-
merce and navigation; and in all those parts which relate to
peace and friendship, it shall be permanently and perpetually
binding on both powers.
2ndly. If any one or more of the citizens of either party shall
1824.
October 3.
*-*---
Consuls may
call in the public
authorities to
aid in securing
deserters, who
are not to be
detained more
than 2 months
in prison.
Consular con-
vention to be
formed.
The following
points agreed
to.
Treaty to re-
main in force
twelve years.
Peace perpetu-
al.
Citizens respon
sible for in-
38
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1824.
October 3.
parte infringiesen alguno de los articulos contenidos en el pre-
sente tratado, dichos ciudadanos serán personalmente respon-
sables, sin que por esto se interrumpa la harmonio y buena
correspondencia entre las dos naciones, comprometiendose
cada una a no protegér de modo alguno al ofensoró sanccionár
semejante violacion. º -
3°. Si (lo que á la verdad no puede esperarse) desgracia-
damente, alguno de los articulos contenidos en el presente
tratado, fuesen en alguna otra manera violados, ó infringidos,
se estipula espresamente que ninguna de las dos partes con-
tratantes, ordenará, ó autorizará ningunos actos de represalia,
ni declarará la guerra contra la otra por quejas de injurias, ó
daños hasta que la parte que se crea ofendida, haya antes pre-
sentado á la otra una esposicion de aquellas injurias, ó daños,
hasta que la parte que se crea ofendida, haya antes presen-
tado a la otra una esposicion de aquellas injurias, ó daños,
verificada con pruebas y testimonios competentes, exigiendo
justicia y satisfaccion, y esto haya sido negado, ó diferido sin
3.740 le
4°. Nada de cuanto se contiene en el presente tratado, se
construirá sin embargo, ni obrará, en contra de otros tratados
publicos anteriores, y existentes con otros soberanos ó Esta-
dos. º
El presente tratado de paz, amistad, navegacion, y comer-
cio, será ratificado por el presidente ó vice presidente de la
Republica de Colombia, encargado del poder ejecutivo con
consentimiento y aprobacion del congreso de la misma, y por
el presidente de los Estados-Unidos de America, con consejo,
y consentimiento del senado de los mismos; y las ratifica-
ciones serán cangeadas en la Ciudad de Washington dentro
de ocho meses contados desde este cia ó antes si fuese posible.
En fe de lo cual nosotros los plenipotenciaries de la Repub-
lica de Colombia, y de los Estados-Unidos de America hemos
firmado y sellado las presentes. va
Dada en la Ciudad de Bogota el dia tres de Octubre, del
año del senor mil ochocientos veinticuatro, decimo cuarto de
la independencia de la Republica de Colombia y cuadragesimo
nono de la de los Estados-Unidos de America.
Firmado.
L. s. PEDRO GUAL, - -
L. s. RICHARD CLOUGH ANDERSON, Jr,
TREATY WITH COLOMBIA. 39
infringe any of the articles of this treaty, such citizen shall 1824.
be held personally responsible for the same, and the harmony ‘’”
and good correspondence between the nations shall not be in- . T.
© tº fringing this ar-
terrupted thereby; each party engaging in no way to protect tici.
the offender, or sanction such violation. "
3dly. If, (what indeed, cannot be expected,) unfortunately, X. º º
any of the articles contained in the present treaty shall be º
violated or infringed in any other way whatever, it is expressly #: and sa-
o te e g g action is re-
stipulated, that neither of the contracting parties will order fused.
or authorize any acts of reprisal, nor declare war against the
other, on complaints of injuries or damages, until the said
party considering itself offended, shall first have presented to
the other a statement of such injuries or damages, verified by
competent proof, and demanded justice and satisfaction, and
the same shall have been either refused or unreasonably
delayed.
4thly. Nothing in this treaty contained, shall, however, be Other treaties
construed, or operate contrary to former and existing public º º
treaties with other sovereigns or states.
The present treaty of peace, amity, commerce, and naviga- Ratification
tion, shall be approved and ratified by the president of the Yºsh
United States of America, by and with the advice and consent
of the senate thereof, and by the president of the Republic of
Colombia, with the consent and approbation of the congress of
the same, and the ratifications shall be exchanged in the city
of Washington within eight months, to be counted from the
date of the signature hereof, or sooner if possible.
In faith whereof, we, the plenipotentiaries of the United
States of America, and of the Republic of Colombia, have
signed and sealed these presents.
Done in the city of Bogota, on the third day of October, in
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
twenty-four, in the forty-ninth year of the Independence
of the United States of America, and the fourteenth of
that of the Republic of Colombia.
É. º CLOUGH ANDERSON, Jr.
L. s...] PEDRO GUAL.
And whereas the said convention has been duly ratified on Ratification.
both parts, and the respective ratifications of the same were
exchanged at Washington, on the twenty-seventh day of the
present month by Daniel Brent, chief clerk of the Department
of State, and José Maria Salazar, LL.D. Fiscal of the high
40
DIPLOMATIC code.
1824.
October 3.
court of justice of the Republic of Colombia, and envoy extra-
ordinary and minister plenipotentiary thereof, near the gov-
ernment of the United States of America, on the part of their
respective governments.
Now, therefore, be it known, that I, John QUINCY ADAMs,
President of the United States, have caused the said conven-
tion to be made public, to the end that the same, and every
clause and article thereof, may be observed and fulfilled with
good faith by the United States and the citizens thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and
caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington, this thirty-first day
[L. s.] of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and twenty-five, and of the Independence of
the United States the forty-ninth.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS,
By the President:
H. CLAY, Secretary of State.
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA,
41
TREATY witH THE FEDERATION of THE
CENTRE OF AMERICA.
By the President of the United States of America.
A Proclamation:
Whereas a General Convention of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation,
between the United States of America and the Federation of the Centre of
America, was concluded and signed at Washington, on the fifth day of De-
cember, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-five;
which Convention, being in the English and Spanish languages, is word for
word, as follows:
ORIGINAL.
Convencion Jeneral de Paz,
.Amistad, Comércio y Wave-
gacion, entre la Confedera-
cion de Centro-JAmerica i
tos Estados-Unidos de Ame-
720 (1.
La Federacion de Centro-
America i los Estados-Unidos
de America, deseando hacer
firme y permanente la paz y
amistad que felizmente existe
entre ambas potencias, han
resuelto fijar de una manera
clara, distinta y positiva, las
reglas que deben observar re-
ligiosamente en lo venidero,
por medio de un tratado, 6
convencion general de paz,
amistad, comercio, y navega-
cion.
Con este muy deseable obje-
to, el Poder Executivo de la
Federation de Centro-Ameri-
ca, ha conferido plenos po-
deres à Antonio Jose Cañas,
diputado de la assemblea na-
cional constituyente por la
provincia de San Salvador, y
Envirº Extraordinario y Mi-
ORIGINAL.
General Convention of Peace,
Amity, Commerce and Na-
vigation, between the United
States of America and the
Federation of the Centre of
Jämerica.
The United States of Ame-
rica, and the Federation of the
Centre of America, desiring
to make firm and permanent
the peace and friendship which
happily prevails between both
nations, have resolved to fix,
in a manner clear, distinct,
and positive, the rules which
shall in future be religiously
observed between the one and
the other, by means of a trea-
ty, or general convention of
peace, friendship, commerce,
and navigation.
For this most desirable ob-
ject, the President of the Uni-
ted States of America has con-
ferred full powers on Henry
Clay, their secretary of state;
and the executive power of
the Federation of the Centre
America, on Antonio Jose
Cañas, a deputy of the Con-
1825.
December 5,
Negotiators ap-
pointed to con-
clude a treaty.
42
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
December 5.
nistro Plenipotenciario de la aquella Republica cerca de los
Estados-Unidos, y el Presidente de los Estados-Unidos de
America, á Henrico Clay, su Secretario de Estado, quienes
despues de haber canjeado sus espresados plenos poderes en
debida y buena forma, han convenido en los articulos sigui-
entes.
ARTº. 1.° Hebra una paz, perfecta, firme é inviolable y
amistad sincera entre la Federacion de Centro-America y los
Estados-Unidos de America, en toda la estencion de sus po-
sesiones y territorios, y entre sus pueblos y ciudadanos re-
spectivamente sin distincion de personas, ni lugares.
ARTº. 2º. La Federacion de Centro-Amorica, y los Estados-
Unidos de America, deseando vivir en paz y harmonia con las
demas naciones de la tierra, por medio de una politica franca,
é igualmente amistosa con todas, se obligan mutuamente à no
conceder favores particulares à otras naciones, con respecto
á comercio y navegacion, que no se hagan inmediatamente co-
mun á una ú otra, quien gozará de los mismos libremente, si
la concession fuese hecha libremente, ó prestando la misma
compensacion, si la concesion fuere condicional.
ARTº. 3º. Las dos altas partes contratantes deseando tam-
bien establecer el comercio y navegacion de sus respectivos
paises sobres las liberales bases de perfecta igualidad y reci-
procidad, convienen mutuamente que los ciuadadanos de cada
una podran frecuentar todas las costas y paises de la otra y
residir y traficar en ellos con toda clase de producciones, ma-
nufacturas, y mercaderias, y gozaran de todos los derechos,
privilegos y esempciones con respecto a navegacion y comercio
que gozan ó gozaren los ciudadanos nativos, sometiendose á
las leyes, decretos é usos establecidos á que estan sujetos
dichos ciudadanos nativos. Pero deber entenderse que este
articulo no comprehende el comercio de costa de cada uno de
los dos paises, cuya regulacion es reservada a las partes res-
pectivamente, segun sus propias y peculiares leyes.
ARTº. 4º. Igualmente convienen, que cualquiera clase de
producciones, manufacturas ó mercaderias estrangeras que
puedan ser, en cualquier tiempo, legalmente introducidas en
la Republica Central en sus propios buques, puedan tam-
bien ser introducidas en los buques de los Estados-Unidos;
y que no se impondran ó cobraran otros ó mayores derechos
de tonelada ó por el cargamenta, ya sea que la importacion se
haga en buques de la una ó de la otra. De la misma manera
que cualesquiera clase de producciones, mañufacturas ó mer-
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
43
stituent national assembly of the province of San Salvador,
and envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of that
Republic, near the United States, who, after having exchan-
ged their said full powers in due and proper form, have agreed
to the following articles:
1825.
December 5.
ART. 1. There shall be a perfect, firm, and inviolable peace Firm and inviol
and sincere friendship between the United States of America able Pe*, *.
and the Federation of the Centre of America, in all the extent
of their possessions and territories, and between their people
and citizens, respectively, without distinction of persons or
places.
ART. 2. The United States of America and the Federation
of the Centre of America, desiring to live in peace and har-
mony with all the other nations of the earth, by means of a
policy frank and equally friendly with all, engage mutually
not to grant any particular favor to other nations in respect of
commerce and navigation, which shall not immediately be-
come common to the other party, who shall enjoy the same
freely, if the concession was freely made, or on allowing the
same compensation, if the concession was conditional.
ART. 8. The two high contracting parties, being likewise
desirous of placing the commerce and navigation of their re-
spective countries on the liberal basis of perfect equality and
reciprocity, mutually agree that the citizens of each may fre-
Quent all the coasts and countries of the other, and reside and
trade there, in all kinds of produce, manufactures, and mer-
chandize; and they shall enjoy all the rights, privileges, and
exemptions, in navigation and commerce, which native citizens
do or shall enjoy, submitting themselves to the laws, decrees,
and usages, there established, to which native citizens are
subjected. But it is understood that this article does not in-
clude the coasting trade of either country, the regulation of
which is reserved by the parties, respectively, according to
their own separate laws.
ART. 4. They likewise agree, that whatever kind of pro-
duce, manufacture, or merchandize of any foreign country,
can be, from time to time, lawfully imported into the United
States, in their own vessels, may be also imported in vessels
of the Federation of the Centre of America; and that no higher
or other duties, upon the tonnage of the vessel or her cargo,
shall be levied and collected, whether the importation be made
in vessels of the one country, or of the other. And, in like
manner, that whatever kind of produce, manufactures or mer-
Favors of come
merce to be
common to both
parties.
Mutual benefits
in trade and re-
sidence to be e-
qually enjoyed.
Each party may
carry its own
produce to the
republic of the
other—-equali-
zation of duties
established,and
to be the basis
of ali trade.
44
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
December 5. ”
caderías estrangeras que pueden ser en cualquier tiempo le-
galmente introducidas en los Estados-Unidos en sus propios
buques, puedan tambien ser introducidas en los buques de la
Federacion de Centro-America; i que no se impendran ó co-
braran otros ó mayores derechos de tonelada ó por el carga-
mento ya sea que la importacion se haga en buques de la una
ó de la otra. Convienen ademas, que todo lo que pueda ser
legalmente esportado ó re-esportado de uno de los dos paises,
en sus buques propios para un pais estranjero pueda de la
misma manera ser esportado ó re-esportado en los buques de
el otro. Y los mismo derechos, premios ó descuentos se con-
cederan i cobraran y sea que tal exportacion, ó re-exportacion
se haga en los buques de la Republica Central ó de los Estados-
Unidos.
ARTº. 5º. No se impondran otros ó mayores derechos sobre
la importacion de cualquier articulo, produccion ó manufae-
tura de los Estados-Unidos en la Federacion de Centro Ame-
rica, i no se impondran otros ó mayores derechos sobre la im-
portacion de cualquier articulo, produccion ó manufactura de
la Federacion de Centro-America en los Estados Unidos, que
los que se pagan ó pagaren en adelante por iguales articulos,
produccion ó manufactura de cualquiera pais estrangero: ni se
impondran otros ó mayores derechos ó cargas en cualquiera
de los dos paises sobre la esportacion de cualesquiera articulos
para la Federacion de Centro-America ó para los Estados-
Unidos respectivamente, que los que se pagan ó pagaren en
adelante por la esportacion de iguales articulos para cual-
quiera otro pais estrangero; ni se establecera prohivicion sobre
la importacion ó esportacion de cualesquiera articulos, pro-
duccion ó manufactura de los territorios de la Federacion de
Centro-America para los de los Estados-Unidos, ó de los terri-
torios de los Estados-Unidos para los de la Federacion de Cen-
tro-America, que no sea igualmente estensiva a los otras na-
ciones.
ARTº. 6º. Se conviene ademas, que será enteramente libre
y permitido, a los comerciantes, comandantes de buques, y
otros Ciudadanos de ambos paises el manejar sus negocios,
por si mismos, en todos los puertos y lugares sujetos á la ju-
risdiccion de uno ú otro, asi respecto á los consignaciones y
ventas por mayor y menor de sus efectos y mercaderias, como
de la carga, descarga y despacho de sus buques, debiendo en
todos estos casos, ser tratados como Ciudadanos del pais en
que residan, ó al menos puestos sobre un pie igual con los sub-
ditos ó Ciudadanos de las naciones mas favorecidas.
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
45
chandize, of any foreign country, can be, from time to time,
lawfully imported into the Central Republic, in its own ves-
sels, may be also imported in vessels of the United States; and
that no higher or other duties, upon the tonnage of the vessel,
or her cargo, shall be levied or collected, whether the impor-
tation be made in vessels of the one country, or of the other.
And they further agree, that whatever may be lawfully ex-
ported, or re-exported, from the one country, in its own ves-
sels, to any foreign country, may, in like manner, be export-
ed, or re-exported, in the vessels of the other country. And
the same bounties, duties, and drawbacks, shall be allowed
and collected, whether such exportation or re-exportation, be
made in vessels of the United States, or of the Central Re-
public.
ART. 5. No higher or other duties shall be imposed on the
importation into the United States of any articles, the produce
or manufactures of the Federation of the Centre of America,
and no higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importa-
tion into the Federation of the Centre of America, of any ar-
ticles, the produce or manufactures of the United States,
than are or shall be, payable on the like articles, being the
produce or manufactures of any other foreign country; nor
shall any higher or other duties, or charges, be imposed in
either of the two countries, on the exportation of any articles
to the United States, or to the Federation of the Centre of
America, respectively, than such as are payable on the ex-
portation of the like articles to any other foreign country; nor
shall any prohibition be imposed on the exportation or importa-
tion of any articles, the produce or manufactures of the Uni-
ted States, or of the Federation of the Centre of America, to
or from the territories of the United States, or to or from the
territories of the Federation of the Centre of America, which
shall not equally extend to all other nations.
ART. 6. It is likewise agreed that it shall be wholly free
for all merchants, commanders of ships, and other citizens of
both countries, to manage themselves their own business in all
ports and places subject to the jurisdiction of each other, as well
with respect to the consignment and sale of their goods and
merchandise by wholesale or retail, as with respect to the load-
ing, unloading, and sending off their ships, they being in
all these cases to be treated as citizens of the country in
which they reside, or at least to be placed on a footing with
the subjects or citizens of the most favored nation.
1825.
December 5.
Importations
and exporta-
tions to be on a
reciprocal foot-
ing.
No partial pro-
hibitions to be
established.
Merchants,
commanders of
ships, and other
citizens of both
countries, &c.
to manage their
own business;
to be treated as
citizens of the
most favored
nation.
46
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
ARTº.7°. Los Ciudadanos de una ú otra parte, no podrán
December 5. ser embargados ni detenidos con sus embarcaciones, tripula-
ciones, mercaderias, y efectos comerciales de su pertenencia,
para alguna espedicion militár, usos publicos, ó particulares
cualesquiera que sean, sin conceder á los interesados una
suficiente indemnizacion.
ARTº.8º. Siempre que los Ciudadanos de alguna de las
partes contratantes se vieren precisados á buscár refujio, ó
asilo en los rios, habias, puertos, ó dominios de la otra, con sus
buques, ya sean mercantes, ó de guerra, publicos ó particu-
lares, por mal tiempo, persecucion de piratas ó enemigos, serán
recibidos y tratado con humanidad, dondoles todo favor
y proteccion para reparar sus buques, procurár viveres,
y ponerse en situacion de continuar su viaje, sin obstaculo ó
estorbo de ningun genero.
ARTº.9º. Todos los buques, mercaderias y efectos per-
tenecientes a los Ciudadanos de una de las partes contratantes,
que sean apresados por piratas, bien sea dentro de los limites
de su jurisdiccion, ó en alta mar, y fueren llevados, ó hallados
en los rios, radas, bahias, puertos, ó dominios de la otra, seràn
entregados á sus dueños, probando estos en la forma propia y
debida sus derechos ante los Tribunales competentes; bien
entendido que el reclamo ha de hacerse dentro del termino
de un año, por las mismas partes, sus apoderados ó Agentes
de los respectivos Gobiernos.
ARTº. 10º. Cuando algun buque perteneciente á los ciudad-
nos de alguna de las partes contratantes, naufrague, encalle,
ó sufra alguno averia, en las costas, ó dentro de los dominios
de la otra, se les dará toda ayuda y proteccion, del mismo
modo que es uso y costumbre, con los buques de la nacion en
donde suceda la averia; permitiendo les descargár el dicho
buque (si fuere necesario) de sus mercaderias y efectos, sin
cobrar por esto hasta que sean esportados, ningun derecho,
impuesto ó contribucion.
ARTº. 11°. Los ciudadanos de cada una de las partes contra-
tantes, tendrán pleno podér para disponér de sus bienes per-
sonales dentro de la jurisdiccion de la otra, por venta, dona-
cion, testamento, ó de otro modo; y sus representantes, siendo
ciudadanos de la otra parte, succederán á sus dichos bienes
personales, ya sea por testamento ó ab intestato, y podran
tomar posesion de ellos, ya sea por si mismos, ó por otros, que
obren por ellos, y disponer de los mismos, segun su voluntad,
pagando aquellas cargas solamente, que los habitantes del pais
en donde estan los referidos bienes, estuvieren sujetos, á pagar
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
47
ART. 7. The citizens of neither of the contracting parties
shall be liable to any embargo, nor be detained with their
vessels, cargoes, merchandises, or effects, for any military
1825.
December 5.
Citizens of nei-
expedition, nor for any public or private purpose, whatever, ther of the con-
without allowing to those interested a sufficient indemnifica-
tion.
ART. 8. Whenever the citizens of either of the contracting
parties shall be forced to seek refuge or asylum in the rivers,
bays, ports, or dominions, of the other, with their vessels,
whether merchant or of war, public or private, through stress
of weather, pursuit of pirates, or enemies, they shall be re-
ceived and treated with humanity, giving to them all favor
and protection for repairing their ships, procuring provisions,
and placing themselves in a situation to continue their voyage
without obstacle or hindrance of any kind.
ART. 9. All the ships, merchandise, and effects belonging to
the citizens of one of the contracting parties, which may be cap-
tured by pirates, whether within the limits of its jurisdiction or
on the high seas, and may be carried or found in the rivers,
roads, bays, ports, or dominions, of the other, shall be deli-
vered up to the owners, they proving in due and proper form
their rights before the competent tribunals; it being well un-
derstood that the claim should be made within the term of one
year by the parties themselves, their attorneys, or agents of
their respective governments.
ART. 10. When any vessel belonging to the citizens of either
of the contracting parties shall be wrecked, foundered, or
shall suffer any damage on the coasts, or within the domin-
ions of the other, there shall be given to them all assistance
and protection in the same manner which is usual and custom-
ary with the vessels of the nation where the damage happens,
permitting them to unload said vessel, if necessary, of its mer-
chandise and effects, without exacting for it any duty, im-
post, or contribution whatever, until they may be exported.
ART, 11. The citizens of each of the contracting parties
shall have power to dispose of their personal goods within the
jurisdiction of the other, by sale, donation, testament, or other-
wise, and their representatives, being citizens of the other
party, shall succeed to their said personal goods, whether by
testament or ab intestato, and they may take possession there-
of, either by themselves or others acting for them, and dispose
of the same at their will, paying such dues only as the inhabi-
tants of the country, wherein the said goods are, shall be sub-
ject to pay in like cases: And if, in the case of real estate,
tracting parties
shall be liable
to any embar-
*
go, &c.
Whenever the
citizens of eith-
er party seek
refuge, in the
dominions, &c.
of the other,
they are to be
treated as
friends, &c.
All ships, &c.
belonging to
the citizens of
either party
captured by pi-
rates, and found
within the do-
minions of eith-
er, to be deli-
vered up to the
OWIlêI'Ss
Assistance and
protection to be
rendered in
case of wrecks,
&c within the
dominions of
each other.
Citizens of each
party shall have
power to dis-
pose of their
oods and ef-
ects within the
jurisdiction of
the other, by
sale, testament,
or otherwise.
48
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825-
December 5.
en iguales casos. Y si en el caso de bienes raices, los dichos
herederos fuesen impedidos de entrár en la posesion de la he-
rencia por razon de su caracter de estrangeros, se les dará el
termino de tres años, para disponer de ella como juzguen con-
veniente, y para estraér el producto sin molestia, y esentos de
todo derecho de deduccion, por parte del Gobierno de los re-
spectivos Estados.
ARTº. 12º. Ambas partes contratantes se comprometen y
obligan formalmente á dar su proteccion especial á las personas
y propriedades de los ciudadanos de cada una reciprocamente
transeuntes ó habitantes de todas ocupaciones, en los territo-
rios sujetos á la jurisdiccion de una y otra, dejandoles abier-
tos y libres los tribunales de justicia, para sus recursos judi-
ciales, en los mismos terminos que son de uso y costumbre
para los naturales ó ciudadanos del pais en que residan; para
lo cual, podrán emplear en defensa de sus derechos aquellos
abogados, procuradores, escribanos, agentes, ó factores que
juzguen conveniente, en todos sus asuntos y litigios; y di-
chos ciudadanos ó agentes tendrán la libre facultad de estar
presentes en las decisiones y sentencias de los tribunales, en
todos les casos que les conciernan, como igualmente al tomar
todos los examenes y declaraciones que se ofrezcan en los
dichos litigios.
ARTº. 13º. Se conviene igualmente en que los ciudadanos
de ambas partes contratantes gozen la mas perfecta y entera
seguridad de conciencia en los paises sujetos á la jurisdiccion
de una ú otra, sin quedar por ello espuestos á ser inquietados
ó molestados en razon de su creencia religiosa, mientras que
respeten las leyes y usos establecidos. Ademas de esto,
podrán sepultarse los cadaveres de los ciudadanos de una de
las partes contratantes, que fallecieren en los territorios de
la otra, en los cementerios acostumbrados ó en otros lugares
decentes, y adecuados, los cuales serán protejidos contra
toda violacion ó trastorno.
Arrº. 4°. Será licito a los cuidadanos de la Federacion de
Centro-America, y de los Estados Unidos de America nave-
gár con sus buques, con toda seguridad y libertad, de cual-
quiera puerto á las plazasó lugares de los que son ó fueron en
adelante enemigos de cualquiera de las dos partes contratantes,
sin hacerse distincion de quienes son los dueños de las merca-
derias cargadas en ellos. Será igualmente licito á los refe-
ridos ciudadanos navegár con sus buques y mercaderias men-
cionadas y traficár con la misma libertad y seguridad, de los
lugares, puertos y ensenadas de los enemigos de ambas partes,
3.
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA. 49
the said heirs, would be prevented from entering into the pos- . 1825.
session of the inheritance, on account of their character of **
aliens, there shall be granted to them the term of three years Alien heir, al-
to dispose of the same, as they may think proper, and to with- lowed 3 years
draw the proceeds without molestation, and exempt from all $º.
duties of detraction, on the part of the government of the re-
spective states.
ART, 12. Both the contracting parties promise and engage, Complete pro-
formally to give their special protection to the persons and ...”. #:
property of the citizens of each other, of all occupations, who perty in the ter
may be in the territories subject to the jurisdiction of the one tºº, º
or the other, transient or dwelling therein, leaving open and redress, *.
free to them the tribunals of justice for their judicial recourse,
on the same terms which are usual and customary, with the
natives or citizens of the country in which they may be; for
which they may employ in defence of their rights such advo-
cates, solicitors, notaries, agents, and factors, as they may
judge proper, in all their trials at law; and such citizens or
agents shall have free opportunity to be present at the deci-
sions and sentences of the tribunals, in all cases which may
concern them, and likewise at the taking of all examinations
and evidence which may be exhibited in the said trials.
ART. 13. It is likewise agreed that the most perfect and en- Liberty of con-
tire security of conscience shall be enjoyed by the citizens of . ºria
both the contracting parties, in the countries subject to the secure".
jurisdiction of the one and the other, without their being lia-
ble to be disturbed or molested on account of their religious
belief, so long as they respect the laws and established usages
of the country. Moreover, the bodies of the citizens of one
of the contracting parties, who may die in the territories of
the other, shall be buried in the usual burying grounds, or in
other decent or suitable places, and shall be protected from
violation or disturbance.
ART. 14. It shall be lawful for the citizens of the United Both parties at
º º - - liberty to trade
States of America and of the Federation of the Centre of Ame- with those at
rica to sail with their ships, with all manner of liberty and fººt eis.
security, no distinction being made, who are the proprietors of "
the merchandise laden thereon, from any port to the places of
those who now are or hereafter shall be at enmity with either of
the contracting parties. It shall likewise belawful for the citi-
zens aforesaid to sail with the ships and merchandises before-
mentioned, and to trade with the same liberty and security
from the places, ports, and havens, of those who are enemies
7.
50
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
December 5.
ó de alguna de ellas, sin ninguna oposicion, ó disturbio cual-
quiera, no solo directamente de los lugares de enemigo arriba
mencionados á lugares neutros, sino tambien de un lugar per-
teneciente á un enemigo, á otro enemigo, ya sea que esten
bajo la jurisdiccion de una potencia, ó bajo la de diversas. Y
queda aqui estipulado, que los buques libres, dan tambien li-
bertad á las mercaderias, y que se ha de considerar libre y
esento todo lo que se hallare á bordo de los buques pertene-
cientes á los ciudadanos de cualquiera de las partes contra-
tantes, aunque toda la carga ó parte de ella pertenezca á
enemigos de una u otra, exceptuando siempre los articulos
de contrabando de guerra. Se conviene tambien del mismo
modo, en que la misma libertad se estienda á las personas
que se encuentren á bordo de buques libres, con el fin
de que aunque dichas personas sean enemigos de ambas
partes ó de alguna de ellas, no deban ser estraidos de los
buques libres, á menos que sean oficiales ó soldados en
actual servicio de los enemigos: á condicion no obstante, y se
conviene aqui en esto, que las estipulaciones contenidas en el
presente articulo, declarando que el pabellon cubre la pro-
piedad, se entenderán aplicables solamente á aquellas poten-
cias que reconocen este principio; pero si alguna de las dos
partes contratantes, estuviere en guerra con una tercera, y la
otra permaneciese neutrál, la bandera de la neutrál cubrirá
la propñedad de los enemigos, cuyos gobiernos reconozcan
este principio y no de otros. -
ARTº. 15º. Se conviene igualmente que en el caso de que
la bandera neutrál de una de las partes contratantes protega
las propriedades de los enemigos de la otra en virtud de lo es-
tipulado arriba, deberá siempre entenderse, que las proprie-
dades neutrales encontradas á bordo de tales buques enemigos»
han de tenerse y considerarse como propiedades enemigas, y
como tales, estarán sujetas á detencion, y confiscacion; excep-
tuando solamente aquellas propiedadas que hubiesen sido pues-
tas á bordo de tales buques antes de la declaracion de la guer-
ra, y aun despues, si hubiesen sido embarcadas en dichos
buques, sin tenér noticia de la guerra, y se conviene, que pa-
sados dos meses despues de la declaracion, los ciudadanos de
una y otra parte no podrán alegár que la ignoraban. Por el
contrario, si la bandera neutrál, no protegiese las propriedades
enemigas, entonces serán libres los efectos y mercaderias de
la parte neutrál embarcadas en buques enemigos.
ARTº. 16º. Esta libertad de navegacion y comercio se es-
tenderá a todo genero de mercaderias, exceptuando aquellas
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA. 51
of both or either party, without any opposition or disturbance 1825.
whatsoever, not only directly from the places of the enemy, * *
beforementioned, to neutral places, but also from one place
belonging to an enemy to another place belonging to an ene-
my, whether they be under the jurisdiction of one power or
under several. And it is hereby stipulated, that free ships Free ships to
shall also give freedom to goods, and that every thing shall **
be deemed to be free and exempt, which shall be found on
board the ships belonging to the citizens of either of the con-
tracting parties although the whole lading, or any part there-
of should appertain to the enemies of either, contraband goods
being always excepted. It is also agreed, in like manner, that . persons on
o oard, except
the same liberty be extended to persons who are on board a free those in the ac-
ship, with this effect, that although they be enemies to both *:::: §:
or either party, they are not to be taken out of that free ship, free.
unless they are officers or soldiers, and in the actual service
of the enemies: Provided, however, and it is hereby agreed, º r...
that the stipulations in this article contained, declaring that be j." to
the flag shall cover the property, shall be understood as ap- º: rº.
plying to those powers only who recognise this principle; but knowledge the
if either of the two contracting parties should be at war with *
a third, and the other neutral, the flag of the neutral shall
cover the property of enemies whose governments acknow-
ledge this principle, and not of others.
ART. 15. It is likewise agreed, that in the case where the Enemy's º:
neutral flag of one of the contracting parties shall protect the $º t; 3.
property of the enemies of the other, by virtue of the above stipu- .*.*ši.
lation, it shall always be understood that the neutral property ped two months
found on board such enemy’s vessels shall be held and consi- º:
dered as enemy’s property, and as such shall be liable to de-
tention and confiscation, except such property as was put on
board such vessel before the declaration of war, or even after-
wards, if it were done without the knowledge of it; but the
contracting parties agree, that two months having elapsed
after the declaration, their citizens shall not plead ignorance
thereof. On the contrary, if the flag of the neutral does not pro-
tect the enemy’s property, in that case the goods and mer-
chandises of the neutral, embarked in such enemy’s ship shall
be free.
ART. 16. This liberty of navigation and commerce shall ex- Contraband
tend to all kinds of merchandises, excepting those only which *
52
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
December 5.
solamente, que se distinguen con el nombre de contrabando,
y bajo este nombre de contrabando ó efectos prohibidos se
comprehenderán:
1º. Cañones, morteros, obuces, pedreros, trabucos, mos-
quetes, fusiles, rifles, carabinas, pistolas, picas, espadas, sa-
bles, lanzas, chuzos, alabardas, y granadas, bombas, polvora,
mechas, balas, con las demas cosas correspondientes al uso de
eSta armas.
2º. Escudos, casquetes, corazas, cotas de malla, fornituras,
y vestidos hechos en forma, y á usanza militar.
3°. Bandoleras, y caballos junto con sus armas y arneses.
4°. Y generalmente toda especie de armas, é instrumentos
de hierro acero, bronce, cobre, y otras materias cualesquiera,
manufacturadas, preparadas, y formadas espresamente para
hacér la guerra por mar, ó tierra.
ARTº. 17º. Todas las demas mercaderias, y efectos no com-
prehendidos en los articulos de contrabando esplicitamente
enumerados, y clasificados en el articulo anterior, serán te-
nidos, y reputados por libres, y de licito y libre comercio, de
modo, que ellos puedan sér transportados, y llevados de la
manera mas libre, por los ciudadanos de ambas partes contra-
tantes, aun á los lugares pertenecientes á un enemigo de una
ú otra, eceptuando solamente aquellos lugares ó plazas, que
están al mismo tiempo sitiadas ó bloqueadas: y para evitar
toda duda en el particulár, se declaran sitiadas ó bloqueadas
áquellas plazas, que en la actualidad estuviesen átacadas por
una fuerza de un beligerante capaz de impedir la en trada del
neutrál.
ARTº. 18º. Los articulos de contrabando antes enumerados
y clasificados, que se hallan en un buque destinado á puerto
enemigo estarán sujetos á detencion y confiscacion; dejando
libre el resto del cargamento y el buque, para que los dueños
puedan disponér de ellos como lo crean conveniente. Ningun
buque de cualquiera de las dos naciones, será detenido, por
tenérá bordo articulos de contrabando, siempre que el maes-
tre, capitan, ó sobrecargo de dicho buque quiera entregár los
articulos de contrabando al apresador, á menos que lo cantidad
de estos articulos sea tan grande y de tanto volumen, que no
puedan sér recibidos á bordo del buque apresadór, sin grandes
inconvenientes; pero en este, como en todos los otros casos de
justa detencion, el buque detenido será enviado al puerto mas
inmediato, comodo, y seguro, par ser juzgado y sentenciado
conforme á las leyes.
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
53
are distinguished by the name of contraband, and under this
name of contraband, or prohibited goods, shall be compre-
hended—
1st. Cannons, mortars, howitzers, swivels, blunderbusses,
muskets, fuzées, rifles, carbines, pistols, pikes, swords, sabres,
lances, spears, halberds, and granades, bombs, powder, match-
es, balls, and all other things belonging to the use of these
à l'IſlS.
2dly. Bucklers, helmets, breast-plates, coats of mail, infan-
try belts, and clothes made up in the form and for a military
tlSe.
3dly. Cavalry belts, and horses with their furniture.
4thly. And generally all kinds of arms and instruments of
iron, steel, brass and copper, or of any other materials manu-
factured, prepared and formed, expressly to make war by sea
or land. r
ART. 17. All other merchandise and things not compre-
hended in the articles of contraband explicitly enumerated,
and classified as above, shall be held and considered as free,
and subjects of free and lawful commerce, so that they may
be carried and transported in the freest manner by both the
contracting parties, even to places belonging to an enemy, ex-
cepting only those places which are at that time besieged or
blocked up; and to avoid all doubt in this particular, it is de-
clared that those places only are besieged or blockaded which
are actually attacked by a belligerent force capable of prevent-
ing the entry of the neutral.
ART. 18. The articles of contraband, before enumerated
and classified, which may be found in a vessel bound for an
enemy’s port, shall be subject to detention and confiscation,
leaving free the rest of the cargo and the ship, that the owners
may dispose of them as they see proper. No vessel of either
of the two nations shall be detained on the high seas on account
of having on board articles of contraband, whenever the mas-
ter, captain, or supercargo of said vessel will deliver up the ar-
ticles of contraband to the captor, unless the quantity of such
articles be so great, and of so large a bulk, that they cannot
be received on board the capturing ship without great incon-
venience; but in this and in all other cases of just detention,
the vessel detained shall be sent to the nearest convenient and
safe port, for trial and judgment according to law.
1825.
December 5.
Goods not coh-
traband.
Definition of
blockade.
Contraband on-
ly liable to con-
fiscation.
54
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
ARTº. 19º. Y por cuanto frecuentemente sucede que los
Peºemberº buques navegan para un puerto ó lugár perteneciente á un
enemigo, sin saber que aquel esté sitiado, bloqueado ó enves-
tido, se conviene en que todo buque en estas circumstancias se
pueda hacer volver de dicho puerto, ó lugar; pero no será de-
tenido, ni confiscado parte alguna de su cargamento, no siendo
contrabando; á menos que despues de la intimacion de seme-
jante bloqueo ó ataque, por el comandante de las fuerzas blo-
queadoras, intentase otra vez entrar; pero le será permitido ir
á qualquiera otro puerto ó lugar que juzgue conveniente. Ni
ningun buque de una de las partes, que haya entrado en seme-
jante puerto, ó lugar, antes que estuviese sitiado, bloqueado, ó
envestido por la otra, sera impedido de dejar el tal lugar con
su cargamento, ni si fuere hallado alli despues de la rendicion
y entrega de semejante lugár, estará el tal buqueó su cargamen-
to sujeto áconfiscacion, sino que serán restituidos á sus dueños.
ARTº. 20°. Para evitar todo genero de desorden en la visita,
y examen de los buques y cargamentos de ambas partes contra-
tantes en alta mar, han convenido mutuamente, que siempre
que un buque de guerra, publico ó particular se encontrase con
un neutral de la otra parte contratante, el primero permanecerá
fuera de tiro de cañon, y podrá mandár su bote, con dos ó
tres hombres solamente, para ejecutár el dicho examen de los
papeles concernientes á la propiedad y carga del buque, sin
ocasionár la menor estorcion, violencia ó mal tratamiento, por
lo que los comandantes del dicho buque armado serán respon-
sables, con sus personas y bienes; á cuyo efecto los coman-
dantes de buques armados, por cuenta de particulares, estarán
obligados antes de entregarseles sus comisiones ó patentes, á
dar fianza suficiente para respondér de los perjuicios que
causen. Y se ha convenido espresamente, que en ningun caso
se exigira á la parte neutrál, que vaya á bordo del buque ex-
aminadór con el fin de exibir sus papeles, ó para cualquiera
otro objeto sea el que fuere.
ARTº. 21º. Para evitar todo clase de vejamen y abuso en
el examen de los papeles relativos á la propiedad de los buques
pertenecientes á los ciudadanos de las dos partes contratantes,
han convenido y convienen, que en caso de que una de ellas
estuviere en guerra, los buques, y bajeles pertenecientes á los
ciudadanos de la otra, serán provistos con letras de már, o
pasaportes, espresando et nombre, propiedad y tamaño del
buque, como tambien el nombre y lugar de la residencia del
maestre, ó comandante, á fin de que se vea que el buque, real
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA. 55
ART. 19. And whereas it frequently happens that vessels ..., 1825.
sail for a port or place belonging to an enemy, without know- December 5.
ing that the same is besieged, blockaded, or invested, it is I f
agreed, that every vessel so circumstanced, may be turned i. VeS-
away from such port or place, but shall not be detained, nor ; *lºt
shall any part of her cargo, if not contraband, be confiscated, tained, &c.
unless, after warning of such blockade, or investment from
the commanding officer of the blockading forces, she shall
again attempt to enter; but she shall be permitted to go to any
other port or place she shall think proper. Nor shall any vessels enter-
vessel of either, that may have entered into such port before º,
the same was actually besieged, blockaded or invested, quit, unmolest-
by the other, be restrained from quitting such place with her ed, &c.
cargo, nor if found therein after the reduction and surrender,
shall such vessel or her cargo be liable to confiscation, but
they shall be restored to the owners thereof.
ART. 20. In order to prevent all kind of disorder in the During a visit
visiting and examination of the ships and cargoes of both the *:::: *
contracting parties on the high seas, they have agreed mutual- ...
* . * reach of cannon
ly, that whenever a vessel of war, public or private, shall meet shot.
with a neutral of the other contracting party, the first shall
remain out of cannon shot, and may send its boat with two or
three men only in order to execute the said examination of
the papers concerning the ownership and cargo of the vessel,
without causing the least extortion, violence, or ill treatment,
for which the commanders of the said armed ships shall be res-
ponsible with their persons and property; for which purpose
the commanders of the said private armed vessels shall, before
receiving their commissions, give sufficient security to answer
for all the damages they may commit. And it is expressly Neutrals nºt to
tº * go on board the
agreed that the neutral party shall, in no case be required to examining ves.
go on board the examining vessel, for the purpose of exhibit- *
ing her papers, or for any other purpose whatever.
ART. 21. To avoid all kind of vexation and abuse in the In case of war,
examination of the papers relating to the ownership of the ves-É.;;
sels belonging to the citizens of the two contracting parties, #. &c. to be
} h d d d * | º f urnished, ex-
they have agreed, and do agree, that in case one of them pressing to
should be engaged in war, the ships and vessels belonging to º
the citizens of the other must be furnished with sea-letters or
passports, expressing the name, property and bulk of the ship,
as also the name and place of habitation of the master or com-
mander of said vessel, in order that it may thereby appear,
56
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
December 5
y verdaderamente pertenece á los ciudadanos de una de las
partes; y han convenido igualmente, que estando cargados los
espresados buques, ademas de las letras de mar, ó pasaportes,
estarán tambien provistos de certificados, que contengan los
por menores del cargamento, y el lugar de donde salió el
buque, para que asi pueda saberse, si hay á su bordo algunos
efectos prohibidos ó de contrabando, cuyos certificados serán
hechos por los oficiales del lugár de la procedencia del buque,
en la forma acostumbrada, sin cuyos requisitos el dicho buque
puede ser detenido, para ser juzgado por el tribunal compe-
tente, y puede ser declarado buena presa, á menos que satisfagan,
ó suplan el defecto con testimonios enteramente equivalentes.
ARTº. 22º. Se ha convenido ademas, que las estipulaciones
anteriores, relativas al examen y visita de buques, se aplicarán
solamente á los que navegan sin convóy y que cuando los dichos
buques estuvieren bajo de convóy, será bastante la declaracion
verbal del comandante del convó y, bajo su palabra de honór,
de que los buques que están bajo su proteccion pertenecen á
la nacion, cuya bandera llevan, y cuando se dirijen á un puerto
enemigo, que los dichos buques no tienen á su bordo articulos
de contrabando de guerra.
ARTº. 23º. Se ha convenido ademas, que en todos los casos
que ocurran, solo los tribunales establecidos para causas de
presas, en el pais á que las presas sean conducidas, tomarán
conocimiento de ellas. Y siempre que semejante tribunal de
cualquiera de las partes, pronunciase sentencia contra algun
buque, ó efectos, ó propiedad reclamado por los ciudanos de la
otra parte, la sentencia ó decreto hará mencion de las razones
ó motivos en que aquella se haya fundado, y se entregará sin
demora alguna al comandante ó agente de dicho buque, si lo
solicitase, un testimonio autentico de la sentencia, ó decreto,
ó de todo el proceso, pagando por el los derechos legales.
ARTº. 24°. Siempre que una de las partes contratantes
estuviere empeñada en guerra, con otro Estado, ningun ciuda-
dano de la otra parte contratante aceptará una comisionó
letra de marca para el objeto de ayudáró co-operar hostil-
mente con el dicho enemigo, contra la dicha parte que esté
asi en guerra, bajo la pena de ser tratado como pirata.
ARTº. 25º. Si por alguna fatalidad, que no puede esperarse,
y que Dios no permita, las dos partes contratantes se viesen
empeñadas en guerra una con otra, han convenido y convienen
de ahora para entonces, que se concederá el termina de seis
meses á los comerciantes residentes en las costas y en los
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA. 57
that the ship really and truly belongs to the citizens of one ... 1825.
of the parties; they have likewise agreed that such ships be **
ing laden besides the said sea-letters or passports shall also
be provided with certificates containing the several particulars
of the cargo, and the place whence the ship sailed, so that it
may be known whether any forbidden or contraband goods be
on board the same; which certificates shall be made out by the
officers of the place whence the ship sailed, in the accustomed
form; without which requisites, said vessel may be detained,
to be adjudged by the competent tribunal, and may be de-
clared legal prize, unless the said defect shall be satisfied or
supplied by testimony entirely equivalent.
ART, 22. It is further agreed, that the stipulations above yisiting regu:
© © tº a tº • • lations to apply
expressed relative to the visiting and examination of vessels, § to vessels
shall apply only to those which sail without convoy; and when without convoy
said vessels shall be under convoy, the verbal declaration of
the commander of the convoy, on his word of honor, that the
vessels under his protection belong to the nation whose flag he
carries; and when they are bound to an enemy’s port, that they
have no contraband goods on board, shall be sufficient.
ART. 23. It is further agreed, that in all cases the establish- Established
º we º f * courts only to
ed courts for prize causes, in the country to which the prizes tº jºuses
may be conducted, shall alone take cognizance of them. And Motives of con-
whenever such tribunal of either party shall pronounce judg- lºſion to be
ment against any vessel or goods, or property claimed by the
citizens of the other party, the sentence or decree shall mention
the reasons or motives on which the same shall have been foun-
ded, and an authenticated copy of the sentence or decree, and
of all the proceedings in the case, shall, if demanded, be de-
livered to the commander or agent of said vessel, without any
delay, he paying the legal fees for the same.
ART, 24. Whenever one of the contracting parties shall be The neutral
engaged in war with another state, no citizen of the other con- 5. w
tracting party shall accept a commission, or letter of marque, sión to cruise
for the purpose of assisting or co-operating hostilely, with the ...""
said enemy, against the said parties so at war, under the pain
of being treated as a pirate.
ART. 25. If, by any fatality which cannot be expected, and In case of war,
which God forbid, the two contracting parties should be en- tºº.
gaged in a war with each other, they have agreed, and do agree, on the ºt,
gº and 12 for those
now for then, that there shall be allowed the term of six months in the interior
to the merchants residing on the coasts and in the ports of each #. ef-
8 ects, &c.;
58
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
December 5.
puertos de entrambas, y el termino de un año á los que ha-
bitan en el interior, para arreglár sus negocios, y transportár
sus efectos á donde quieran, dandoles el salvo conducto ne-
cesario para ello, que les sirva de suficiente proteccion hasta
que lleguen al puerto que designen. Los ciudadanos de otras
ocupaciones, que se hallen establecidos en los territorios ó
dominios de la Federacion de Centro-America, ó los Estados
Unidos de America, serán respectados, y mantenidos en el
pleno goz0 de su libertad personal y propiedad, á menos que su
conducta particular les haga perdér esta proteccion, que en
consideracion á la humanidad, las partes contratantes se
comprometen á prestarles. -
ARTº. 26º. Ni las deudas contraidas por los individuos de
una Nacion, con los individuos, de la otra, ni las acciones ó
dineros, que puedan tenér en los fondos publicos, ó en los
bancos publicos, ó privados, serán jamas secuestrados ó con-
fiscados en ningun caso de guerra, ó diferencia nacional.
ARTº. 27º. Deseando ambas partes contratantes, evitár
toda diferencia, relativa á etiqueta en sus comunicaciones, y
correspondencias diplomaticas han convenido asi mismo, y
convenien en conceder á sus enviados, ministros, y otros
agentes diplomaticos, los mismos favores, inmunidades, y
esenciones de que gozan, ó gozaren en lo venidero los de las
naciones mas favorecidas, bien entendido que cualquier favór,
inmunidad ó privilegio, que la Federacion de Centro-America,
ó los Estados-Unidos de America, tengan por conveniente dis-
pensár á los enviados, ministros, y agentes diplomaticos de
otras potencias, se haga por el mismo hecho estensivo á los de
una y otra de las partes contratantes.
ARTº. 28º Para hacér mas efectiva la proteccion, que la
Federacion de Centro-America, y los Estados-Unidos de Ame-
rica, darán en adelante á la navegacion y comercio de los ciuda-
danos de una y otra, se convienen en recibir y admitir consules
y vice consules en todos los puertos abiertos al comercio es-
trangero, quienes gozarán en ellos todos los derechos, prerro-
gativas é inmunidadas de los consules, y vice consules de la
nacion mas favorecida, quedando no obstante en libertad cada
parte contratante, para exceptuar aquellos puertos y lugares
en que la admision y residencia de semejantes consules, y
vice consules no parezca conveniente.
ARTº. 29º. Para que los consules, y vice consules de las dos
partes contratantes, puedan gozar los derochos, prerrogativas,
é inmunidades, que les corresponden por su caracter publico,
antes de entrár en el ejercicio de sus funciones, presentarán
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
59
other, and the term of one year to those who dwell in the in-
terior, to arrange their business and transport their effects
wherever they please, giving to them the safe conduct necessa-
ry for it, which may serve as a sufficient protection until they
arrive at the designated port. The citizens of all other occupa-
tions who may be established in the territories or dominions of
the United States and of the Federation of the Centre of Ame-
rica, shall be respected and maintained in the full enjoyment
of their personal liberty and property, unless their particular
conduct shall cause them to forfeit this protection, which, in
consideration of humanity, the contracting parties engage to
give them.
ART. 26. Neither the debts due from individuals of the one
nation to the individuals of the other, nor shares, nor moneys,
which they may have in public funds, nor in public nor private
banks, shall ever, in any event of war, or of national difference,
be sequestered or confiscated.
ART. 27. Both the contracting parties being desirous of
avoiding all inequality in relation to their public communica-
tions and official intercourse, have agreed, and do agree, to
grant to the envoys, ministers, and other public agents, the
same favors, immunities, and exemptions, which those of the
most favored nation do or shall enjoy; it being understood that
whatever favors, immunities, or privileges, the United States
of America or the Federation of the Centre of America may
find it proper to give the ministers and public agents of any
other power, shall, by the same act, be extended to those of
each of the contracting parties.
ART. 28. To make more effectual the protection which the
United States and the Federation of the Centre of America shall
afford in future to the navigation and commerce of the citizens
1825.
December 5.
And no seques-
tation of money
in bank or pub-
lic funds,
Official inter-
course in rela-
tion to pnblic
ministers, &c.
to be on a reci-
procal footing.
Each party per-
mitted to have
consuls in each
others’ ports.
of each other, they agree to receive and admit consuls and -
vice-consuls in all the ports open to foreign commerce, who
shall enjoy in them all the rights, prerogatives, and immunities,
of the consuls and vice-consuls of the most favored nation;
each contracting party, however, remaining at liberty to except
those ports and places in which the admission and residence
of such consuls may not seem convenient.
ART:29. In order that the consuls and vice-consuls of the
two contracting parties may enjoy the rights, prerogatives, and
immunities, which belong to them, by their public character,
they shall, before entering on the exercise of their functions, ex-
Commissions to
be exhibited be
fore exeguatur
is obtained.
60
DIPLOMATIC coDE.
asº º --
1825.
December 5.
su comision ó patente en la forma debida, al gobierno con
quien esten acreditados, y habiendo obtenido el eaequatur,
serán tenidos, y considerados como tales, por todas los autori-
dades, majistrados y habitantes del distrito consular en que
residan. l
ARTº. 30°. Se ha convenido igualmente, que los consules,
sus secretarios, officiales y personas agregadas al servicio de
los consulados (no siendo estas personas ciudadanos del pais
en que el consul reside) estarán esentos de todo servicio pub-
lico, y tambien de toda especie de pechos, impuestos, y con-
tribuciones, exceptuando aquellas que esten obligados á pagar
por razon de comercio, ó propiedad, y á las cuales estan suje-
tos los ciudadanos, y habitantes naturales, y estrangeros del
pais en que residen, quedando en todo lo demas, sujetos a las
leyes de los respectivos estados. Los archivos y papeles de
los consulados serán respetados inviolablemente, y bajo nin-
gun pretesto los ocupará magistrado alguno, ni tendrá en ellos
ninguna intervencion.
ARTº. 31º. Los dichos consules tendrán podér de requerir
el auxilio de las autoridades locales, para la prision, detencion
y custodia de los desertores de buques, publicos y particu-
lares de su pais, y para este objeto se dirigirán á los tribu-
nales, jueces, y oficiales competentes y pedirán los dichos
desertores por escrito, probando por una presentacion de los
registros de los buques, rol del equipage, ú otros documentos
publicos, que aquellos hombres eran parte de las dichas tripu-
laciones, y á esta demanda asi probado (menos no obstante
cuando seprobare lo contrario) no se reusará la entrega. Se-
mejantes desertores, luego que sean arrestados, se pondrán á
disposicion de los dichos consules, y pueden ser depositados
en las prisiones publicas, a solicitud y espensas de los que los
reclamen, para ser enviados á los buques á que corresponden,
ó á otros de la misma nacion. Pero si nó fueren mandados
dentro de dos meses contados desde el dia de su arresto,
serán puestos en libertad, y no volverán a ser presos por la
misma causa.
ARTº. 32º. Para protegérmas efectivamente su comercio y
navegacion, las dos partes contratantes se convienen en for-
mar luego que las circumstancias lo permitan, una convencion
consulár, que declare mas especialmente los poderes é inmu-
niades de los consules y vice consules de las partes respec-
tivas.
ARTº. 38º. La Federacion de Centro-America, y los Esta-
dos Unidos de America, deseando hacer tan duraderas y
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
61
hibit their commission or patentin due form to the government
to which they are accredited; and having obtained their eace-
quatur, they shall be held and considered as such by all the
authorities, magistrates, and inhabitants, in the consular dis-
trict in which they reside.
ART. 30. It is likewise agreed, that the consuls, their sec-
retaries, officers, and persons attached to the service of con-
suls, they not being citizens of the country in which the con-
sul resides, shall be exempt from all public service, and also
from all kind of taxes, imposts, and contributions, except
those which they shall be obliged to pay on account of com-
merce, or their property, to which the citizens and inhabitants,
native and foreign, of the country in which they reside are
subject; being in every thing besides subject to the laws of
the respective states. The archives and papers of the consu-
lates shall be respected inviolably, and under no pretext
whatever shall any magistrate seize, or in any way intefere
with them. -
Aler. 31. The said consuls shall have power to require the
assistance of the authorities of the country for the arrest, de-
tention, and custody of deserters from the public and private
vessels of their country, and for that purpose they shall ad-
dress themselves to the courts, judges, and officers competent,
and shall demand the said deserters in writing, proving by an
exhibition of the registess of the vessel’s or ship’s roll, or other
public documents, that those men were part of the said crews;
and on this demand, so proved, (saving, however, where the
contrary is proved,) the delivery shall not be refused. Such
deserters, when arrested, shall be put at the disposal of the
said consuls, and may be put in the public prisons at the re-
quest and expense of those who reclaim them, to be sent to the
ships to which they belonged, or to others of the same nation.
But if they be not sent back within two months, to be counted
from the day of their arrest, they shall be set at liberty, and
shall be no more arrested for the same cause.
ART. 32. For the purpose of more effectually protecting
their commerce and navigation, the two contracting parties do
hereby agree, as soon hereafter as circumstances will permit
them, to form a consular convention, which shall declare spe-
cially the powers and immunities of the consuls and vice-con-
suls of the respective parties.
ART. 83. The United States of America and the Federa-
tion of the Centre of America, desiring to make as durable as
1825.
December 5.
Consulsexempt
from public ser
vice—their ar-
chives inviolate.
Consuls may
call in the public
authorities to
aid in securing
deserters, who
are not to be
detained more
than 2 months
in prison.
Consular con-
vention to be
formed.
62
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825.
firmes, como las circumstancias lo permitan las reclaciones que
ººººººººº, han de establecerse entre las dos potencias, en virtud del
e
presente tratado ó convencion general de paz, amistad, nave-
gacion y comercio, han declarado solemnemente y convienen
en los puntos siguientes:
1º. El presente tratado permanecerá en su fuerza y vigor
por el termino de doce años contados desde el dia del cange
de las ratificaciones, en todos los puntos concernientes á
comercio y navegacion, y en todos los demas puntos que se
refieren á paz y amistad, será permanente, y perpetuamente
obligatorio para ambas potencias.
2° Si alguno, ó algunos de los ciudadanos de una ú otra
parte infringiesen alguno de los articulos contenidos en el pre-
sente tratado, dichos ciudadanos serán personalmente respon-
sables, sin que por esto se interrumpa la harmonio y buena
correspondencia entre las dos naciones, comprometiendose
cada una a no protegér de modo alguno al ofensor ó sanccionár
semejante violacion.
3°. Si (lo que á la verdad no puede esperarse) desgracia-
damente, alguno de los articulos contenidos en el presente
tratado, fuesen en alguna otra manera violados, ó infringidos,
se estipula espresamente que ninguna de las dos partes con-
tratantes, ordenará, ó autorizará ningunos actos de represalia,
ni declarará la guerra contra la otra por quejas de injurias, ó
daños hasta que la parte que se crea ofeñdida, haya antes pre-
sentado á la otra una esposicion de aquellas injurias, ó daños,
hasta que la parte que se crea ofendida, haya antes presen-
tado a la otra una esposicion de aquellas injurias, ó daños,
verificada con pruebas y testimonios competentes, exigiendo
justicia y satisfaccion, y esto haya sido negado, ó diferido sin
I"3ZOIle
4°. Nada de cuanto se contiene en el presente tratado, se
construirá sin embargo, ni obrará, en contra de otros tratados
publicos anteriores, y existentes con otros soberanos ó Esta-
dos.
El presente tratado de paz, amistad, comercio, y navegacion,
será ratificado por el Gobierno de la Federacion de Centro-
America, por el presidente de los Estados-Unidos de America,
con consejo, y consentimiento del senado de los mismos; y
las ratificaciones serán cangeadas en la ciudad de Guatemala
dentro de ocho meses contados desde este dia, ó antes si fuese
posible.
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA. 63
circumstances will permit, the relations which are to be esta- D .
blished between the two parties by virtue of this Treaty, or “” 5.
General Convention of Peace, Amity, Commerce, and Navi. The following
gation, have declared solemnly, and do agree to the following points agreed
... • to.
points:
1st. The present Treaty shall remain in full force and virtue Treaty to re-
for the term of twelve years, to be counted from the day of the tº:
exchange of the ratifications, in all the parts relating to com-
merce and navigation; and in all those parts which relate to Peace perpetu-
e e ‘e al. .
peace and friendship, it shall be permanently and perpetually
binding on both powers.
2ndly. If any one or more of the citizens of either party shall Citizens respon *
* * * º g tº a tº sible for in-
infringe any of the articles of this treaty, such citizen shall fringing this ar:
be held personally responsible for the same, and the harmony “le.
and good correspondence between the nations shall not be in-
terrupted thereby; each party engaging in no way to protect
the offender, or sanction such violation.
3dly. If, (which indeed, cannot be expected) unfortunately, war not to be
any of the articles contained in the present treaty shall be declared, until
violated or infringed in any other way whatever, it is expressly º#º.
stipulated, that neither of the contracting parties will order flºon is re-
or authorize any acts of reprisal, nor declare war against the
other, on complaints of injuries or damages, until the said
party considering itself offended, shall first have presented to
the other a statement of such injuries or damages, verified by
competent proof, and demanded justice and satisfaction, and
the same shall have been either refused or unreasonably
delayed.
4thly. Nothing in this treaty contained, shall, however, be other treaties
construed, or operate contrary to former and existing public nºt tº be ºutra
tº º * vened by this.
treaties with other sovereigns or states.
The present treaty of peace, amity, commerce, and naviga- Ratification
tion, shall be approved and ratified by the president of the .*
United States of America, by and with the advice and consent
of the senate thereof, and by the government of the Federa-
tion of the Centre of America, and the ratifications shall be
exchanged in the city of Guatemala, within eight months,
from the date of the signature hereof, or sooner if possible.
64 DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1825. En fe de lo cual nosotros los plenipotenciarios de la Federa-
December 5. cion de Centro-America, y de los Estados-Unidos de
America hemos firmado y sellado las presentes.
Dada en la Ciudad de Washington, el dia cinco de
Deciembre, del año del senor mil ochocientos vein-
ticinco, quinto de la independencia de la Federa-
cion de Centro-America y quinquagesimo de la de
los Estados-Unidos de America, per duplicado.
DL. s.] ANTONIO JOSE CAÑAS,
L. s. H. CLAY.
**
65
TREATY WITH CENTRAL AMERICA.
In faith whereof, we, the plenipotentiaries of the United
1825.
States of America, and of the Federation of the Centre of ***
America, have signed and sealed these presents.
Done in the city of Washington, on the fifth day of
December, in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and twenty-five, in the fiftieth year of
the Independence of the United States of America,
and the fifth of that of the Federation of the Centre
of America, in duplicate.
[L. s.] H. CLAY. *
[L. s.] ANTONIO JOSE CANAS.
And whereas the said convention has been duly ratified on
both parts, and the respective ratifications of the same were
exchanged at Guatemala, on the second day of August, one
thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, by John Williams,
Chargé d’Affaires of the United States, near the government
of the Federation of the Centre of America, and Pedro Gon-
zales, chief officer of the department of state, despatch, war,
and marine, Secretary of Legation of the Republic of Central
America, near the governments of South America, on the
part of their respective governments.
Now, therefore, be it known, that I, John QUINCY ADAMS,
President of the United States, have caused the said conven-
tion to be made public, to the end that the same, and every
clause and article thereof, may be observed and fulfilled with
good faith by the United States and the citizens thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and
caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington, this twenty-eighth
day of October, in the year of our Lord one thou-
[1... s.] sand eight hundred and twenty-six, and of the In-
dependence of the United States the fifty-first.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
. By the President:
H. CLAy, Secretary of State.
Ratification.
66
BIPLOMATIC CODE,
1828.
December 12.
Negotiators ap-
pointed to con-
clude a treaty.
Firm and invio-
lable peace, &c
Favors of com-
merce to be
common to both
parties.
TREATY WITH BRAZIL.
[JVegotiated in the English Language.]
By the President of the United States of America. A Proclamation:
Whereas a Treaty or General Convention of Peace, Friendship, Commerce
and Navigation, between the United States of America and his Majesty the
Emperor of Brazil, was concluded and signed at Rio de Janeiro, on the twelfth
day of December, 1828, which Treaty or General Convention is, word for
word, as follows:
In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity:
The United States of America, and his Majesty the Empe-
ror of Brazil, desiring to establish a firm and permanent peace
and friendship between both nations, have resolved to fix, in
a manner clear, distinct, and positive, the rules which shall
in future be religiously observed between the one and the
other, by means of a treaty, or general convention of peace,
friendship, commerce, and navigation.
For this most desirable object, the President of the United
States has conferred full powers on William Tudor, their
Chargé d’Affaires at the Court of Brazil; and his Majesty the
Emperor of Brazil on the most illustrious and most excellent
Marquez of Aracaty, a member of his council, gentleman of
the imperial bed chamber, councillor of the treasury, grand
cross of the order of Aviz, senator of the empire, minister and
secretary of state for foreign affairs, and Miguel de Souza
Mello e Alvim, a member of his council, commander of the
order of Aviz, knight of the imperial order of the cross, chief
of division in the imperial and national navy, minister and se-
cretary of state for the marine, who, after having exchanged
their said full powers in due and proper form, have agreed to
the following articles:
ART. 1. There shall be a perfect, firm, and inviolable peace
and friendship between the United States of America and their
citizens, and his Imperial Majesty, his successors and sub-
jects throughout their possessions and territories respectively,
without distinction of persons or places.
ART. 2. The United States of America and his Majesty the
Emperor of Brazil, desiring to live in peace and harmony with
all the other nations of the earth, by means of a policy frank
and equally friendly with all, engage, mutually, not to grant
any particular favor to other nations in respect of commerce
and navigation, which shall not immediately become common
TREATY with BRAZIL.
67
to the other party, who shall enjoy the same freely, if the
concession was freely made, or on allowing the same compen-
sation, if the concession was conditional. It is understood,
however, that the relations and conventions which now exist,
or may hereafter exist, between Brazil and Portugal, shall
form an exception to this article.
ART. 3. The two high contracting parties, being likewise
desirous of placing the commerce and navigation of their re-
spective countries on the liberal basis of perfect equality and
reciprocity, mutually agree that the citizens and subjects of
each may frequent all the coasts and countries of the other,
and reside and trade there, in all kinds of produce, manufac-
tures, and merchandize ; and they shall enjoy all the rights,
privileges, and exemptions, in navigation and commerce, which
native citizens do or shall enjoy, submitting themselves to the
laws, decrees, and usages, there established, to which native
citizens and subjects are subjected. But it is understood that
this article does not include the coasting trade of either coun-
try, the regulation of which is reserved by the parties, respec-
tively, according to their own separate laws.
ART. 4. They likewise agree, that whatever kind of pro-
duce, manufactures, or merchandize of any foreign country,
can be, from time to time, lawfully imported into the United
States, in their own vessels, may be also imported in vessels
of Brazil; and that no higher or other duties upon the tonnage
of the vessel and her cargo, shall be levied and collected, whe-
ther the importation be made in vessels of the one country, or
of the other. And, in like manner, that whatever kind of
produce, manufactures or merchandize, of any foreign coun-
try, can be, from time to time, lawfully imported into the
Empire of Brazil, in its own vessels, may be also import; in
vessels of the United States; and that no higher or other du-
ties, upon the tonnage of the vessel and her cargo, shall be le-
vied or collected, whether the importation be made in vessels
of the one country, or of the other. And they agree, that
whatever may be lawfully exported, or re-exported, from the
one country, in its own vessels, to any foreign country, may,
in like manner, be exported, or re-exported, in the vessels of
the other country. And the same bounties, duties and draw-
backs, shall be allowed and collected, whether such exporta-
tion or re-exportation, be made in vessels of the United States,
or of the Empire of Brazil. The government of the United
States, however, considering the present state of the naviga-
tion of Brazil, agrees that a vessel shall be considered as Bra-
1828.
December 12.
Mutual benefits
in trade and re-
sidence to be e-
qually enjoyed.
Each party may
carry its own
produce to the
republic of the
other—-equali-
zation of duties
established,and
to be the basis
of all trade.
68 DIPLOMATIC CODE. ºr gº gº
1828..., zilian, when the proprietor and captain are subjects of Brazil
** and the papers are in legal form.
º ART. 5. No higher or other duties shall be imposed on the
Importations . $º º * tº
importation into the United States of any articles, the produce
and exporta-
ºtá: or manufactures of the Empire of Brazil, and no higher or
ing. other duties shall be imposed on the importation into the Em-
pire of Brazil, of any articles, the produce or manufactures of
the United States, than are or shall be, payable on the like
articles, being the produce or manufactures of any other for-
eign country; nor shall any higher or other duties or charges,
be imposed in either of the two countries, on the exportation
of any articles to the United States, or to the Empire of Bra-
zil, respectively, than such as are payable on the exportation
of the like articles to any other foreign country; nor shall any
§º partial pro- prohibition be imposed on the exportation or importation of any
hibitions to be * e
established. articles, the produce or manufactures of the United States, or
of the Empire of Brazil, to or from the territories of the Uni-
ted States, or to or from the territories of the Empire of Bra-
- zil, which shall not equally extend to all other nations,
Merchants, ART. 6. It is likewise agreed that it shall be wholly free
commanders of & { } . e.
ships, and other for all merchants, commanders of ships, and other citizens or
.*.* subjects of both countries, to manage themselves their own bu-
. their siness in all ports and places subject to the jurisdiction of each
jº º, other, as well with respect to the consignment and sale of their
*...*.*.* goods and merchandise by wholesale or retail, as with respect
most favored tº tº & e e
nation. to the loading, unloading, and sending off their ships, they
being in all these cases to be treated as citizens or subjects
of the country in which they reside, or at least to be placed
on a footing with the subjects or citizens of the most favored
nation.
Citizens of nei- ºr 7. The citizens and subjects of neither of the con-
*:::::::::: tracting parties shall be liable to any embargo, nor be detain-
shall beliable ed with their vessels, cargoes, merchandise or effects, for any
to any embar- tº ºi º tº a º * *
go, &c. military expedition, nor for any public or private purpose,
whatever, without allowing to those interested a sufficient in-
demnification.
Whenever the ART. 8. Whenever the citizens or subjects of either of the
citizens of eith- e * *
er party seek contracting parties shall be forced to seek refuge or asylum in
...tº; in the the rivers, bays, ports, or dominions, of the other, with their
dominions, &c. g tº
of the other, vessels, whether merchant or of war, public or private, through
*::::...” * stress of weather, pursuit of pirates, or enemies, they shall be
friends, &c. received and treated with humanity, giving to them all favor
and protection for repairing their ships, procuring provisions.
TREATY WITH BRAZIL.
69
and placing themselves in a situation to continue their voyage
without obstacle or hindrance of any kind.
ART. 9. All the ships, merchandise, and effects beionging to
the citizens or subjects of one of the contracting parties, which
may be captured by pirates, whether within the limits of its ju-
risdiction, or on the high seas, and may be carried or found in
the rivers, roads, ports, bays, or dominions, of the other, shall
be delivered up to the owners, they proving in due and pro-
per form, their rights before the competent tribunals; it being
well understood that the claim should be made within the term
of one year by the parties themselves, their attorneys, or
agents of their respective governments.
ART. 10. When any vessel belonging to the citizens or sub-
jects of either of the contracting parties shall be wrecked,
foundered, or shall suffer any damage on the coasts, or within
the dominions of the other, there shall be given to them all
assistance and protection in the same manner which is usual
and customary with the vessels of the nation where the damage
happens, permitting them to unload said vessel, if necessary,
of its merchandise and effects, without exacting for it any duty,
impost, or contribution whatever, until they may be exported,
unless they be destined for consumption.
ART, 11. The citizens or subjects of each of the contract-
ing parties shall have power to dispose of their personal goods
within the jurisdiction of the other, by sale, donation, testa-
1828.
December 12.
All ships, &c.
belonging to
the citizens of
either party
captured by pi-
rates, and found
within the do-
minions of eith-
er, to be deli-
vered up to the
OW ner’Se
Assistance and
protection to be
rendered in
case of wrecks,
&c. within the
dominions of
each other.
Citizens of each
party shall have
power to dis-
pose of their
oGds and ef-
ment, or otherwise, and their representatives, being citizens of É. within the
the other party, shall succeed to the said personal goods, whe-
ther by testament or ab intestato, and they may take posses-
sion thereof, either by themselves or others acting for them,
and dispose of the same at their will, paying such dues only as
the inhabitants of the country, wherein the said goods are,
jurisdiction of
the other, by
sale, testament,
or otherwise.
shall be subject to pay in like cases: And if, in the case of Alien heirs al-
real estate, the said heirs, would be prevented from entering ..."
ſº º e © º pose of
into the possession of the inheritance, on account of their their property.
character of aliens, there shall be granted to them the term of
three years to dispose of the same, as they may think proper,
and to withdraw the proceeds without molestation, nor any
other charges than those which are imposed by the laws of the
country.
ART. 12. Both the contracting parties promise and engage, Complete pro-
formally to give their special protection to the persons and .*.* #:
property of the citizens and subjects of each other, of all occu- perty in the ter
pations, who may be in their territories subject to the juris-
ritories of both
* . s nations, legal
diction of the one or the other, transient or dwelling therein,
redress, &c.
f
70
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
December 12.
Liberty of con-
science and
rites of burial
secured.
Both parties at
liberty to trade
with those at
enmity with ei-
ther,&c.
Free ships to
make free
goods.
All persons on
board, except
those in the ac-
tual service of
an enemy to be
free.
leaving open and free to them the tribunals of justice for their
judicial intercourse, on the same terms which are usual and
customary, with the natives or citizens and subjects of the
country in which they may be; for which they may employ,
in defence of their rights, such advocates, solicitors, notaries,
agents, and factors, as they may judge proper, in all their
trials at law.
ART. 13. It is likewise agreed that the most perfect and en-
tire security of conscience shall be enjoyed by the citizens or
subjects of both the contracting parties, in the countries sub-
ject to the jurisdiction of the one and the other, without their
being liable to be disturbed or molested on account of their
religious belief, so long as they respect the laws and establish-
ed usages of the country. Moreover, the bodies of the citizens
and subjects of one of the contracting parties, who may die in
the territories of the other, shall be buried in the usual burying
grounds, or in other decent or suitable places, and shall be
protected from violation or disturbance.
ART. 14. It shall be lawful for the citizens and subjects of
the United States of America and of the Empire of Brazil, to
sail with their ships, with all manner of liberty and security,
no distinction being made, who are the proprietors of the mer-
chandise laden thereon, from any port to the places of those
who now are or who hereafter shall be, at enmity with either of
the contracting parties. It shall likewise be lawful for the citi-
zens and subjects aforesaid, to sail with the ships and merchan-
dises before mentioned, and to trade with the same liberty
and security from the places, ports, and havefis, of those who
are enemies of either party, without any opposition or distur-
bance whatsoever, not only directly from the places of the ene-
my, before mentioned, to neutral places, but also from one
place belonging to an enemy to another place belonging to an
enemy, whether they be under the jurisdiction of one power or
under several. And it is hereby stipulated, that free ships
shall also give freedom to goods, and that every thing shall
be deemed to be free and exempt, which shall be found on
board the ships belonging to the citizens or subjects of either
of the contracting parties although the whole lading, or any
part thereof should appertain to the enemies of either, contra-
band goods being always excepted. It is also agreed, in like
manner, that the same liberty be extended to persons who are
on board a free ship, with this effect, that although they be ene-
mies to both or either party, they are not to be taken out of
that free ship, unless they are officers or soldiers, and in the
TREATY WITH BRAZIL.
71
actual service of the enemies: Provided, however, and it is
hereby agreed, that the stipulations in this article contained,
declaring that the flag shall cover the property, shall be un-
derstood as applying to those powers only who recognise this
principle; but if either of the two contracting parties should be
at war with a third, and the other neutral, the flag of the neu-
tral shall cover the property of enemies whose governments
acknowledge this principle, and not of others.
ART. 15. It is likewise agreed, that in the case where the
neutral flag of one of the contracting parties shall protect the
property of the enemies of the other, by virtue of the above stipu-
lation, it shall always be understood that the neutral property
found on board such enemies vessels shall be held and consi-
dered as enemies property, and as such shall be liable to de-
tention and confiscation, except such property as was put on
board such vessel before the declaration of war, or even after-
wards, if it were done without the knowledge of it; but the
contracting parties agree, that four months having elapsed
after the declaration, their citizens shall not plead ignorance
thereof. On the contrary, if the flag of the neutral does not pro-
tect the enemy’s property, in that case the goods and mer-
chandise of the neutral, embarked in such enemy’s ship shall
be free.
ART. 16. This liberty of commerce and navigation shall ex-
tend to all kinds of merchandises, excepting those only which
are distinguished by the name of contraband, and under this
name of contraband, or prohibited goods, shall be compre-
hended—
1st. Cannons, mortars, howitzers, swivels, blunderbusses,
muskets, fuzées, rifles, carbines, pistols, pikes, swords, sabres,
lances, spears, halberds, and granades, bombs, powder, match-
es, balls, and all other things belonging to the use of these
al’II1S.
2dly. Bucklers, helmets, breast-plates, coats of mail, infan-
try belts, and clothes made up in the form and for a military
ll Se.
3dly. Cavalry belts, and horses with their furniture.
4thly. And generally all kinds of arms and instruments of
iron, steel, brass and copper, or of any other materials manu-
factured, prepared and formed, expressly to make war by sea
or land.
ART. 17. All other merchandise and things not compre-
hended in the articles of contraband expressly enumerated,
and classified as above, shall be held and considered as free,
1828.
Tecember 12.
Flag covering
the property to
be applied to
those powers,
only, who ac-
knowledge the
principle.
Enemy’s pro-
perty, to be
protected by a
neutral flag,
must be ship-
ped two months
before declara-
tion of war, &c.
Contraband
specified.
Goods not cons'
traband.
72
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
December 12.
Definition of
blockade.
Contraband on-
ly liable to con-
fiscation.
In cases of
blockade, ves-
sels to be noti-
fied but not de-
tained, &c.
Vessels enter-
ing before
blockade, may
quit unmolest-
ed, &c.
and subjects of free and lawful commerce, so that they may
be carried and transported in the freest manner by both the
contracting parties, even to places belonging to an enemy, CX-
cepting only those places which are at that time besieged or
blockaded; and to avoid all doubt in this particular, it is de-
clared that those places only are besieged or blockaded which
are actually attacked by a belligerent force capable of prevent-
ing the entry of the neutral.
ART. 18. The articles of contraband, before enumerated
and classified, which may be found in a vessel bound for an
enemies port, shall be subject to detention and confiscation,
leaving free the rest of the cargo and the ship, that the owners
may dispose of them as they see proper. No vessel of either
of the two nations shall be detained on the high seas on account
of having on board articles of contraband, whenever the mas-
ter, captain, or supercargo of said vessel will deliver up the ar-
ticles of contraband to the captor, unless the quantity of such
articles be so great, and of so large a bulk, that they cannot
be received on board the capturing ship without great incon-
venience; but in this and in all other cases of just detention,
the vessel detained shall be sent to the nearest convenient and
safe port, for trial and judgment according to law.
ART. 19. And whereas it frequently happens that vessels
sail for a port or place belonging to an enemy, without know-
ing that the same is besieged, blockaded, or invested, it is
agreed, that every vessel so circumstanced, may be turned
away from such port or place, but shall not be detained, nor
shall any part of her cargo, if not contraband, be confiscated,
unless, after warning of such blockade, or investment from
any officer commanding a vessel of the blockading forces, she
shall again attempt to enter; but she shall be permitted to go to
any other port or place she shall think proper. Nor shall any
vessel of either, that may have entered into such port before
the same was actually besieged, blockaded or invested,
by the other, be restrained from quitting such place with her
cargo, nor if found therein after the reduction and surrender,
shall such vessel or her cargo be liable to confiscation, but
they shall be restored to the owners thereof. And if any ves-
sel having thus entered the port before the blockade took place,
shall take on board a cargo after the blockade be established,
she shall be subject to being warned by the blockading forces
to return to the port blockaded, and discharge the said cargo,
and if after receiving the said warning the vessel shall persist
in going out with the cargo, she shall be liable to the same
TREATY WITH BRAZIL, 73
consequences as a vessel attempting to enter a blockaded port , 1828.
after being warned off by the blockading forces. December 12.
ART. 20. In order to prevent all kind of disorder in the . . * *
visiting and examination of the ships and cargoes of both the º º
contracting parties on the high seas, they have agreed mutual- ...”.”
ly, that whenever a vessel of war, public or private, shall meet reach of cannon
with a neutral of the other contracting party, the first shall ”
remain at the greatest distance compatible, with making the
visit under the circumstances of the sea and wind and the de-
gree of suspicion attending the vessel to be visited, and shall
send its smallest boat, in order to execute the said examina-
tion of the papers concerning the ownership and cargo of the
vessel, without causing the least extortion, violence, or ill treat-
ment, for which the commanders of the said armed ships shall
be responsible with their persons and property; for which pur-
pose the commanders of the said private armed vessels shall,
before receiving their commissions, give sufficient security to
answer for all the damages they may commit; and it is ex- Neutrals not to
pressly agreed, that the neutral party shall in no case be re- :*:
quired to go on board the examining vessel, for the purpose of sel.
exhibiting her papers, or for any other purpose whatever.
ARt. 21. To avoid all kind of vexation and abuse in the in case of war,
examination of the papers relating to the ownership of the ves- §: :
sels belonging to the citizens and subjects of the two contract- . . to he
ing parties, they have agreed, and do agree, that in case one i. €X-
of them shall be engaged in war, the ships and vessels belong- whom the pro-
ing to the citizens or subjects of the other, must be furnished ”*
with sea-letters or passports, expressing the name, property,
and bulk of the ship, as also the name and place of habitation
of the master or commander of said vessel, in order that it may
thereby appear, that the ship really and truly belongs to the
citizens or subjects of one of the parties; they have likewise
agreed that such ships being laden, besides the said sea-letters
or passports, shall also be provided with certificates contain-
ing the several particulars of the cargo, and the place whence
the ship sailed, so that it may be known whether any forbid-
den or contraband goods be on board the same; which certifi-
cates shall be made out by the officers of the place whence the
ship sailed, in the accustomed form; without such requisites
said vessel may be detained, to be adjudged by the competent
tribunal, and may be declared legal prize, unless the said
defect shall be proved to be owing to accident, and be satis-
fied or supplied by testimony entirely equivalent.
10
74
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
December 12.
Visiting regu-
lations to apply
only to vessels
without convoy
Established
courts only to
try prize causes
Motives of con-
demnation to be
stated.
The neutral
party not to ac-
cept a commis-
sion to cruise
against the
other.
In case of war,
6 months al-
lowed to those
on the coast,
and 12 for those
in the interior
to remove ef-
fects, &c.
And no seques-
tation of mone
in bank or pub-
lic funds,
ART. 22. It is further agreed, that the stipulations above
expressed, relative to the visiting and examining of vessels,
shall apply only to those which sail without convoy; and when
said vessels shall be under convoy, the verbal declaration of
the commander of the convoy, on his word of honor, that the
vessels under his protection belong to the nation whose flag he
carries; and when they are bound to an enemies port, that they
have no contraband goods on board, shall be sufficient.
ART. 23. It is further agreed, that in all cases the establish-
ed courts for prize causes, in the countries to which the prizes
may be conducted, shall alone take cognizance of them. And
whenever such tribunal of either party shall pronounce judg-
ment against any vessel or goods, or property claimed by the
citizens or subjects of the other party, the sentence or decree
shall mention the reasons or motives, on which the same shall
have been founded, and an authenticated copy of the sentence
or decree, and of all the proceedings in the case, shall, if de-
manded, be delivered to the commander or agent of said ves-
sel, without any delay, he paying the legal fees for the same.
ART. 24. Whenever one of the eontracting parties shall be
engaged in war with another state, no citizen or subject of the
other contracting party, shall accept a commission, or letter of
marque, for the purpose of assisting, or co-operating hostilely,
with the said enemy, against the said party so at war, under
the pain of being treated as a pirate.
ARF. 25. If, by any fatality which cannot be expected, and
which God forbid, the two contracting parties should be en-
gaged in a war with each other, they have agreed, and do agree,
now for them, that there shall be allowed the term of six months
to the merchants residing on the coasts and in the ports of each
other, and the term of one year to those who dwell in the in-
terior, to arrange their business and transport their effects
wherever they please, giving to them the safe conduct necessa-
ry for it, which may serve as a sufficient protection until they
arrive at the designated port. The citizens and subjects of all
other occupations who may be established in the territories or
dominions of the United States and of the Empire of Brazil,
shall be respected and maintained in the full enjoyment of
their personal liberty and property, unless their particular con-
duct shall cause them to forfeit this protection, which, in con-
sideration of humanity, the contracting parties engage to give
them.
ART. 26. Neither the debts due from individuals of the one
nation to the individuals of the other, nor shares, nor money,
TREATY WITH BRAZIL.
75
which they may have in public funds, nor in public nor private
banks, shall ever, in any event of war, or national difference,
be sequestrated or confiscated.
ART. 27. Both the contracting parties being desirous of
avoiding all inequality in relation to their public communica-
tions and official intercourse, have agreed, and do agree, to
grant to the envoys, ministers, and other public agents, the
same favors, immunities, and exemptions, which those of the
most favored nation do or shall enjoy; it being understood that
whatever favors, immunities, or privileges, the United States
of America or the Empire of Brazil may find it proper to give
the ministers and public agents of any other power, shall, by
the same act, be extended to those of each of the contracting
arties.
ART, 28. To make more effectual the protection which the
United States and the Empire of Brazil shall afford in future
to the navigation and commerce of the citizens and subjects
of each other, they agree to receive and admit consuls and
vice-consuls in all the ports open to foreign commerce, who
shall enjoy in them all the rights, prerogatives, and immunities,
of the consuls and vice-consuls of the most favored nations;
each contracting party, however, remaining at liberty to except
those ports and places in which the admission and residence
of such consuls may not seem convenient.
ART.29. In order that the consuls and vice-consuls of the
two contracting parties may enjoy the rights, prerogatives, and
immunities, which belong to them, by their public character,
they shall, before entering on the exercise of their functions, ex-
hibit their commission or patentin due form to the government
to which they are accredited; and having obtained their eace-
quatur, they shall be held and considered as such by all the
authorities, magistrates, and inhabitants, in the consular dis-
trict in which they reside.
ART. 30. It is likewise agreed, that the consuls, their se-
cretaries, officers, and persons attached to the service of con-
suls, they not being citizens of the country in which the con-
sul resides, shall be exempt from all public service, and also
from all kind of taxes, imposts, and contributions, except
those which they shall be obliged to pay on account of com-
merce, or their property, to which the citizens or subjects and
inhabitants, native and foreign, of the country in which they
reside are subject; being in every thing besides subject to the
laws of their respective states. The archives and papers of
the consulate shall be respected inviolably, and under no
1828.
December 12.
Official inter-
course in rela-
tion to pnblic
ministers, &c.
to be on a reci-
procal footing:
Each party pere
mitted to have
consuls in each
others’ ports,
Commissions to
be exhibited be
fore exeguatur
is obtained.
Consulsexempt
from public ser
vice—their ar-
chives inviolate.
76 DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828. pretext whatever, shall any magistrate seize, or in any way
December 12, interfere with them.
$º. may. ART. 31. The said consuls shall have power to require the
* assistance of the authorities of the country for the arrest, de-
...sºuring tention, and custody of deserters from public and private ves-
deserters, who º
are not to be sels of their country, and for that purpose they shall address
*::::::: themselves to the courts, judges, and officers competent, and
in prison. shall demand the said deserters in writing, proving by an exhi-
bition of the registers of the vessels or ships roll, or other pub-
lic documents, that those men were part of the said crews; and
on this demand, so proved, (saving, however, where the con-
trary is proved,) the delivery shall not be refused. Such de-
serters, when arrested, shall be put at the disposal of the said
consuls, and may be put in the public prison, at the request
and expense of those who reclaim them, to be sent to the ships
to which they belonged, or to others of the same nation. But
if they be not sent back within two months, to be counted from
the day of their arrest, they shall be set at liberty, and shall
no more be arrested for the same cause.
Consular con- ART. 82. For the purpose of more effectually protecting
*.*.* their commerce and navigation, the two contracting parties do
hereby agree, as soon hereafter as circumstances will permit
them, to form a consular convention, which shall declare spe-
cially the powers and immunities of the consuls and vice-con-
suls of the respective parties.
The following ART. 83. The United States of America and the Emperor
.**** of Brazil, desiring to make as durable as circumstances will
permit, the relations which are to be established between the
two parties by virtue of this treaty, or general convention of
peace, amity, commerce, and navigation, have declared so-
lemnly, and do agree to the following points:
Treaty to re- 1st. The present treaty shall be in force for twelve years
º: from the date hereof, and further until the end of one year
after either of the contracting parties shall have given notice
to the other, of its intention to terminate the same: each of
the contracting parties reserving to itself the right of giving
such notice to the other, at the end of said term of twelve
years; and it is hereby agreed between them, that on the
expiration of one year after such notice shall have been re-
ceived by either, from the other party, this treaty in all the
parts relating to commerce and navigation, shall altogether
cease and determine, and in all those parts which relate to
* perpetu- peace and friendship, it shall be permanently and perpetually.
º binding on both powers.
TREATY WITH BRAZIL. 77
2ndly. If any one or more of the citizens or subjects of either 1828.
party shall infringe any of the articles of this treaty, such citi- *ember 12.
zen or subject shall be held personally responsible for the ...
º & A Citizens respon
same, and the harmony and good correspondence between the sible for in:
nations shall not be interrupted thereby; each party engaging *s this ar.
in no way to protect the offender, or sanction such violation.
3dly. If, (which indeed, cannot be expected) unfortunately, War not to be
any of the articles contained in the present treaty shall be ..."
violated or infringed in any way whatever, it is expressly sti- is made, and sa-
tº * * ſº tisfaction is re-
pulated, that neither of the contracting parties will order or fused.
authorize any acts of reprisal, nor declare war against the
other, on complaints of injuries or damages, until the said
party considering itself offended, shall first have presented to
the other a statement of such injuries or damages, verified by
competent proof, and demanded justice and satisfaction, and
the same shall have been either refused or unreasonably
delayed.
4thly. Nothing in this treaty contained, shall, however, be other treaties
construed, or operate contrary to former and existing public . º, *
treaties with other sovereigns or states.
The present treaty of peace, amity, commerce, and naviga- Ratification
tion, shall be approved and ratified by the president of the Mººght
tº ſº * months.
United States by and with the advice and consent of the senate
thereof, and by the Emperor of Brazil, and the ratifications
shall be exchanged within eight months from the date of the
signature hereof, or sooner if possible.
3.
In faith whereof, we, the plenipotentiaries of the United
States of America, and of his Majesty the Emperor of
Brazil, have signed and sealed these presents.
Done in the city of Rio de Janeiro, this twelfth day of
December, in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ, one
thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight.
(Signed)
W. TUDOR, [L. S.]
MARQUEZ de ARAC ATY, [L. S.]
MIGUEL de SOUZAMELLO e ALVIM, [L. s.]
And whereas, the said Treaty or General Convention has Ratification.
been duly ratified on both parts, and the respective ratifica-
tions of the same have, this day, been exchanged at Wash-
ington, by James A: Hamilton, acting secretary of state of
78
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
the United States, and the Chevalier Je. Silvestre Rebello,
*** chargé d'affaires of his Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, on the
part of their respective governments:
Now, therefore, be it known, that I, ANDREw JAckson,
Fresident of the United States of America, have caused the
said Treaty or General Convention to be made public, to the
end that the same, and every clause and article thereof, may
be observed and fulfilled with good faith by the United States
and the citizens thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and
caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington, this eighteenth day
of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand
| L. s.] eight hundred and twenty-nine, and of the Inde-
pendence of the United States the fifty-third.
ANDREW JACKSON.
By the President:
JAMEs A. HAMILTON, acting Secretary of State.
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
81*
Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between the
United States of America, and the United Mexican States.
By the President of the United States of America.
A Proclatuation.
When EAs a treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, between the United
States of America and the United Mexican States. was concluded attſ signed
by th: Plenipotentiaries of the two countries, at Mexicº, on the fifth April,
one thousand eight hundred and thirty-one; which treaty is word for word as
follows:
The United States of Amer-
ica and the United Mexican
States, desiring to establish
upon a firm basis the relations
of friendship that so happily
subsist between the two Re-
publics, have determined to fix
in a clear and positive manner
the rules which shall in future
be religiously observed be-
tween both, by means of a
treaty of Amity, Commerce,
and Navigation. For which
important object, the President
of the United States of Amer-
ica has appointed Anthony
Butler, a citizen of the United
States,and Chargé d’Affaires of
the United States of America
near the United Mexican
States, with full powers; and
the Vice-Preident of the Unit.
ed Mexican States, in the ex-
ercise of the Executive power,
having conferred like full pow
ers on his Excellency Lucas
Alaman, Secretary of State
for Home and Foreign Affairs,
and his Excellency Raphael
Mangino, Secretary of the
Treasury; and the aforesaid
Plenipotentiaries after having
compared and exchanged in
due form their several powers
as aforesaid, have agreed upon
the following articles:
I,0s Estados Unidos de
America v los Estados Unidos
Mexicanos deseasos deafirmar
sobre bases solidas las rela-
ciones de amistad y comercio
que felizmente ecsisten entre
ambaskeptiblicas, han resuelto
fijar de una manera clara y
positiva las reglas que han de
observarse en lo sucesivo reli-
giosamente entre ambas, por
medio de un tratado de Amis-
tad, Comercio, y Navegacion.
Para cuyo importante objeto,
el Presidente de los Estados
Unidos de America há confer-
ido plenos poderes al ciuda-
dano de los mismos Estados
Antonio Butler, Encargado
de Negocios cerca de los
Estados Unidos Mexicanos; y
el Vice-Presidente de los
Estados Unidos Mexicanos en
ejercicio del poder Ejecutivo
al Ecselentisimo Señor Don
Lucas Alaman, Secretario de
Estado y del Despacho de
Relaciones Esteriores é Inte-
riores.yal ecselentisimo Señor
Don Rafael Mangino, Secreta-
rio de Estado y del Despacho
de Hacienda; los cuales, des-
pues de haber cambiado sus
plenos poderes, han convenido
en los articulos siguientes:
11:
1881.
April 5.
Object—amica-
ble allustment
of c mt we’ree
and navigation.
Negotiators.
*82
IXIPLOMATIC CODE.
1931.
April 5.
Universal peace
and sincere
friendship.
Basis—perfect
equality and
reciprocity.
Freedom to vi-
sit al) ports, hire
warehouses,&c.
Duties, &c.
Same as most
favored nations.
Coasting trade
always except-
ed.
Duties on im-
ortation into
Mexico, same
as on like arti-
cles into the
United States.
ART. 1. There shall be a firm, inviolable, and universal
peace, and a true and sincere friendship between the United
States of America and the United Mexican States in all the
extent of their posessions and territories, and between their
people and citizens respectively, without distinction of per-
sons or places.
ART. 2. The United States of America and the United
Mexican States, designing to take for the basis of their agree-
ment the most perfect equality and reciprocity, engage mutu-
ally not to grant any particular favor to other nations in re-
spect of commerce and navigation, which shall not immediately
become common to the other party; who shall enjoy the same
freely, if the concession was freely made, or upon the same
conditions, if the concession was conditional.
ARt. 3. The citizens of the two countries respectively
shall have liberty, freely and securely to come with their ves-
sels and cargoes to all such places, ports, and rivers of the
United States of America and of the United Mexican States,
to which other foreigners are permitted to come; to enter into
the same and to remain and reside in any part of the said ter-
ritories respectively; also, to hire and occupy houses and
warehouses for the purposes of their commerce, and to trade
therein. in all sorts of produce, manufactures, and merchandize;
and, generally, the merchants and traders of each nation shall
enjoy the most complete protection and security for their
COjn IT) ºr Cé.
And they shall not pay higher or other duties, imposts, or
fees whatsoever, than those which the most favored nations
are or may be obliged to pay; and shall enjoy all the rights,
privileges and exemptions, with respect to navigation and
comunerce, which the citizens of the most favored nations do
or may enjoy ; but subject always to the laws, usages, and
statutes of the two countries respectively.
The liberty to enter and discharge the vessels of both nations
of which this article treats, shall not be understood to authorize
the coasting trade, which is permitted to national vessels
only.
ART. 4. No higher or other duties shall be imposed on the
importation into the United Mexican States of any article the
produce, growth, or manufacture of the United States of
America, than those which the same or like articles, the pro-
duce, growth, or manufacture of any other foreign country do
now or may hereafter pay; nor shall articles, the produce,
growth, or manufacture of the United Mexican States, be sub-
rREATY WTH MEXICO. 83º
Arr. 1. Habrá una firme, inviolable y universal paz, y una 1831.
sincera y verdadera aumistad entre los Estados Unidos de April 5.
America y los Estados Unidos Mexicanos en toda la estension
de sus posesiones y territorios, y entre sus pueblos y ciuda-
danos, respectivamente, sin distincion de personas ó lugares.
ART. 2. Los Estados Unidos de America y los Estados
Unidos Mexicanos, deseando tomar por base de este convenio
la mas perfecta igualdad y reciprocidad, se comprometen
mutuamente á no conceder ningun favor particular á otras
naciones, en lo respectivo á comercio y navegacion, que no
venga á ser inmediatamente comun á la otra parte; la cual
deberá gozarlo libremente, á bajo las mismas condiciones, si
la concesion fuese condicional.
ART. 3. Los ciudadanos de los dos paises respectivamente,
tendrán libertad, franquicia y seguridad para ir con sus buques
y cargamentos á todas las plazas, puertos, y rios de los Estados
Unidos de America y de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, á los
que á otros estrangeros es permitido ir, entrar y permanecer
en cualquiera parte de los dichos territorios respectivamente;
asi como arrendar y ocupar casas y almacenes para los fines
de su comercio, y comerciar en ellos en toda clase de pro-
ductos, manufacturas y mercancias; y en general, los comer-
ciantes y negociantes de cada nacion, gozarán la mas completa
proteccion y seguridad para su comercio.
Y no paragán otros ni mas altos derechos impuestos ó
emolumentos, cualquiera que sean, que los que esten ó estu-
vieren obligadas á pagar las naciones mas favorecidas; y
gozarán todos los derechos, privilegios, ecsenciones, con
respecto á la navegacion y comercio, que los ciudadanos de
la nacion mas favorecida gozen ó gozaren; pero sugetos
siempre á las leyes, usos y estatutos de las dos naciones re-
spectivamente.
La libertad de entrar y descargar los buques de ambas
naciones de que habla este articulo, no se entenderá que
autoriza el comercio de escala y cabotaje permitido solamente
á los buques Nacionales
ART. 4. No se impondrán otros ni mayores derechos á la
importacion en los Estados Unidos de America de articulo
alguno de producto natural, ó manufactura, de los Estados
Unidos Mexicanos, que los que pagan, ó en adelante pagaren,
los mismos ó semejantes articulos de producto natural ó man-
ufactura de cualquiera otro pais estrangero. Los articulos de
producto natural ó manufactura de los Estados Unidos de
America, no estarán sugetos en su introduccion en los Estades
*84 DIPLOMATIC CODE,
1831. ject on their introduction into the United States of America,
April 5 to higher or other duties than those which the same or like
articles of any other foreign country do now or may hereafter
• Bay. '
Erport duties, Higher duties shall not be imposed in the respective States
tº: on the exportation of any article to the States of the other con-
tracting party, than those which are now or may hereafter be
paid ou the exportation of the like articles to any other for-
eign country; nor shall any prohibition be established on the
exportation or importation of any article, the produce, growth,
or imanufacture of the United States of America, or of the
United Mexican States respectively, in either of them, which
shail not in like manner be established with respect to other
foreign countries.
Light or har- ART. 5. No higher or other duties or charges on account of
}...'...". ton age, light or harbor dues, pilotage, salvage in case of dam-
yas, salize as age or supwreck, or any other local charges, shall be imposed,
in U. States, in any of the ports of Mexico on vessels of the United States
of America than those payable in the same ports by Mexican
vessels; not it, the ports of the United States of America. on
Mexican vessels, than shall be payable in the same ports on
vessels of the United States of Aumerica.
Duties, draw- . ART. 6. The same duties shall be paid on the importation
backs, &c. on into the United Mexican States, of any article, the growth,
...'... produce, or manufacture of the United States of America,
whº her made whether such importation shall be in Mexican vessels or in
in Mexican or - - Yt. e te -
tnºted states vessels of the United States of America; and the same duties
...'... shall be paid on the importation into the United States of
growth of eith- s -
er country. Aimerica, of any article, the growth, produce, or manufacture
- of Mexico, whether such importation shall be in vessels of the
United States of America or in Mexican vessels. The same
duties shall be paid, and the same bounties and drawbacks
aliowed, on the exportation to Mexico of any articles, the
growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States of
America, whether such exportation shall be in Mexican ves-
sels or in vessels of the United States of America; and the
same duties shall be paid, and the same bounties and draw-
backs allowed, on the exportation of any articles, the growth,
produce, or manufacture of Mexico, to the United States of
America, whether such exportation shall be in vessels of the
United States of America or in Mexican vessels.
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
Unidos Mexicanos, á otros ni mas altos derechos que aquellos
que los mismos ó semejantes articulos de cualquiera otro pais
esi rangero paguen ahora ó puedan pagar en adelante.
No se impondrán mayores derechos en los Estados respec-
tivos, a la esportacion de articulo alguno á los Estados de la
otra parte contratante que los que ahora ó despues sean pagados
en la esportacion de los mismos articulos á algun otro pais
estrangeru; ni ninguna prohibicion será establecida en la
esportacion ó importacion de cualquier articulo, producto
natural ó manufactura de los Estados Unidos de America ó
los Estados Unidos Mexicanos respectivamente, en alguno de
ellos, que del mismo modo no se establesca igualmente con
respecto á otros paises estrangeros.
ART. 5. No se impondrá, otros ni mas altos derechos ni
cargas, por razon de toneladas, fanal, emolutnentos de puerto,
practico, derechos de salvamento en caso de perdida ó nau-
fragio, ni ningunas otras cargas locales, en nitiguno de los
puertos de los Estados Unidos de America, á los buques de
los Estados Uaidos Mexicanos, sino los que unicamente pagan
en los mismoy puertos los buques de los Estados Unidos de
A merica; ni en los puertos de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
se impondrán á los buques de los Estados Unidos de America
otras cargas que las que en los mismos puertos paguen los
buques Mexicanos.
ART. 6. Se pagarán los mismos derechos de importacion en
los Estados Unidos de America, por los articulos de productos
naturales y manufacturas de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos,
bien sean importados en buques de los Estados Unidos de
America ó en buques Mexicanos; y los mismos derechos se
pagarán por la importacion en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
de cualquiera articulo de producto natural ó manufactura de
los Estados Unidos de America, sea que su importacion se
verifique en buques Mexicanos ó de los Estados Unidos de
America. Los mismos derechos pagarán, y gozarán las mis-
mas franquicias y descuentos concedidos á la esportacion á
Mexico de cualquiera articulos de los productos naturales ó
manufacturas de los Estados Unidos de America, sea que la
exportacion se haga en buques Mexicanos ó en buques de los
Estados Unidos de America, y los mismos derechos se pagarán
y se concederán las mismas franquicias y descuentos á la
esportacion de cualquiera articulos de producto natural ó
manufactura de Mexico á los Estados Unidos de America,
sea que la esportacion se haga en buques de los Estados
Unidos de America ó en buques Mexicanos.
*86
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831.
April 5.
1Brokers, fac-
tors, &c. to be
chosen as the
parties may
think fit.
No embargo or
detention with-
out compensa-
tion-
Exemption
from compul-
sory service.
Refuge from
stress of weath-
er, enemies,8.c.
previded for.
Vessels, &c.
oaptured by
pirates, to be
given ups
ART. 7. All merchants, captains or commanders of vessels,
and other citizens of the United States of America, shali have
fuíl liberty in the United Mexican States to direct or manage
themselves, their own affairs, or to commit them to the
management of whomsoever they may think proper, either as
broker, factor, agent, or interpreter; nor shall they be obliged
to employ for the aforesaid purposes any other persons than
those employed by Mexicans, nor to pay them higher salaries
or remuneration than such as are in like cases paid by Mexi-
cans: and absolute freedom shall be allowed in ail cases to
the buyer and seller to bargain and fix the prices of any goods,
wares, or merchandise imported into, or exported from, the
United Mexican States, as they may think proper; observing
the laws, usages, and customs of the country. The citizens
of Mexico shall enjoy the same privileges in the States and
Territories of the United States of America, being subject to
the same conditions.
ART, 8. The citizens of neither of the contracting parties
shall be liable to any embargo, nor shall their vessels, cargoes,
__ – — — — — -º =
tion, nor for any public or private purpose whatsoever, with-
out a corresponding compensation.
ART. 9. The citizens of both countries, respectively, shall
be exempt from compulsory service in the army or navy; nor
shall they be subjected to any other charges, or contributions,
or taxes, than such as are paid by the citizens of the States in
which they reside.
ART. 10. Whenever the citizens of either of the contract-
ing parties shall be forced to seek refuge or asylum in the ri-
vers, bays, ports or dominions of the other with their vessels,
whether merchant or of war, public or private, through stress
of weather, pursuit of pirates or enemies, they shall be recei-
ved and treated with humanity, with the precautions which
may be deemed expedient on the part of the respective
Governments in order to avoid fraud, giving to them all favor
and protection for repairing their vessels, procuring provi-
sions, and placing themselves in a situation to continue their
voyage without obstacle or hinderance of any kind.
ART. 11. All vessels, merchandise, or effects, belonging to
the citizens of one of the contracting parties, which may be
captured by pirates, whether within the limits of its jurisdic-
tion, or on the high seas, and may be carried into or found in
the rivers, bays, ports, or dominions of the other, shall be de-
hivered up to the owners, they proving, in due and proper
REATY WITH MEXIC6.
87%
ART, 7. Todo comerciante, comandante de buque, y etros
ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos de America gozarán de
libertad completa en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos para di-
rijiró girar por si sus propios negocios ó para encargar su
manejo aquien mejor les parezca, sea correder, factor, agente
ó interprete; y no se le obligará á emplear para estos objetos
á ningunas otras personas qúe aquellas que se emplean por
los Mejicanos, ni estarán obligados á pagarles mas salario ó
remuneracion que la que en semejantes casos pagan los Meji-
canos, y se concederá libertad absoluta en todos los casos al
comprador ó vendedor para ajustar y fijar el precio de cuales-
quiera efectos, articulos ó mercancias importadas ó esportadas
de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, como lo crean conveniente
observando las leyes, usos y costumbres establecidas en el
pais. Los ciudadanos de Mexico gozarán los mismos pri-
vilegios en los Estados y Territorios de los Estados Unidos
de America. quedando sugetos á las mismas condiciones.
ART. 8. Los ciudadanos de las partes contratantes no
estarán sugetos á embargo, ni sus buques, cargamentos mer-
cancias ó efectas serán detenidos para ninguna espedicion
militar, ni para ningun otro objeto público ó privado, cual-
quiera que sea, sin una compensacion correspondiente.
ART. 9. Los ciudadanos de ambos paises respectivamente,
estarán ecsentos de todo servicio militar forzoso en el ejer-
cito ô armada; ni estarán sugetos á ningunas otras cargas,
contribuciones ó impuestos, que aquelias que son pagadas por
los ciudadanos de los Estados en que residen.
ART. 10. Siempre que los ciudadanos de cualquiera de las
partes contratantes se vean precisados á buscar refugio ó
asilo en los rios, bahias, puertos ó dominios de la otra con sus
buques, ya sean mercantes, ó de guerra, ó armardos en corso,
á causa de un temporal persecucion de piratas ó enemigos,
serán recibidos y tratados con humanidad, previas las pre-
cauciones que se juzgen convenientes por parte del respec-
tivo Gobierno para evitar el fraude, concediendoles todo fa-
vor y proteccion para reparar sus buques, procurar provisiones
y ponerse en estado de continuar su viaje, sin obstaculo ô
impedimento de ninguna clase.
ART. 11. Todo buque, mercancia y efectos, pertenecientes
à ciudadanos de alguna de las partes contratantes, que sean
apresados por piratas, ya sea dentro de los limites de su juris-
diccion ó en alta mar, y que fueren conducidos ó encontrados
en los rios, bahias, puertos ô dominios de la otra, serán
entregados á sus dueños, provando estos en debida forma sus
1831.
April 5.
*88
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831.
April 5.
Assistance in
case of wreck,
&c.
Right of dispn-
saï ºf property,
by w if r sale,
same as native
citizens.
Special protec-
tion to persons
and property;
tribunals of
justice open,8.c.
form, their rights before the competent tribunal; it being well
understood that the claim shall be made within one wear,
counting from the capture of said vessels or merchandise by
the parties themselves, or their attorneys, or by the agents of
the respective Governments.
ARt. 12. When any vessel belonging to the citizens of
either of the contracting parties, shall be wrecked, foundered,
or shall suffer any damage on the coasts or within the dominions
of the other, there shall be given to it all the assistance and
protection in the same manner which is usual and customary
with the vessels of the nation where the damage happens;
permitting them to unload the said vessel. if necessary. of its
merchandise effects, with the precautions which nay be deem-
ed expedient on the part of the respective Governments, in
order to avoid fraud, without exacting for it any duty, impost,
or contribution whatever, until they be exported.
ART, 13. In whatever relates to the succession of [per-
sonal] estates, either by will or ab intestato [and the right of]
disposal of such property, of whatever sort or denomination
it may. be, by- sale. --donation. -exchange, Or testamer, t; or
in any other manner whatsoever, the citizens of the two con-
tracting parties shall enjoy, in their respective States and
Territories, the same privileges, exemptions, liberties, and
rights, as native citizens; and shall not be charged, in any of
these respects, with other or higher duties or impost, than
those which are now, or may hereafter be paid by the citizens
of the power in whose territories they may reside.
ARt. 14. Both the contracting parties promise and engage
to give their special protection to the persons and property of
the citizens of each other, of all occupations, who may be in
their territories. subject to the jurisdiction of the one or of the
other, transient or dwelling therein; leaving open and free to
them the tribunals of justice for their judicial recourse, on the
same terms which are usual and customary with the natives or
citizens of the country in which they may be; for which they
may employ, in defence of their rights, such advocates, so-
licitors, notaries, agents, and factors, as they tuay judge pro-
per, in all their trials at law; and the citizens of either party,
or their agents, shall enjoy. in every respect, the same rights
and privileges, either in prosecuting or defending their rights
of person or of property, as the citizens of the country where
the cause may be tried.
ART 15. The citizens of the United States of America,
residing in the United Mexican States, shall enjoy in their
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
89%
derechos ante el tribunal competente; bien entendido que el
reclauno deberá hacerse dentro del termino de un año contado
desde la captura de dichos buques ó mercancias, por los
mismos interesados, sus apoderados ó por los agentes de sus
Gobiernos respectivos.
ART. 12. Cuando algun buque perteneciente à ciudadanos
de alguna de las partes contratantes, naufrague, vaya á pique,
ó sufra cualquiera averia, en las costas ó dentro de los domin-
ios de la otra, se le dis ensará toda la asistencia y proteccion,
del mismo modo que es de uso y costumbre con los buques
de la nacion en que acontece el daño; permitiendoles descar-
gar las mercancias y efectos del mismo buque si fuere neces-
ario con las precauciones que se estimen convenientes por
parte de los Gobiernos respectivos, para evitar el fraude, sin
ecsigir por ello ningun impuesto ó contribucion cualquiera
que sean, hasta que sean esportadas.
ART. 13. Por lo que toca á la sucesion de las propiedades
personales por testamento ó ab intestato, y al derecho de dis-
poner de la propiedad personal de cualquiera clase ó denom-
inacion, por venta, donacion, permuta ó testamento, ó de otro
modo cualquiera los ciudadanos de las dos partes contratantes
gozarán en sus respectivos Estados y Territorios los mismos
privilegios, ecsenciones, libertades y derechos que si fueran
ciudadanos nativos; y no se les cargara en ninguno de estos
puntos ó casos, mayores impuestos ó derechos que los que
pagan ó en adelante pagaren los ciudadanos nativos de la
potencia en cuyo territorio residan.
ART. 14. Ambas partes contratantes prometen y formal-
mente se obligan á conceder su especial proteccion á las
personas y propiedades de los ciudadanos de cada una de
ellas, en todas clases que puedan ecsistir en sus territorios
sugetos á la jurisdiccion de la una ó de la otra, transeuntes ó
radicados en ellos; dejandoles abiertos y libres los tribunales
de justicia para sus recursos judiciales, de la misma manera
que es uso y costumbre con los nacionales ó ciudadanos del
pais en que residan; á cuyo efecto podrán emplear en defensa
de sus derechos, los abogados, procuradores, escrivanos,
agentes y factores que juzgen á proposito en todos sus juicios:
y dichos ciudadanos ó sus agentes gozarán en todo, los mis-
mos derechos y privilegios en la prosecucion ó defensa de sus
personas ó propiedades que disfrutan los ciudadanos del pais
en donde la causa sea seguida.
ART. 15. Los ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos de
America residentes en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, gozarán
1831.
A pl il 5.
12º
*96
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831.
April 5.
Liberty of con-
Science, and
privilege of
sepulchre.
Free trade with
those at enmity
with either-
party.
Free ships
make free
goods.
The flag to pro-
tect passengers.
houses, persons,and properties,the protection of the government,
with the most perfect security and liberty of conscience: they
shall not be disturbed or molested, in any manner, on account
of their religion, so long as they respect the constitution, the
laws, and established usages of the country where they reside;
and they shall also enjoy the privilege of burying the dead in
places which now are, or may hereafter be assigned for that
purpose; nor shall the funerals or sepulchres of the dead be
disturbed in any manner, nor under any pretext.
The citizens of the United Mexican States shall enjoy,
throughout all the States and Territories of the United States
of America, the same protection; and shall be allowed the
free exercise of their religion, in public or in private, either
within their own houses, or in the chapels or places of worship
set apart for that purpose.
ART. 16. It shall be lawful for the citizens of the United
States of America, and of the United Mexican States respec-
tively, to sail with their vessels with all manner of security
and liberty, no distinction being made who are the owners of
the merchandise laden thereon, from any port to the places of
those who are now, or may hereafter be at enmity with the Uni-
ted States of America or with the United Mexican States. It
shall likewise be lawful for the aforesaid citizens respectively
to sail with their vessels and merchandise. before mentioned,
and to trade with the same liberty and security from the
places, ports, and havens of those who are enemies of both or
either party, without any opposition or disturbance whatsoever,
not only directly from the places of the enemy, before men-
tioned, to neutral places, but also from one place belonging to
an enemy to another place belonging to an enemy, whether
they be under the jurisdiction of the same government or
under several; and it is hereby stipulated that free ships shall
also give freedom to goods; and that every thing shall be
deemed free and exempt which shall be found on board the
vessels belonging to the citizens of either of the contracting
parties, although the whole lading or any part thereof, should
appertain to the enemies of either, contraband goods being
always excepted. It is also agreed that the same liberty be
extended to persons who are on board a free vessel, so that,
although they be enemies to either party, they shall not be
made prisoners, or taken out of that free vessel, unless they
are soldiers, and in the actual service of the enemy. By the
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
9.1%
en sus casas, personas y propiedades, de la proteccion del Go-
bierno y continuando en la posesion en que estan; no serán
alterados inquietados ni molestados, de ninguna manera por
motivos de su religion, con tal que respeten la de la nacion en
que residan, y la Constitucion, leyes, usos y costumbres de
esta; asi mismo continuarán en la facultad de que gozan para
enterrar en los lugares señalados ó que en adelante se seña-
laren á este objeto, á los ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos de
America que mueran en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos: y
les funerales y sepulcros de los muertos no serán turbados
de modo alguno, ni por ningun pretesto.
Los ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos gozarán
en todos los Estados y Territorios de los Estados Unidos de
America, de la misma proteccion; y poderán ejercer libre-
mente su religion en público ó en privado dentro de sus casas
é en los templos y lugares destinados al culto.
ART. 16 Será permitido á todos y cada uno de los ciuda-
danos de los Estados Unidos de America, y de los Estados
Unidos Mexicanos poder navegar libre y seguramente con
sus embarcamiones sin que haya la menor escepcion por este
respecto aunque los propietarios de las mercaderias cargadas
en dichas embarcaciones procedan de cualquiera puerto, y
sean destinadas a cualquiera plaza de una potencia enemiga, ó
que lo sea despues, asi de los Estados Unidos de America,
como de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Se permitirá igual-
mente á los ciudadanos repectivamente navegar con sus buques
y mercaderias y frecuentar con igual libertad y seguridad las
plazas y puertos en las potencias enemigas de las partes con-
tratantes, ó de una de ellas, sin oposicion ú obstaculo, y de co-
merciar no solo desde los puertos de dicho enemigo. á un
puerto neutro directamente, sino tambien desde un enemigo á
otro tal, bien se encuentre bajo su jurisdiccion, ó bajo las de
muchos; y se estipula tambien que los buques libres asegura-
rán igualmente la libertad de las mercancias; y que se juz-
garán libres todos los efectos que se hallasen á bordo de los
buques que perteneciesen á ciudadanos de una de las partes
contratantes, aun cuando el cargamento por entero, ó parte de
el fuese de los enemigos de una de las dos, bien entendido sin
embargo que el contrabando se esceptua siempre. Se há
convenido asi mismo que la propia libertad gozarán los su-
getos que puedan encontrarse á bordo del buque libre, aun cu-
ando fuesen enemigos de una de las dos partes contratantes; y
por lo tanto no se podrá hacerlos prisioneros ni separarlos de
1831.
April 5.
*92
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831.
April 5.
Flag to cover
prºperty to ap
ply to those who
acknow ledge
the principle.
Neutral pro-
perty on board
enemy vessels,
to be considered
enemies’ pro-
perty, and lia-
ble to confisca-
tion.
€ontraband
specified.
Things not
enumerated
free and lawful.
stipulation that the flag shall cover the property, the two con-
tracting parties agree that this shall be so understood with
respect to those powers who recognize this principle; but if
either of the two contracting parties shall be at war with a
third party, and the other neutral, the flag of the neutral shall
cover the property of enemies whose governments acknow-
ledge this principle, and not of others.
ART. 17. It is likewise agreed that in the case where the
neutral flag of one ºf the contracting parties shall protect the
property of the enemies of the other, by virtue of the above
stipulation, it shall always be understood that the neutral
property found on board such enemies” vessels shall be held
and considered as enemies’ property. and as such shall be
liable to detention and confiscation, except such property as
was put on board such vessel before the declaration of war, or
even afterwards, if it were done without the knowledge of it:
but the contracting parties agree that four months having
elapsed after the declaration, their citizens shall not plead
ignorance thereof; on the contrary, if the flag of the neutral
does not protect the enemy’s property, in that case the goods
and merchandises embarked in such enemy’s vessel shall be
free.
ART. 18. This liberty of commerce and navigation shall
extend to all kinds of merchandise, excepting those only which
are distinguished by the name of contraband; and under this
name of contraband or prohibited goods, shall be comprehend-
ed., first, cannons, mortars, howitzers, swivels, blunderbusses,
muskets, fusees, rifles, carbines, pistols, pikes, swords, sabres,
lances, spears, halberts; and granades, bombs, powder, matches,
balls, and all other things belonging to the use of these arms:
secondly, bucklers, helmets, breast-plates, coats of mail,
infantry belts, and clothes made up in a military form, and for
a military use; thirdly, cavalry belts and horses with their
furniture; fourthly, and generally, all kinds of arms, and
instruments of iron, steel, brass and copper, or of any other
materials manufactured, prepared and formed expressly to
make war by sea or land.
ART. 19. All other merchandise and things not compre-
hended in the articles of contraband expressly enumerated
and classified as above, shall be held and considered as free,and
Subjects of free and lawful commerce, so that they may be car-
ried and transported in the freest manner by both the contrac-
TREATY WTH MEXICO.
3.
9
3
dichos buques, á menos que sean militares, y estén á la sazon
empleados en el servicio del enemigo. Por la estipulacion de
que la bardera cubre la propiedad, han convenido las dos
partes contratantes en que esto entiende asi respecto de aquel-
las potencias que reconozcan este principio; pero que si una de
las dos partes contratantes estubiese en guerra con una tercera,
y la otra neutral, la bandera de esta neutral cubrirá la pro-
piedad de los enemigos cuyo Gobierno reconozca este principio,
y no de otros.
ART 17. Se conviene tambien que en caso de que el pavel-
ion neutral de una de las partes contratar es proteja la
propiedad de los enemigos de la otra en virtud de la referida
estipulacion. se entenderá siempre que la propiedad neutral
encontrada á bordo de los referidos buques enemigos se tendrá
y considerará como propiedad enemiga, y como tal estará
sugeta á del encion y confiscacion, escepto aquella propiedad
que haya sido embar cada en tal buque antes de declaracion de
guerra, y aun despues si se há hecho sin noticia de tal declara-
cion; pero las partes contratantes convienen en que cuatro
meses despues de la declaracion, sus ciudananos no alegarán
ignorancia; al contrario, si el pavellon del buque neutral no
proteje la propiedad enemiga, en este caso los efectos y mer-
cancias del neutral embarcados en tal buque enemigo serán
Hibres.
ART. 18. Esta libertad de navegacion y comercio será es-
tensiva á todo genero de mercancias esceptuando solamente
las que se distinguen con el 1.ombre de contrabando; y bajo
esta calificácion ó la de efectos prohibidos se comprenderán,
primero, cañones, morteros, obuses, pedreros, trabucos,
fusiles, escopetas, carabinas, comunes y rayadas, pistolas,
picas, espadas, sables, lanzas, arpones, alabardas y granadas,
bombas, polvora, mechas, balas y otras cosas que pertenecen
á el uso de armas: segundo, escudos, yelmos, petos, cotas de
maya, cinturones de infanteria, y uniformes ó vestidos propios
para la tropa; tercero, cinturones de caballeria y caballos con
sus arneces; cuarto, y generalmente toda clase de armas é in-
strumentos en hierro, acero, bronce y cobre ú otros materiales
manufacturados, preparados y formados a proposito para hacer
la guerra por mar ó por tierra.
ART. 19. Cualesquiera otras mercancias y cosas no com-
prendidas en los articulos en contrabando enumerados y clas-
ificados esplicitamente como queda dicho, se tendrán y con-
siderarán libres, y de libre y legal comercio, de modo que
podrán llevarse y transportarse de la manera mas libre por
83 l.
April 5.
-----º
*94
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1881.
April 5.
Contraband ar-
ticles only to be
cond mned—
the rest of the
eargo to be free.
In ease of block-
ade, warning to
be given.
Rules of visit to
be established.
ting parties, even to places belonging to an enemy, excepting
only those places which are at that time besieged or blockaded;
and to avoid all doubt in that particular, it is declared that
those places only are besieged or blockaded, which are actually
besieged or blockaded by a belligerent force capable of prevent-
ing the entry of the neutral. -
ART. 20. The articles of contraband before enumerated
and classified, which may be found in a vessel bound for the
enemy’s port, shall be subject to detention aud confiscation,
leaving free the rest of the cargo and the vessel, that the
owners may dispose of them as they see proper. No vessels
of either of the two nations shall be detained on the high seas
on account of having on bºard articles of contraband, when-
ever the master,captain, or supercargo of said vessel will deliver
up the articles of contraband to the captor, unless the quantity
of such articles be so great and of so large a bulk, that they
cannot be received on board the capturing vessel without great
inconvenience; but in this, and in all other cases of just de-
tention, the vessel detained shall be sent to the nearest con-
venient and safe port for trial and judgment, according to
law.
ART. 21. And, whereas it frequently happens that vessels
sail for a port or place belonging to an enemy without know-
ing that the same is besieged, blockaded, or invested, it is
agreed that every vessel so situated may be turned away from
such port or place, but shall not be detained; nor shall any
part of her cargo, if not contraband, be confiscated, unless,
after warning of such blockade or investment from the com-
manding officer of the blockading force, she should again at-
tempt to enter the aforesaid port; but she shall be permitted
to go to any other port or place she may think proper. Nor
shall any vessel of either of the contracting parties, that may
have entered into such port before the same was actually be-
sieged, blockaded, or invested by the other, be restrained
from quitting such place with her cargo; nor if found therein
after the surrender, shall such vessel or her cargo be liable to
confiscation, but she shall be restored to the owner thereof.
ARt. 22. In order to prevent all kinds of disorder in the
visiting and examination of the vessels and cargoes of both the
contracting parties on the high seas, they have agreed, mutu-
ally, that, whenever a vessel of war, public or private, should
meet with a neutral vessel of the other contracting party, the
first shall remain out of cannon shot, and may send his boat,
with two or three men only, in order to execute the said
TREATY WTH MEXICO.
Q5º
ambas partes contratantes aun á parages pertenecientes á en-
emigos, esceptuando solo aquellos que á la sazon estubiesen
sitiados ó bloqueados: y para evitar toda duda en este partic-
ular, se declara que solo se considerarán bloqueados ó sitia-
dos aquellos puntos que se hallen sitiados ó bloqueados por
una fuerza beligerante capaz de impedir la entrada á los neu-
trales.
ART. 20. Los articulos de contrabando enumerados y clas-
ificados arriba que se encuentren en un buque que navega pa-
ra puerto enemigo, estarán sugetos á detencion y confiscacion,
dejando libre el resto del cargamento y el buque para que los
dueños dispongan lo que les paresca. Ningun buque de am-
bas naciones será detenido en alta mar por conducir á bordo
articulos de contrabando, siempre que el dueño, capitan ó
sobrecargo del referido buque los entregue al apresador, á
menes que la cantidad de estos articulos sea tan grande y
abulte tanto que no pueda recibirlos el buque apresador sin
grande inconveniente; pero en este y en todos los demas casos
de justa detencion, el buque de tenido se enviará al puerto
mas cercano conveniente y seguro para ser juzgado con ar-
reglo á las leyes.
ART. 21. Como sucede muy frecuentemente que los buques
salen para un puerto ó plaza perteneciente al enemigo sin
saber que se halla sitiado, bloqueado ó atacado, se conviene
en que á ningun buque que se halle en astas circunstancias se
le permitirá entrar en el; pero no será detenido, ni será con-
fiscada parte alguna de su cargamento, sino hubiere en el al-
guno de los efectos de contrabando: á menos que despues de
ser prevenido del sitio ó bloqueo por el oficial comandante de
las fuerzas bloqueadoras emprendiese de nuevo entrar en dicho
puerto; pero se permitirá ir á cualquiera otro puerto ó lugar
que crea conveniente. Ni á buque alguno de las partes con-
tratantes que hubiere entrado en tal puerto antes de ser bloque-
ado, sitiado ó atacado por alguna de ellas, se le impedirá sa-
ir del puerto con su cargamento, y si se hallare en el despues
de la rendicion, ni el buque ni el cargamento serán confisca-
dos sino debueltos á sus dueños.
ART. 22. Para impedir toda clase de desorden en la visita
y ecsamen de los buques y cargamentos de ambas partes con"
tratantes en alta mar, convienen mutuamente en que siempre
que un buque de guerra nacional, ó armado en corso se en-
contrare con un buque neutral de la otra parte contratante,
el primero se mantendrá fuera del tiro de cañon, y enviará su
vote con solo dos ó tres hombres para verificar el referido
1831.
April 5.
#95
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831
April
3.
In case of war,
st-a lºtters to be
furn.-hed, ex-
pressing name,
property, &c.
Rules for the
examination of
vessels, to apply
only to vessels
without convoy.
examination of the papers concerning the ownership and cargo
of the vessel, without causing the least extortion, violence, or
ilſ treatment, for which the commanders of the said armed
vessels shall be responsible with their persons and property;
and for this purpose the commanders of said private armed
vessels shall, before receiving their commissions give sufficient
security to answer for all the damages they may commit.
And it is expressly agreed, that the neutral party shall in no
case, be required to go on board the examining vessel for the
purpose of exhibiting his papers, or for any other purpose
whatsoever.
ART, 23. To avoid all kinds of vexation and abuse in the
examination of papers relating to the ownership of vessels
belonging to the citizens of the two contracting parties. they
have agreed, and do agree, that in case one of them should be
engaged in war, the vessels belonging to the citizens of the
other must be furnished with sea letters or passports, expres-
sing the name, property, and buik of the vessel, and also the
name and place of habitation of the master or commander of
said vessel, in order that it may thereby appear that the said
vessel really and truly belongs to the citizens of one of the
contracting parties; they have likewise agreed that such ves-
sels being laden, besides the said sea-letters or passports, shall
also be provided with certificates, containing the several par-
ticulars of the cargo, and the place whence the vessel sailed,
so that it may be known whether any forbidden or contraband
goods be on board the same; which certificate shall be made
out by the officers of the place whence the vessel sailed, i. the
accustomed form: without which requisites, the said vessel
may be detained to be adjudged by the competent tribunal, and
may be declared legal prize, unless the said defect shall be
satisfied or supplied by testimony entirely equivalent to the
satisfaction of the competent tribunal.
ARt. 24. It is further agreed, that the stipulations above
expressed, relative to visiting and examination of vessels, shall
apply only to those which sail without convoy; and when said
vessels are under convoy, the verbal declaration of the com-
mander of the convov. or his word of honor, that the vessels
under his protection belong to the nation whose flag he carries,
and when they are bound to an enemy’s port, that they have
no contraband goods on board, shall be sufficient.
ARt. 25. It is further agreed. that in all cases the estab-
lished courts for prize causes, in the country to which the
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
97%
ecsamen de los papeles relativos al dueño y cargamento del
buque, sin causar la menor violencia. vejacion ó maltrato:
para lo que los comandantes de los espresados buques armados,
serán responsables con sus personas y propiedades, á cuyo fin
los comandantes de dichos buques armados en corso por
1831.-
April 5.
euento de particulares, darán antes de recibir sus patentes,
fianzas suficientes para responder de los daños que puedan
causar. Y se estipula espresamente que á buque neutral en
ningun caso se le obligará ir á bordo del que registra á
manifestar sus papeles, ni algun otra objeto sea el que fuere.
ART. :3. Para evitar toda vejacion y abuso en el ecsamen
de los papeles relativamente á los dueños de los buques que
pertenescan á ciudadanos de las dos partes contratantes, han
comvenido y convienen que en caso de hallarse una de ellas
en guerra, los buques y navios que pertenescan á ciudadanos
de la otra, deberán ser provistos con patentes de mar ó pasa-
portes, que espresen el nombre, propiedad y dimensiones
del buque, asi como el nombre del lugar en que habite el
capitan ó comandante del buque para que aparesca real y
verdaderamente que pertenece á ciudadanos de una de las
partes contratantes; y han convenido igualmente en que los
referidos buques si condujesen cargamento ademas de las
patentes de mar ó pasaportes, seran provistos de certificaciones
con espresion de cada uno de los articulos que comprende el
cargamento y el lugar de su procedencia, para saber si á su
bordo se hallan efectos de contrabando; cuya certificacion se
dará por les autoridades del lugar de donde salió el buque en
la forma acostumbrada: sin cuyo requisito el referido buque
podrá ser detenido para ser juzgado por tribunal competente,
y podrá ser declarado buena presa, á menos que esta falta se
satisfaga ó supla con testimonio equivalente á satisfaccion del
tribunal competente.
ART. 24. Convienen ademas en que las estipulaciones
arriba espresadas relativamente al ecsamen y visitas de buques
tendrán lugar solamente respecto de aquellos que navegan sin
convoy y que cuando los dichos buques estubieren bajo con-
voy será bastante la declaracion verbal del comandante del
convoy bajo su palabra de honor de que los buques que están
bajo su proteccion pertenecen á la nacion del pavellon que
enarbola, y cuando van con destino á puerto enemigo» de que
no llevan contrabando á bordo.
ART. 25. Se convienen ademas que en todos los casos los
tribunales establecidos para juzgar presas en el pais adonde
13%
*98 DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831. prizes may be conducted, shall alone take cognizance of them.
AP" ". And whenever such tribunal of either party shall pronounce
Enumed judgment against any vessel, or goods, or property claimed by
prize conts the citizens of the other party, the sentence or decree shall
tº of mention the reason or motives on which the same shall have
prize causes, been founded; and an authenticated copy of the sentence or
decree, in conformity with the laws and usages of the country.
and of all the proceedings of the case, shall, if demanded, be
delivered to the commander or agent of said vessel, without
any delay, he paying the legal fees for the same.
In ease of war, ARt. 26. For the greater security of the intercourse be-
six month’s no- tween the citizens of the United States of America and of the
tice, to mer- -> e & a tº º
chants on the United Mexican States, it is agreed now for then, that if there
.. tº should be at any time hereafter an interruption of the friendly
in the interior. relations which now exist, or a war unhappily break out be-
tween the two contracting parties, there shall be allowed the
term of six months to the merchants residing on the coast,
and one year to those residing in the interior of the States and
Territories of each other respectively, to arrange their busi-
ness, dispose of their effects, or transport them wheresoever
they may please, giving them a safe conduct to protect them
to the port they may designate. Those citizens who may be
other trades established in the states and territories aforesaid exercising
. i. "re- any other occupation or trade, shall be permitted to remain in
...," the uninterrupted enjoyment of their liberty and property, so
long as they conduct themselves peaceably, and do not com-
mit any offence against the laws; and their goods and effects,
of whatever class and condition they may be, shall not be sub-
ject to any embargo or sequestration whatever, nor to any
charge nor tax other than may be established upon similar
goods and effects belonging to the citizens of the State in which
they reside respectively; nor shall the debts between indivi-
duals, nor moneys in the public funds, or in public or private
banks, nor shares in companies, be confiscated, embargoed, or
detained. -
Public minis- A Rt. 27. Both the contracting parties being desirous of
‘....” avoiding all inequality in relation to their public commu-
same immuni- * * > tº ſº e
ties, &c. as the nications and official intercourse, have agreed and do agree to
:* grant to the envoys, ministers, and other public agents, the
same favors, immunities, and exemptions which those of the
most favored nations do or may enjoy; it being understood
that whatever favors, immunities, or privileges the United
States of America or the United Mexican States may find
Proper to give to the ministers and public agents of any other
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
99º
estas sean conducidas temdrán ellos solos el conocimiento de
estas causas y cuando estos tribunales de alguna de las partes
pronunciasen sentencia contra algun buque, efectos ó pro-
piedad que sea reclamada por ciudadanos de la otra en la sen-
tencia se hará mencion de las razones ó motivos en que la
haya fundado y se dará si la pidiere, una copia autentica de
ella en conformidad con los usos y leyes del pais y de todos
los procederes del caso al comandante ó agente del buque
interesado sin demora alguna, pagando este las costas es-
tablecidas por la ley.
ART. 26. Para mayor seguridad en la comunicacion entre
los ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos de America y los de
Mexico, se conviene desde ahora para entonces que si acaecise
en lo sucesivo alguna interrupcion en las relaciones amistosas
que hoy ecsisten ó si desgraciadamente hubiere un rompi-
miento hostil entre ambas partes contratantes se les conceder
á el permiso de seis meses á los comerciantes que residan en
las costas, y un año á los que esten en el interior de cada uno
de los estados y territorios respectivos, para arreglar sus
negocios, disponer de sus bienes ó transportalos adonde gus-
ten, dandoles un salvo conducto que los proteja hasta el
puerto que ellos designen: á los ciudadanos que se hallaren
establecidos en los referidos estados y territorios ocupados
en cualquier otro trafico ó ejercicio se les permitirá perma-
necer sin interrupcion en el goze de su libertad y propiedades
mientras se comporten pacificamente y no cometan ofenza
alguna contra las leyes, y sus bienes y efectos de cualquiera
clase y condicion que sean no estarán sugetos á embargo ó
secuestro alguno, ni á otro impuesto ni contribucion que los
establecidos sobre efectos y bienes semejantes pertenecientes
á los estados en que respectivamente residan; ni las deudas
particulares, ni las cantidades en los fondos públicos, ó en los
bancos públicos ó particulares, ni las acciones de las com-
pañias podrán ser confiscadas, embargadas ni detenidas.
ART. 27. Ambas partes contratantes deseando evitar toda
desigualdad relativa á las comunicaciones públicas y oficiales,
se han convenido y convienen en conceder á los enviados,
ministros y otros agentes públicos, los mismos privilegios
ecsenciones é inmunidades que hoy goza y en lo sucesivo
pueda gozar. la nacion mas favorecida: debiendo entenderse
que cualquier favor, inmunidad ó privilegio que los Estados
Unidos de America ó los de Mexico tengan por conveniente
cºncederá los ministros ó agentes públicos de cualquiera otra
1831.
April 5.
sensasmsnmmºnsmaneae ese g-
*106 i) IPLOMATIC CODE.
**
1931. power, shall by the same act be extended to those of each of
April 3, the contracting parties.
ARt. 28. In order that the consuls and vice-consuls of the
tºº. two contracting parties may enjoy the rights, prerogatives,
tent; and- and immunities which belong to them by their character, they
shall, before entering upon the exercise of their functions,
exhibit uleir commission or patent in due form to the Govern-
ment to which they are accredited; and having obtained their
eacequalur, they shall be held and considered as such by all
the authorities, magistrates, and inhabitants of the consular
district in which they reside. it is agreed likewise to receive
tºº and admit consuls and vice-consuls in all the ports and places
foreign'com open to foreign commerce, who shall enjoy therein all the
Jºel'Gée rights, prerogatives, and innuaities of the consuls and vice-
consuls of the most favored nation; each of the contracting
parties remaining at liberty to except those ports and places
in which the admission and residence of such consuls and
vice-consuls may not seem expedient.
Consuls and ART. 29. It is likewise agreed that the consuls, vice-con-
. ..". suls, their secretaries, officers and persons attached to the
aii iºn taxes. service of consuls, they not being citizens of the country in
which the consul resides, shall be exempt from all compulso-
ry public service, and also from all kind of taxes, imposts,
and contributions levied specially on them, except those which
they shall be obliged to pay on account of commerce or their
property, to which the citizens and inhabitants, native and
foreign, of the country in which they reside, are subject; be-
ing in every thing besides subject to the laws of their respec-
tive states. The archives and papers of the consulates shall
be respected inviolably, and under no pretext whatever shall
any magistrate seize, or in any way interfere with them.
Consuls may ART. 80. The said consuls shall have power to require the
jº. assistance of the authorities of the country, for the arrest, de-
ties to arrest tention, and custody of deserters from the public and private
deserters. vessels of their country; and for that purpose, they shall ad-
dress themselves to the courts, judges, and officers competent,
*...* and shall demand the said deserters in writing, proving, by an
exhibition of the register of the vessel, or ship's roll, or other
public documents, that the man or men demanded were part
of said crews; and on this demand so proved, (saving always
where the contrary is proved,) the delivery shall not be refus-
ed. Such deserters, when arrested, shall be placed at the
disposal of the said consuls, and may be put in the public prisons
:
:
;
:
:
:
º
o
e
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
1 0 º
potencia, será ipso-facto estensivo á cada una de las respectivas
partes contratantes.
ART. 28. Para que los consules y vice-consules de las dos
partes contratantes puedan gozar de los derechos, prerogativas
é inmunidades que por su caracter les corresponden, pre-
sentarán al Gobierno cerca del cual estén destinados su patente
ó despacho en debida forma antes de entrar en ejercicio de
sus funciones; y habiendo obtenido su execuatur, serán tenidos
y considerados como tales por todas las autoridades, magis-
trados y habitantes del distrito consular donde residan. Se
convienen tambien en recibir y admitir consules y vice-consules
en todos los puertos y lugares abiertos al comercio estrangero,
quienes gozorán en ellos todos los derechos, prerogativas é
inmunidades de los consules y vice-consules de la nacion mas
favorecida, quedando no abstante en libertad cada parte
contratante para esceptuar aquellos puertos y lugares en que
la admision y residencia de semejantes consules y vice-con-
sules no parezca conveniente. xa
ART. 29. Ygualmente se conviene que los consules, sus
secretarios, los oficiales y personas agregadas al servicio de
los consules, no siendo estos ciudadanos del pais en que el
consul resida, estarán esentos del servicio público compulsivo
y tambien de toda clase de impuestos y contribuciones señala-
das especialmente á ellos, esceptuando las que respecto de su
comercio ó propiedad estarán obligados á satisfacer del mismo
modo que los ciudadanos y habitantes naturales y estrangeros
del pais en que residan pagaren; estando en todo lo demas
sugetos á las leyes de los Estados respectivos. Los archivos
y papeles oficiales de los consules serán respectados inviolable-
mente y por ningun pretesto sea el que fuere, podrán los
magistrados embargarlos ni de ningun modo tomar conoci-
miento de ellos. v.
ART. 30. Los dichos consules tendrán poder de requerir
el aucsilio da las autoridades locales para la prision, detencion
y custodia de los desertores de buques nacionales y par-
ticulares de su pais y para este objeto se dirijirá á los
tribunales, jueces y oficiales competentes; y pediran los
dichos desertores por escrito, probando por una presentacion
de los registros de los buques, roll del equipage, ú otros
documentos públicos, que aquellos hombres eran parte de las
dichas tripulaciones, y esta demanda asi provada (menos no
obstante cuando se probare lo contrario) no se recusará la
entrega. Semejantes desertores leugo que sean arrestados,
se pondrán á disposicion de los dichos consules, y pueden ser
1831.
April 5.
*102
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831.
April 5.
{Provision for
forming a con-
sular conven-
tion.
Interior com-
merce to be re-
gulated by
mutual agree-
Yºnent-
but, in the
meantime,to be
conducted as
heretofore with
Missouri.
Indian hostili-
ties on the res-
pective bounda-
aries to be res-
trained by force
at the request and expense of those who reclaim them, te
be sent to the vessels to which they belonged, or to others of
the same nation. But, if they be not sent back within two
months, to be counted from the day of their arrest. they shall
be set at liberty, and shall not be again arrested for the same
Caul Se.
ART. 31. For the purpose of more effectually protecting
their commerce and navigation, the two contracting parties do
hereby agree, as soon hereafter as circumstances will permit,
to form a consular convention, which shall declare specially
the powers and immunities of the consuls and vice-consuls of
the respective parties.
ART. 32. For the purpose of regulating the interior com-
merce between the frontier territories of both Republics, it is
agreed that the Executive of each shall have power, by mutu-
al agreement, of determining on the route and establishing
the roads by which such commerce shall be conducted; and in
all cases where the caravans employed in such commerce may
require convoy and protection by military escort, the Supreme
Executive of each nation, shall, by mutual agreement, in like
manner, fix on the period of departure for such caravans, and
the point at which the military escort of the nations shall be
exchanged. And it is further agreed, that, until the regula-
tions for governing this interior commerce between the two
nations shall be established, that the commercial intercourse
between the State of Missouri of the United States of Amer-
ica, and New Mexico in the United Mexican States. shall be
conducted as heretofore, each Government affording the ne-
cessary protection to the citizens of the other.
ARt. 33. It is likewise agreed that the two contracting par-
ties shall, by all the means in their power, maintain peace and
harmony among the several Indian nations who inhabit the
lands adjacent to the lines and rivers which form the bound-
aries of the two countries; and the better to attain this object,
both parties bind themselves expressly to restrain, by force,
all hostilities and incursions on the part of the Indian nations
living within their respective boundaries: so that the United
States of America will not suffer their Indians to attack the
citizens of the United Mexican States, nor the Indians inhab-
iting their territory; not will the United Mexican States per-
mit the Indians residing within their territories to commit
hostilities against the citizens of the United States of Amer-
ica, nor against the Indians residing within the limits of the
United States, in any manner whatever.
“TREATY WTH MEXICO.
103 º
depositados en las prisiones públicas á solicitud y espensas
de los que los reclamen para ser enviados á los buques á que
correspondan, ó á otros de la misma nacion. Pero sino fue-
ren mandados dentro de dos meses contados desde el dia de
su arresto, serán puéstos en libertad, y no volverán á ser
presos por la misma causa.
ARt. 31. Con objeto de protejer mas efiscasmente su
comereio y navegacion las dos partes contrantes convienen,
que tan luego como lo permitan las circunstancias formarán
un convenio consular que declarará especialmente las facul-
tades y prerogativas de los consules y vice-consules de las
partes respectivas.
ART. 32. Con el fin de regularizar el comercio terrestre
por las fronteras de ambas Repúblicas queda establecido que
se fijarán por los gobiernos de estas por mutuo convenio los
caminos por donde este trafico há de ser conducido; y en
todos aquellos casos en que las caravanas que se forman para
este comercio, necesiten convoy y proteccion de la fuerza
militar se fijará tambien del mismo modo por mutuo convenie
de ambos gobiernos el tiempo de la partida de tales caravanas
y el punto en el cual se han de cambiar las escoltas de tropas
de las dos naciones. Se há convenido ademas que entretanto
se establecen las reglas que han de regir segun lo dicho en el
eomercio terrestre entre las dos naciones, las comunicaciones
comerciales entre el Estado de Missouri de los Estados
Unidos de America, y el territorio de Nuevo Mexico en los
Estados Unidos Mexicanos continuará como hasta aqui conce-
diendo cada gobierno la proteccion necesaria á los ciudadanos
de la otra parte.
ART. 33. Se há convenido igualmente que las dos partes
eontratantes procurarán por todos medios posibles, mantener
la paz y bueno armonia entre las diversas tribus de Indios
que habitan los terrenos adyacentes á las lineas y rios que
forman los limites de los dos paises; y para conseguir mejor
este fin se obligan espresamente ambas partes á reprimir con
la fuerza todo genero de hostilidades é incurciones de parte
de las tribus Indias que habitan dentro de sus respectivos
limites: de modo que los Estados Unidos de America no
pe: mitirán que sus indios ataquen á los ciudadanos de los
Estados Unidos Mexicanos, ni á los Indios habitan su terri-
torio, y los Estados Unidos Mexicanos no permitirán tampoco
que sus Indios hostilizen á los ciudadanos de los Estados
Unidos de America ó á sus Indios manera alguna.
1831.
April 5.
*164 BIPLOMATIC COF).E.
1831. And in the event of any person or persons captured by the
April 5. Indians who inhabit the territory of either of the contracting
C --- parties, being or having been carried into the territories of the
aptives to be tº *
set free, and other, both Governments engage and bind themselves in the
...'... most solemn manner to return them to their country as soon
ritories. as they know of their being within their respective terri-
tories, or to deliver them up to the agent or representative of
the Government that claims them, giving to each other, recip-
rocally, timely notice, and the claimant paying the expenses
incurred in the transmission and maintenance of such person
or persons, who, in the inean time, shall be treated with the
utmost hospitality by the local authorities of the place where
they may be. Nor shall it be lawful. under any pretext what-
ever, for the citizens of either of the contracting parties to
purchase or hold captive prisoners made by the Indians inha-
biting the territories of the other.
points to be ob- ART. 34. The United States of America and the United
º, º Mexican States, desiring to make as durable as circumstan-
understanding ces will permit, the relations which are to be established be-
...” tween the two parties by virtue of this treaty or general con-
vention of amity, commerce, and navigation, have declared
solemnly, and do agree to the following points:
1. Treaty tore- First, The present treaty shall remain and be of force for
. ºt. eight years from the day of the exchange of the ratifications,
tº: and until the end of one year, after either of the contracting
ice to termi- parties shall have given notice to the other of its intention to
nate it: terminate the same; each of the contracting parties reserving
to itself the right of giving such notice to the other, at the end
of said term of eight years. And it is hereby agreed between
them, that, on the expiration of one year after such notice
shall have been received, by either of the parties from the
other party, this treaty, in all its parts, relating to commerce
and navigation, shall altogether cease and determine, and in
all those parts which relate to peace and friendship, it shall
be permanently and perpetually binding on both the contract-
ing parties. -
*mºsus-
2. Gºitizens to • . . iº
be held person- Secondly, If any one or more of the citizens of either par-
ally responsible ty shall infringe any of the articles of this treaty, such citi-
fºr infringing” zens shall be held personally responsible for the same; and
the harmony and good correspondence between the two na-
tions shall not be interrupted thereby; each party engaging,
in no way, to protect the offender, or sanction such violation.
TREATY WTTH MEXICO.
105%
Y en el casº de que alguna ó algunas personas cojidas por
los Indios que habitan los territorios de cada una de las partes
contratantes, fuere ó hubiere «ido llevada á los territorios de
la otra, ambos Gobiernos se comprometen v obligan del modo
mas solemne á devolverlas á su pais tan luego como se pan
que se hallan en sus respectivos territorios ó entregarlas al
agente ó encargado del mismo Gobierno que las reclame,
dandose aviso oportuno reciprocamente. y abonandose por el
que lo reclama los gastos erog dos en la cor du cion y ma-
nutencion de la tal persona ó personas a quienes entre tanto
se dispensará por los autoridades locales del punto en que se
encuentren la mas generosa hospitalidad. Ni se á legitimo
por ningun pretesto que los ciudadanos de cualquiera de las
partes contratantes comprenó retengan prisioneros cautivos
hechos por los Indios que habitan el territorio de la otra.
ART 34 Los Estados Unidos de America y los Estados
Unidos Mexicanos, deseosos de hacer tan permanentes como
lo permitan las circunstancias las relaciones que var, á estable-
cerse entre las dos partes en virtud de este tratado ó convenio
general de amistad, comercio y navegacion, han declarado
soleumnemente, y convienen en los puntos siguientes:
Primero, El presente tratado permanecerá y estará en
todo su rigor y fuerza por el termino de ocho años que debe-
rán contarse desde el dia del cambio de las ratificaciones, y
terminados estos continuará rigiendo hasta el termino de un
año contado desde el dia en que alguna de las dos partes
contratantes haya dadó noticia á la otra de su resolucion de
poner fin á este convenio. Y cada una de las partes contra-
tantes se reserva asi misma el derecho de dar este aviso á la
otra al cabo del referido termino de ocho años. quedando
ademas convenido entre embas que al cabo de un año desques
de recibido tal aviso por alguna de la- partes contra tantes de
parte de la otra, este tratado deberá cesar y a cabar en todo
cuatto tiene relacion con comercio y navegacion, quedando
solo permanente y perpetuamente valedero y obligatorio á
ambas partes contratantes en todo cuanto toca á las paz y
amistad entre ambas
Segundo, Si uno ó mas ciudadanos de alguna de las partes
infringiere algun articulo de este tratado, será personalmento
responsable de ello: pero no por esto se interrumpirá la armo-
nia y buena correspondencia entre las dos naciones; á cuyo
fin ambas partes respectivamente se comprometen á no protejer
á el agresar, ni sancionar semejante infraccion.
831.
April 5.
*14
*106 DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831. Thirdly, If (what indeed cannot be expected) any of the
April 5 articles contained in the present treaty shall be violated or in-
3. Before war, tracted in any manner whatever, it is stipulated that neither
a statement of' of the contracting parties will order or authorize any acts of
: *"...a reprisal, nor declare war against the other, on complaints of
justice demand- injuries or damages, until the said party considering itself of
gº fended, shall first have presented to the other a statement of
such injuries or damages, verified by competent proofs, and
demanded justice and satisfaction, and the same shall have
been either refused or unreasonably delayed.
Fourthly. Nothing in this treaty contained, shall however
be construed to operate contrary to former and existing pub-
lic treaties with other Sovereigns or States.
Ratifications to The present treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation,
be exchanged shall be approved and ratified by the President of the United
within one year. * te tº gº º
States of America, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate thereof, and by the Vice President of the United Mex-
ican States, with the consent and approbation of the Congress
thereof; and the ratifications shall be exchanged in the city of
Washington, within the term of one year, to be counted from
the date of the signature hereof, or sooner, if possible.
In witness whereof, we, the Plenipotentiaries of the Unit-
ed States of America and of the United Mexican States, have
signed and sealed these presents. Done in the city of Mex-
ico, on the fifth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thou-
sand eight hundred and thirty-one, in the fifty-fifth year of the
Independence of the United States of America, and in the
eleventh of that of the United Mexican States.
A. BUTLER, [L. S.]
LUCAS ALA MAN. [L. s.]
RAFAEL MANGINO.[L. s.]
AD DITION A I, ARTICLE,
Fiſh, and ºth Whereas, in the present state of the Mexican shipping, it
articles to be * tº º
suspended for would not be possible for Mexico to receive the full advan-
six years. tage of the reciprocity established in the fifth and sixth arti-
cles of the treaty signed this day, it is agreed that for the
term of six years, the stipulations contained in the said arti-
cles shall be suspended; and in lieu thereof, it is hereby agreed,
that, until the expiration of the said term of six years, Amer-
ican vessels entering into the ports of Mexico, and all articles,
the produce, growth, or manufacture of the United States of
America, imported in such vessels, shall pay no other or higher
TREATY WITH MEXICO.
107*
Tercero, Si (lo que no es de esperar) alguno de los
articulos del presente tratado desgraciadamente fuere violado
ó infringido de cualquiera otro modo se estipula que ninguna
de las partes contratantes dispondrá ó autorizará ninguna
clase de represalia, ni declarará guerra á la otro por queja
de injuria ó daño hasta que le misma parte que se considera
agraviada no haya presentado ó la otra una relacion de las
injurias ó daños competentemente comprobada, y sobre ello
hubiese pedido justicia y satisfaccion, y esta hubiere sido
negada ó sin razon demorada.
Cuarto, Nada de lo contenido en este tratado podrá de
manera alguna interpretarse ni obrará en contra de los
tratados públicos celebrados anteriormente y ecsistentes con
otros Soberanos y Estados.
El presente tratado de amistad, comercio y navegacion será
aprobado y ratificado por el Presidente de los Estados Unidos
de America con la anuencia y consentimiento de su Senado,
y por el Vice Presidente de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos,
previo el consentimiento y aprobacion del Congreso; y las
ratificaciones serán cangeadas en la ciudad de Washington
en el termino de un año contado desde la fecha en que fueren
firmados, ó antes si fuere posible.
E fé de lo cual, los respectivos Plenipotenciaries lo hemos
firmado y sellado con nuestros sellos respectivos. Fecho en
Mexico á los cinco dias de Abril del año del Señor de mil
ochocientos treinta y uno, un decimo de la independencia de
los Estados Unidos M jicanos y quinquagesimo-quinto de la
de los Estados Unidos de America
LUCAS ALAVIAN. CL, s.]
RAFA EL MAN GINO, L. s.]
A. BU Tla Eik. LL. s.
ARTICULO A L) CIONAL •
Por cuanto en el presente estado de la marina Mejicana no
seria posible que Mexico gozase de las veintajas que deberá
producir la reciprocidad establecida por los articulos 5º, y 6°.
del tratado firm do en este dia, se estipula que da ante el
espacio de seis años se suspenderá lo convenido el dichos
articulos y en su lugar se estipula que hasta la conclucion
del termino mencionado da seis años, los buques A ºr caios
que entren en los puertos de y1 exico, y to los los arte rios de
pro lucto, fruto ó manufactura de los Estados Unidos de
Almerica importados en tales Duques, no pagarán otros ni
1831.
April 5.
*108
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1831.
April 5.
duties, than are or may hereafter be payable in the said ports
by tire vessels and the like articles, the growth, produce, or
manufacture of the most favored nation; and, reciprocally, it
it is agreed that Mexican vessels entering into the ports of
the United States of America, and all articles, the growth,
produce, or manufacture of the United Mexican States. in-
ported in such vessels. shall pay no ºther or higher duties than
are, or may hereafter be, payable in the said ports by the ves-
sels and the like articles, the growth, produce, or manufac-
ture of the most favored nation; and that no higher duties
sisall be paid, or bounties or drawbacks allowed, on the ex-
portatiºn of any article, the growth, produce, or manufacture
of ei' her country, in the vessels of the other, than upon the
exportation of the like articles in the vessels of any other fo-
reign country.
The present additional article shall have the same force and
value as if it had been inserted, w ºrd for word, in the treaty
signed this day. It shall be ratified, and the ratification ex-
changed at the same time.
In witness whereof, we, the respective Plenipotentiaries,
have signed and sealed the same. -
Done at Mexico, on the fifth day of April, one thousand
eight huudred and thirty-one.
A. BUTLER. [L. S.]
LUCAS AL AMAN. [L. s.]
RAFAEL MANGINO, L.L. s.]
And whereas the said Treaty has been duly ratified on both parts, and the
respective ratifications of the same were exchanged at Washington on the
fifth day of April, ºne thousand eight hundred and thirty two, by Edward
Livingston, Secretary of State of the United States of America, and Jose
Mout ya, Charge d’Affaires of the United Mexican States, on the part of their
respective sover, ments:
Now, therefore, be it known that I, ANDREw JAckson, President of the
United States of A merica, have caused the said Treaty to be made public, to
the end that the same and every clause and article thereof, may be observed
and fulfilled with gºod faith by the United States and the citizens thereof.
In witness, whereof I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the
[L. S.] Seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington, this fifth day of April, in
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
thirty-two, and of the Independence of the United
States the fifty-sixth.
ANDREW JACKSON.
By the President:
JEDw: Liv 1 NGSTON,
Secretary of State.
TREATY wITH MEXICO.
09*
Ymayores derechos, que los que se pagan ó en adelante se
pagarea en los referidos puertos, por los buques e iguas
artículos de fruto, producto ó manufactura de la nacion mas
favorecida, y reciprocamente se estipula que los buques
M jicanos que entren en los puertos de los Estados Unidos
d. America y todo- los articulos de fruto, producto ó mau-
factura de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos importados en tales
buques, no paragán otros ni mayores derechos que los que se
pagan, ó en adelante se pagaren en los mencionados puertos
por los buques y semejantes articulos de producto, fruto ó
manufactura de la nacion mas favorecida; y que no se paga-
rán mayores derechos, ni se concederán otros franquicias y
descuentos á la esportacion de cualquiera articulo de producto
fruto ó manufactura de cada uno de los dos paises en los
buques del otro mas que á la esportacion de dichos articulos
en buques de cualquiera otro pais estrangero.
El presente articulo adicional tendrá la misma fuerza y
valor que si se hubiera insertado palabra por palabra en el
tratado de este dia. Sera ratificado y la ratificacion cam-
biada al mismo tiempo.
En fé de lo cual, los respectivos Plenipotenciarios, lo
hemos firmado y sellado con nuestros sellos respectivos.
Fecho en Mexico á cinco de Abril de mil ochocientos
frenta y uno.
LUCAS ALAMAN. L. s. l
RAFA EL MAN GINO. L. s.]
*- «- - A, BU 1l ER. L. s.
1831.
April 5.
*110
I)IPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
January 12.
Treaty of 22d
February, 1819,
confirmed.
Third and
fourth articles
to be carried
into full effect.
Boundaries
designated.
Treaty of Limits, between the United States of America,
and the United Mexican States.
By the President of the United States. A Proclamation.
WHEREAs, a treaty of Limits between the United States of America, and
the United Mexican States was concluded and signed by the Plenipotentiaries
of the two countres, at Mexico, on the twelfth January, one thousand eight
hundred and twenty-eight:
Whereas, also, an additional article thereto was concluded and signed by
the Plenipotentiaries of the two countries, at Mexico, on the fifth April, one
thousand eight hundred and thirty-one, which treaty and additional article are
word for word as follows:
The limits of the United States of America with the bor-
dering Territories of Mexico having been fixed and designa-
ted by a solemn treaty, concluded and signed at Washington,
on the twenty-second day of February, in the year of our
Lord one thousand eight hundred and nineteen, between the
respective Plenipotentiaries of the Government of the United
States of America, on the one part, and of that of Spain on
the other: And whereas, the said treaty having been sanc-
tioned at a period when Mexico constituted a part of the Span-
ish Monarchy, it is deemed necessary now to confirm the va-
lidity of the aforesaid treaty of limits, regarding it as still in
force and binding between the United States of America and
the United Mexican States:
With this intention, the President of the United States of
America has appointed Joel Roberts Poinsett their Plenipo-
tentiary; and the President of the United Mexican States
their Excellencies Sebastian Camacho and José Ygnacio Es-
teva:
And the said Plenipotentiaries having exchanged their full
powers, have agreed upon and concluded, the following arti-
cles: -
ART. 1. The dividing limits of the respective bordering
territories of the United States of America and of the United
Mexican States, being the same as were agreed and fixed upon
by the above-mentioned treaty of Washington, concluded and
signed on the twenty-second day of February, in the year one
thousand eight hundred and nineteen, the two high contrac-
ting parties will proceed forthwith to carry into full effect the
third and fourth articles of said treaty, which are herein re-
cited, as follows:
ART. 2. The boundary line between the two countries,
west of the Mississippi, shall begin on the gulf of Mexico, at
the mouth of the river Sabine, in the sea, continuing north
along the western bank of that river, to the 321 degree of la-
titude; thence, by a line due north, to the degree of latitude
"TREATY WHTH MEXIC69.
1*
Treaty of Limits. befueen the United States of America,
and the United Meacican States.
Habiendose fijado y designado los limites de los Estados
Unidos de America con los Territorios limitrofes de Megico
por un tratado solemne, concluido y firmado en Washington,
á veinte y dos de Febrero. de mil ochocientos diez y neuve,
entre los Plenipotenciarios respectivos del Gobierno de los
Estados Unidos por una parte, y de España por la otra; por
tanto, y en consideracion á que dicho tratado recibio su san-
cion en una epoca en que Megico formaba una parte de la
Monarquia Española, se ha creido necesario al presente,
declarar, y confirmar la validez de dicho tratado consideran-
dolo vigente y obligatorio entre los Estados Unidos de Meg-
ico y los Estados Unidos de America: En consecuencia han
sido nombrados los respectivos Plenipotenciarios, á saber:
El Presidente de los Estados Unidos de Megico á sus Ex-
celencias los Señores Sebastian Camacho, y José Ygnacio
Esteva; y el Presidiente de los Estados Unidos de America
al Señor Joel Roberts Poinsett, su Enviado Extraordinario, y
Ministro Plenipotenciario cerca del Gobierno de los Estados
Unidos de Megico. Los que despues de haber cambiado
sus plenos poderes, y hallados en buena, y debida forma, han
eonvenido y concluido los articulos siguientes:
ART. 1. Siendo los limites divisorios de los Estados Unidos
de Megico, y de los Estados Unidos de America en los ter-
renos colindantes de ambas Republicas los mismos que se
acordaron, y fijaron en el dicho tratado de Washington, fe-
cho á veinte y dos de Febrero de mil ochocientos diez y
nueve; se procederá inmediatamente á poner en ejecucion
entre las dos dichas partes contratantes los articulos tercero
y cuarto de dicho tratado, que á continuacion se insertan:
ART. 2. La linea divisoria entre los dos paises, al
occidente del Misisipi arrancará del seno Megicano en la
embocadura del rio Sabina en el mar, seguirá al norte, por la
orilla occidental de este rio hasta el grado 32 de latitud; des-
de allí por una linea recta al norte hasta al grado de latitud,
1858.
January 12.
-----º---
*I 12
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
January 12,
B. k \,::tries
designated.
Commissioner
and si v -y ºr to
be appointed.
where it strikes the Rio Roxo of Natchitoches, or Red river;
then following the course of the Rio Roxo westward, to the
degree of longitude 100 west from London, and 23 from Wash-
ington; then, crossing the said Red river, and running thence
by a line due north, to the river Arkansas; thence. following
the course of the southern bank of the Arkansas. to its source,
in latitude 42 north; and thence, by that parallel of latitude,
to the South sea: the whole being as laid down in Melish’s
map of the United States, published at Philadelphia, improv-
ed to the first of January, 1818. But, if the source of the Ar-
kansas river shall be found to fall north or south of latitude
42. then the line shall run from the said source due south or
north, as the case nuay be, till it meets the said parallel of lat-
itude 42; and thence. along the said parallel, to the South sea.
All the islands in the Sahine, and the said Red and Arkansas
rivers, throughout the course thus described, to belong to the
United States; but the use of the waters, and the navigation
of the Sabine to the sea, and of the said rivers Roxo and Ar-
kansas, throughout the extent of the said boundary on their
respective banks, shall be common to the respective inhab-
itants of both nations.
The two high contracting parties agree to cede and renounce
all their rights, claims, and pretensions to the territories de-
scribed by the said line, that is to say: the United States here-
by cede to his Catholic Majesty, and renounce forever, all
their rights, claims, and pretensions to the territories ly-
ing west and south of the above described line; and. in like
manner, his Catholic Majesty cedes to the said United States
all his rights, claims, and pretensions to any territories east
and north of the said line; and for himself, his heirs, and suc-
cessors, renounces all claim to the said territories forever.
ART. 3. To fix this line with more precision, and to place
the and-marks which shall designate exactly the limits of
both nations, each of the contracting parties shall appoint a
commissioner and a surveyor, who shall meet before the ter-
mination of one year from the date of the ratification of this
treaty, at Natchitoches, on the Red river, and proceed to run
and mark the said line, from the mouth of the Sabine to the
Red river, aud from the Red river to the river Arkansas, and
to ascertain the latitude of the source of the said river Arkan-
sas, in conformity to what is agreed upon and stipulated, and
the line of latitude of 42, to the South sea. They shall make
out pials,and keep journals of their proceedings; and the result
agreed upon by them shall be considered as part of this treaty,
TREA"TY WTH MEXICO.
13º
en que entra en el rio Rojo de Natohitoches, Red river; y
continuará por el curso del rio Rojo al oeste hasta el grado
100 de longitud occidental de Londres, y 23 de Washington,
en que cortará este rio y seguirá, por una linea recta al norte,
por el mismo grado hasta el rio Arkansas, cuya orilla meri-
dional seguirá hasta su nacimiento en el grado 42 de latitud
septentrional, y desde dicho punto se tirará una linea recta
por el mismo paralelo de latitud, hasta el mar del Sur: todo
segun el mapa de los Estados Unidos, de Melish, publicado
en Filadelfia y perfeccionado en 1818. Pero si el nacimien-
to del rio Arkansas se hallase al norte, ó sur de dicho grado
42 de latitud, seguirá la linea desde el origen de dicho rio
recta al Sur, ó norte, segun fuese necesario, hasta que encu-
entre el espresado grado 42 de latitud, y desde alli por el
mismo paralelo hasta el mar del Sur. Pertenecerán á los
Estados Unidos todas las islas de rios Sabina, Rojo de Nat-
chitoches, y Arkansas, en la estension de todo el curso des-
crito; pero el uso de las aguas, y la navigacion del Sabina,
hasta el mar, y de los espresados rios Rojo y Arkansas, en toda
la estension de sus mencionados limites en sus respectivas
orillas será comun á los habitantes de las dos naciones.
Las dos altas partes contratantes convienen en ceder, y re-
munciar todos sus derechos reclamaciones y pretensiones
sobre los Territorios que se describen en esta linea, á saber:
los Estados Unidos de America ceden á S. M. C. y re-
nuncian para siempre todos sus derechos, reclamaciones, y
pretensiones, á cualesquiera Territorios situados al oeste, y
al sur de ducha linea; y S. M. C. en igual forma, renuncia, y
cede para siempre por sí y á nombre de sus herederos y su-
cesores, todos los derechos que tiene sobre los Territorios al
este y al norte de la misma linea arriba descrita.
ART. 3. Para fijar esta linea con mas precision, y estable-
cer los mojones que señalen con ecsactitud los limites de
ambas naciones, nombrara cada una de ellas un comisario y
un geometra, que se juntarán antes del termino de un año
contado desde la fecha de la ratificacion de este tratado, en
Natchitoches, en las orillas del rio Rºjo, y procederán á
señalar, y demarcar dicha linea, desde la embocadura del Sa-
bina hasta el rio Rojo, y de este hasta el rio Arkansas, y
averiguar con certidumbre el origen del espresado rio Arkansas,
y fijar segun queda estipulado, y convenido en este tratado,
la linea que debe seguir desde el grado 42 de latitud hasta el
mar Pacifico. Llevaran diarios, y levantaran planos de sus
operaciones, y el resultado convenido por ellos se tendra por
1828.
February 12.
15%
*114
DIPLOMATIC GODE.
1828.
February 12.
,-ºº-ºººººººº-
and shall have the same force as if it were inserted therein.
The two Governments will amicably agree respecting the ne-
cessary articles to be furnished to those persons, and also as
to their respective escorts, should such be deemed necessary'
ART. 4. The present treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifi-
cations shall be exchanged at Washington, within the term of
four months, or sooner if possible.
In witness whereof, we, the respective Plenipotentiaries
have signed the same, and have hereunto affixed our respec-
tive seals. Done at Mexico, this twelfth day of January, in
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-
eight, in the fifty-second year of the Independence of the Uni-
ted States of America, and in the eighth of that of the United
Mexican States.
J. R. POINSETT. [L. s.]
S. CAMACHO. [L. s.]
J. Y. ESTEVAN. [L. s.]
Additional Article to the Treaty of Limits concluded between
the United States of America and the United Mearican States,
on the 12th day of January, 1828.
The time having elapsed which was stipulated for the ex-
change of ratifications of the Treaty of Limits between the
United Mexican States and the United States of America,
signed in Mexico on the 12th of January, 1828; and both Re-
publics being desirous that it should be carried into full and
counplete effect, with all due solemnity, the President of the
United States of America has fully empowered, on his part,
Anthony Butler, a citizen thereof, and Chargé d’Affaires of
the said States in Mexico; and the Vice-President of the Uni-
ted Mexican States, acting as President thereof, has, in like
manner, fully empowered on his part their Excellencies Lucas
Alaman, Secretary of State and Foreign Relations, and Ra-
fael Mangino, Secretary of the Treasury, who after having ex-
changed their mutual powers, found to be ample and in form,
have agreed, and do hereby agree, on the following article:
The ratifications of the Treaty of Limits, concluded on the
12th January, 1828, shall be exchanged at the City of Wash-
ington, within the term of one year, counting from the date of
this agreement, and sooner should it be possible. ſ
The present Additional Article shall have the same force
and effect as if it had been inserted word for werd in the afore-
FREATY WITH MEXICO.
1 5%
parte de este tratado, y tendra la misma fuerza que se es-
tuviese inserto en el: debiendo convenir amistºsamente los
dos Gobiernos, en el arreglo de cuanto necesiten estos in-
dividuos y en la escolta respectiva que deban llevar siempre
que se crea necesario.
ART. 4. El presente tratado sera ratificado, y las ratifica- ¿
ciones seran cambiadas en Washington en el termino de
euatro meses, ó antes si posible fuere.
En fé de lo cual, los respectivos Plenipotenciarios han
firmado el presente, sellandolo con sus sellos respectivos.
Fecho en Megico, á los doce dias del mes de Enero, del año
del Señor mil ochocientos veinte y ocho, octavo de la lnde-
pendencia de los Estados Unidos de Megico, y 52 de la de
*os Estados Unidos de America.
S. CAMACHO. L. s.]
J. Y. ESTEVA. L. s.]
J. R. POíNSETT. L. s
Árticulo adicional al 7'ratado de Lº mites celebrado entre los
Estados Unidos Mejican s y los Estados Unidos de Hmer-
ica, en 12 de Enero de 1828.
Habiendose pasado el tiempo señalado para el cambio de
fas ratificaciones del Tratado de Limites entre los Estados
Unidos Mejicanos y los Estados Unidos de America, firmado
en Mejico el dia 12 de Enero de 1828, deseosas ambas Re-
publicas de que el referido tratado tenga su mas puntual cum-
plimiento llenandose todas las formalidades necesarias, y ha-
biendo revestido con sus plenos poderes el Vice Presidente
en ejercicio del poder ejecutivo de los Estados Unidos Mej-
icanos á los Ecselentisinos Señores Don Lucas Alaman, Sec-
retario de Estados y del Despacho de Relaciones Interiores y
Esteriores, y Don Rafael Mangino, Secretario de Estado y
del Despacho de Hacienda; y el Pi esidente de los Estados
Unidos de America á Antonio Butler, ciudadano de los mis-
mos Estados y Encargado de Negocios de ellos en Mejico,
despues de cambiar sus plenos poderes que se encontraron en
buena y debida forma, han convenido y convienen en el ar-
ticulo seguiente: 8.
Las ratificaciones del Tratado de Limites celebrado el 12
de Enero de 1828. se cambiarán en la ciudad de Washington
dentro del termino de un año, contado desde la fecha de este
convenio, ó antes si fuere posible.
El presente articulo adicional tendrá la misma fuerza y
valor que si se hubiese insertado palabra por palabra, en él
1828.
February 12.
*1 16
DIPLOMATIC CODE.
1828.
February 12.
-**-----, --
said treaty of the 12th of Jan-
uary, of 1828, and shall be ap-
proved and ratified in the
manner prescribed by the
Constitutions of the respective
States.
In faith of which, the said
Plenipotentiaries have here-
unto set their hands and affixed
their respective seals. Done
in Mexico, the fifth of April,
of the year one thousand eight
hundred and thirty-one, the
fifty-fifth of the Independence
of the United States of Aner-
iea, and the eleventh of that of
the United Mexican States.
A. BUTLER, | L.s.]
LUCAS ALAMAN. [L.s.]
RAFAEL MANGINO.[L.s.]
tratado mencionado de 12 de
Enero de 1828, y será aprov-
ado y ratificado en los termi-
nos que establecen las Con-
stituciones de los respectivos
Estados.
En fé de lo cual, los referi-
dosplenipotenciarios lo hemos
firmado y sellado con nuestros
sellos respectivos. Fecho en
Mejico, ä los cinco dias del
mes de Abril de mil ochocien-
tos trienta y uno, undecimo de
la Independencia de los Es-
tados Unidos Mejicanos, y
quincuagesime quinto de la de
lose-tados Unidos de America.
LUCAS ALAMAN. [...s.]
RAF AEL MANGINO.[1...s.]
A. BUTLER. [L.S.]
AND whenièAs the said Treaty has been duly ratified on both parts, and
[L. S.]
the respective ratifications of the same were exchanged at Washington, on
the fifth day of April, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two, by Edward
Livingston, Secretary of State of the United States of Āmerica, and Jose
Montoya, Charge d'Affaires of the United Mexican States, on the part of
their respective G ºvernments:
Now then EFor E BE IT KNowN, that I, ANDREw J Ackson, President
of the United States of America, have caused the said Treaty to be made
public to the end that the same, and every clause and article thereof, may be
observed and fulfilled with good faith by the United States, and the citizens
thereof. w
.IN witness when Eof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the
seal of the United States to be affixed.
: Don E at the City of Washington, this fifth day of April, in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two, and of the
Independence of the United States the fifty-sixth.
ANDREW JACKSON.
By the President:
EDw. Livings.ToN, Secretary of State.
COMPENSATION TO PUBLIC MINISTERs, &c. 81
LAWS, &c.
IN RELATION TO
PUBLIC MINISTERS, CONSULS, CONVENTIONS, &c.
COMPENSATION TO PUBLIC MINISTERS, AND CONSULS, &c.
“No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States; and no person holding any office
of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the congress, accept of any present,
emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”
FEDERAL Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 9.
No. 1.-4A 4CT firing the compensation of public ministers, and of
consuls residing on the coast of Barbary, and for other purposes.
. U. S. Laws, vol. 4, page 309.
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That the president of the United States shall not
allow to any minister plenipotentiary a greater sum than at the rate of nine
thousand dollars per annum, as a compensation for all his personal services and
expenses; nor to any chargé des affaires, a greater sum than at the rate of
four thousand five hundred dollars per annum, as a compensation for all his
personal services and expenses; nor to the secretary of any legation or em-
bassy to any foreign country, or secretary of any minister plenipotentiary,
a greater sum than at the rate of two thousand dollars per annum, as a com-
pensation for all his personal services and expenses; nor to any consul who
shall be appointed to reside at Algiers, a greater sum than at the rate of
four thousand dollars per annum, as a compensation for all his personal ser-
vices and expenses; nor to any other consul who shall be appointed to reside
at any other of the states on the coast of Barbary, a greater sum than at
the rate of two thousand dollars per annum, as a compensation for all his
personal services and expenses; nor shall there be appointed more than one
consul for any one of the said states: Provided, It shall be lawful for the
president of the United States to allow to a minister plenipotentiary, or
chargé des affaires, on going from the United States to any foreign country,
an outfit, which shall in no case exceed one years full salary of such minis-
ter or chargé des affaires; but no consul shall be allowed an outfit in any
case whatever, any usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.
11 -
82 compenSATION TO PUBLIC MINISTERs, &c.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That to entitle any chargé des affaires,
or secretary of any legation or embassy to any foreign country, or secretary
of any minister plenipotentiary, to the compensation hereinbefore provided,
they shall, respectively, be appointed by the president of the United States,
by and with the advice and consent of the senate; but in the recess of the
senate, the president is hereby authorized to make such appointments,
which shall be submitted to the senate at the next session thereafter, for
their advice and consent; and no compensation shall be allowed to any
chargé des affaires, or any of the secretaries hereinbefore described, who
shall not be appointed as aforesaid: Provided, That nothing herein con-
tained shall be construed to authorize any appointment of a secretary to any
chargé des affaires, or to any consul residing on the Barbary coast, or to
sanction any claim against the United States for expense incident to the
same, any usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.
SEc. 3. ..And be it further enacted, That where any sum or sums of money
shall be drawn from the treasury, under any law making appropriation for
the contingent expenses or intercourse between the United States and for-
eign nations, the president shall be, and he hereby is authorized to cause
the same to be duly settled, annually, with the accounting officers of the
treasury, in the manner following, that is to say: By causing the same to
be accounted for, especially, in all instances wherein the expenditure thereof
may, in his judgment, be made public, and by making a certificate of the
amount of such expenditures as he may think it advisable not to specify;
and such certificate shall be deemed a sufficient voucher for the sum or
sums therein expressed to have been expended.
SEc. 4. And be it further enacted, That it shall not be lawful for the
consuls of the United States, residing on the Barbary coasts, or either of
them, to expend, or to disburse, or pay, or cause to be paid, for any pur-
pose, or on any pretence whatever, not authorized by law, to any one of the
Barbary powers, or to the officers or subjects thereof, a greater sum than
three thousand dollars in any one year, with intent to charge the United
States with the same, without first obtaining a special approbation, in wri-
ting, from the president of the United States, for that purpose. And every
such consul who shall, after notice of this act, expend or disburse, or pay,
or cause to be paid, for any purpose, or on any pretence whatever, not au-
thorized by law, to any one of the Barbary powers, or to the officers or sub-
jects thereof, a greater sum than three thousand dollars in any one year,
or shall be aiding or assisting therein, without first obtaining the approba-
tion of the president as aforesaid, shall forfeit and pay to the treasury of
the United States a sum equal to one-half his yearly compensation; and
shall, moreover, stand charged with, and be accountable for, all moneys se
disbursed or paid, contrary to the provisions of this act.
PRIVILEGES OF FOREIGN MINISTERS. 83
SEc. 5. And be it further enacted, That, from and after the first day of
November next, no consul of the United States residing on the Barbary coast
shall own, in whole orin any part, any ship or vessel, to be concerned, directly
or indirectly, in the exportation from, or importation to, any of the states
on the coast of Barbary, of any goods, wares, or merchandise, on penalty
that every consul so offending, and being thereof convicted, shall, for every
offence, forfeit a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars.
Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the con-
suls residing on the Barbary coast to transmit to the secretary of the trea-
sury, annually, an account of all moneys received, and of all disbursements
or expenditures made, by them, respectively, for or on account of the Unit-
ed States, and the particular purpose to which the moneys have been applied,
and the vouchers to support the same; and the secretary of the treasury
shall transmit to congress, within two months after the commencement of
the first session thereof, in every year, a statement of all the moneys dis-
bursed from the treasury of the United States, for expenses of intercourse
with the Barbary powers during the preceding year, therein noting as
far as can be ascertained at the treasury, the sums received by the respec-
tive agents or consuls, and the purposes to which the same have been applied.
SEc. 7. And be it further enacted, That the act, entitled “An act in
addition to the law of the United States concerning consuls and vice consuls,”.
approved July sixth, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-seven, and the
act, entitled “An act to ascertain the compensation of public ministers,”
approved May the tenth, one thousand eight hundred, be, and the same are
hereby, repealed. [Approved May 1, 1810.]
PRIVILEGES OF FOREIGN MINISTERS.
No. 2. —Extract from the act of April 30, 1790.
U. S. Laws, vol. 2, page 97.
SEc. 25. Be it enacted, That if any writ or process shall, at any time
hereafter, be sued forth or prosecuted by any person or persons, in any of the
courts of the United States, or in any of the courts of a particular state, or by
any judge or justice therein, respectively, whereby the person of any ambas-
sador or other public minister of any foreign prince or state, authorized and
received as such by the president of the United States, or any domestic or
domestic servant of any such ambassador or other public minister, may be
arrested or imprisoned, or his or their goods or chattels be distrained, seized,
or attached, such writ or process shall be deemed and adjudged to be utterly
null and void, to all intents, construction, and purposes, whatsoever.
SEc. 26. And be it enacted, That in case any person or persons shall
sue forth or prosecute any such writ or process, such person or persons, and
all attorneys or solicitors prosecuting or soliciting in such case, and all offi-
84 DUTIES OF CONSULS AND VICE consuls.
cers executing any such writ or process, being thereof convicted, shall be
deemed violators of the laws of nations and disturbers of the public repose,
and imprisoned not exceeding three years, and fined at the discretion of the
court: Provided nevertheless, That no citizen or inhabitant of the United
States, who shall have contracted debts prior to his entering into the service
of any ambassador or other public minister, which debts shall be still due
and unpaid, shall have, take, or receive, any benefit of this act; nor shall
any person be proceeded against by virtue of this act, for having arrested
or sued any other domestic servant of any ambassador or other public min-
ister, unless the name of such servant be first registèred in the office of the
secretary of state, and by such secretary transmitted to the marshal of the
district in which congress shall reside, who shall, upon receipt thereof, affix
the same in some public place in his office, whereto all persons may resort
and take copies without fee or reward. -
SEc. 27. And be it enacted, That if any person shall violate any safe
conduct or passport duly obtained, and issued under the authority of the
United States, or shall assault, strike, wound, imprison, or in any other
, manner infract the law of nations, by offering violence to the person of an
ambassador or other public minister, such person so offending, on convic-
tion, shall be imprisoned not exceeding three years, and fined at the dis-
cretion of the court. [Approved flpril 30, 1790.]
CoNSULS AND WICE CONSULS.
No. 3.-fln act concerning Consuls and Vice Consuls.
U. S. Laws, vol. 2, page 273.
For carrying into full effect the convention between the king of the
French and the United States of America, entered into for the purpose of
defining and establishing the functions and privileges of their respective
consuls and vice consuls. { -
SEc. 1.* Be it enacted, &c. That where, in the seventh article of the said
convention, it is agreed, that when there shall be no consul or vice consul
of the king of the French, to attend to the saving of the wreck of any French
vessels stranded on the coasts of the United States, or that the residence of
the said consul or vice consul (he not being at the place of the wreck)
shall be more distant from the said place than that of the competent judge
of the country, the latter shall immediately proceed to perfºrm the office
therein prescribed, the district judge of the United States of the district in
which the wreck may happen, shall proceed therein, according to the tenor
of the said article. And in such cases it shall be the duty of the officers of
the customs within whose districts such wrecks shall happen, to give notice
thereof, as soon as may be, to the said judge, and to aid and assist him to
perform the duties hereby assigned to him. The district judges of the
*See convention, No. 4, p. 70, vol. 1. Annulled by act of July 7, 1798. This section obsolete.
DUTIES OF CONSULS AND WICE CONSULS. 85
United States shall also, within their respective districts, be the competent
judges, for the purposes expressed in the ninth article of the said conven-
tion, and it shall be incumbent on them to give aid to the consuls and vice
consuls of the king of the French, in arresting and securing deserters from
vessels of the French nation, according to the tenor of the said article.
And where, by any article of the said convention, the consuls and vice
consuls of the king of the French are entitled to the aid of the competent
executive officers of the country, in the execution of any precept, the mar-
shals of the United States, and their deputies shall, within their respective
districts, be the competent officers, and shall give their aid according to the
tenor of the stipulations.
And whenever commitments to the goals of the country shall become
necessary, in pursuance of any stipulation of the said convention, they shall
be to such goals, within the respective districts, as other commitments under
the authority of the United States, are, by law, made.
And for the direction of the consuls and vice-consuls of the United States
in certain cases:
Sec. 2. Be it enacted, &c. That they shall have right, in the ports or places
to which they are, or may be, severally appointed, of receiving the protests
or declarations, which such captains, masters, crews, passengers and mer-
chants, as are citizens of the United States, may respectively choose to
make there; and also such as any foreigner may choose to make before
them, relative to the personal interest of any citizens of the United States;
and the copies of the said acts, duly authenticated by the said Consuls or
vice consuls, under the seal of their consulates, respectively, shall receive
faith in law, equally as their originals would, in all courts in the United
States. It shall be their duty, where the laws of the country permit, to
take possession of the personal estate left by any citizen of the United
States, other than seamen belonging to any ship or vessel, who shall die
within their consulates, leaving there no legal representative, partner in
trade, or trustee by him appointed, to take care of his effects; they shall in-
ventory the same, with the assistance of two merchants of the United States,
or, for want of them, of any others, at their choice; shall collect the debts
due to the deceased in the country where he died, and pay the debts due
from his estate which he shall have there contracted; shall, sell at auction,
after reasonable public notice such part of the estate as shall be of a perish-
able nature, and such further part, if any, as shall be necessary for the pay-
ment of his debts, and, at the expiration of one year from his decease, the
residue, and the balance of the estate they shall transmit to the Treasury of
the United States, to be holden in trust for the legal claimants. But if, at
any time before such transmission, the legal representative of the deceased
shall appear and demand his effects in their hands, they shall deliver them.
up, being paid their fees, and shall cease their proceedings.
86 DUTIES GF CONSULS AND WICE CONSULS.
For the information of the representative of the deceased, it shall be the
duty of the consul or vice consul, authorized to proceed as aforesaid in the
settlement of his estate, immediately to notify his death in one of the ga-
zettes published in the consulate, and also to the secretary of state, that the
same may be notified in the state to which the deceased shall belong; and
he shall also, as soon as may be, transmit to the secretary of state an inven-
tory of the effects of the deceased, taken as before directed.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the said consuls and vice consuls,
in cases where ships or vessels of the United States shall be stranded on the
coasts of their consulates, respectively, shall, as far as the laws of the coun-
try will permit, take proper measures, as well for the purpose of saving the
said ships or vessels, their cargoes and appurtenances, as for storing and
securing the effects and merchandise saved, and for taking an inventory or
inventories thereof; and the merchandise and effects saved, with the inven-
tory or inventories thereof, taken as aforesaid, shall after deducting therefrom
the expense, be delivered, to the owner or owners. Provided, That no con-
sul or vice consul shall have authority to take possession of any such goods,
wares, merchandise, or other property, when the master, owner, or con-
signee thereof, is present, or capable of taking possession of the same.
SEc. 4. And be it further enacted, That it shall and may be lawful for
every consul and vice consul of the United States, to take and receive
the following fees of office, for the services which he shall have performed.
For authenticating, under the consular seal, every protest, declaration,
deposition, or other act, which such captains, masters, mariners, seamen,
passengers, merchants, or others, as are citizens of the United States, may
respectively choose to make, the sum of two dollars.
For the taking into possession, inventorying, selling, and finally settling
and paying, or transmitting, as aforesaid, the balance due on the personal
estate left by any citizen of the United States who shall die within the
limits of his consulate, five per centum on the gross amount of such estate.
For taking into possession, and otherwise proceeding on, any such estate
which shall be delivered over to the legal representative before a final set-
tlement of the same, as is hereinbefore directed, two and an half per centum
on such part delivered over as shall not be in money, and five per centum
on the gross amount of the residue.
And it shall be the duty of the consuls and vice consuls of the United
States, to give receipts for all fees which they shall receive by virtue of this
act, expressing the particular services for which they are paid.
SEc. 5. And be it further enacted, That in case it be found necessary for
the interest of the United States, that a consul or consuls be appointed to
reside on the coast of Barbary, the president be authorized to allow an
annual salary, not exceeding two thousand dollars, to each person so to be
appointed: Provided, That such salary be not allowed to more than one con-
sul for any one of the states on the said coast.
DUTIES OF CONSULS AND VICE CONSULS. 87
Sec. 6. And be itſurther enacted, That every consul and vice consulshall,
before they enter on the execution of their trusts, or if already in the execu-
tion of the same, within one year from the passing of this act, or, if resident
in Asia, within two years, give bond with such sureties as shall be approved
by the secretary of state, in a sum of not less than two thousand, nor more
than ten thousand dollars, conditioned for the true and faithful discharge of
the duties of his office, according to law, and also for truly accounting for
all moneys, goods, and effects, which may come into his possession by virtue
of this act: and the said bond shall be lodged in the office of the secretary
of the treasury.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That to prevent the mariners and
seamen, employed in vessels belonging to citizens of the United States, in
cases of shipwreck, sickness or captivity, from suffering in foreign ports, it
shall be the duty of the consuls and vice consuls, respectively, from time
to time, to provide for them in the most reasonable manner, at the expense
of the United States, subject to such instructions as the secretary of state
shall give, and not exceeding an allowance of twelve cents to a man per
diem; and all masters and commanders of vessels belonging to citizens of
the United States, and bound to some port of the same, are hereby required
and enjoined to take such mariners or seamen on board of their ships or
vessels, at the request of the said consuls or vice consuls, respectively, and
to transport them to the port, in the United States, to which such ships or
vessels may be bound, free of cost or charge; but that the said mariners or
seamen shall, if able, be bound to do duty on board such ships or vessels,
according to their several abilities: Provided, That no master or captain of
any ship or vessel, shall be obliged to take a greater number than two men
to every one hundred tons burthen of the said ship or vessel, on any one
voyage; and if any such captain or master shall refuse the same, on the re-
quest or order of the consul or vice consul, such captain or master shall
forfeitand pay the sum of thirty dollars for each mariner or seaman so refused,
to be recovered, for the benefit of the United States, by the said consul or
vice consul, in his own name, in any court of competent jurisdiction.
Sec. 8.* And be it further enacted, That where a ship or vessel belonging
to citizens of the United States is sold in a foreign port or place, the master,
unless the crew are liable by their contract, or do consent, to be discharged
there, shall send them back to the state where they entered on board, or
furnish them with means sufficient for their return, to be ascertained by the
consul or vice consul of the United States, having jurisdiction of the port
or place. And in case of the master’s refusal, the said consul or vice con-
sul may, (if the laws of the land permit it)cause his ship, goods, and person,
to be arrested and held until he shall comply with his duty herein.
This see repealed, by sec. 5 of the act of Feb. 28, 1803: supplied by sec. 3 of the same act, p. 86.
88 DUTIES OF CONSULS AND WICE CONSULS.
Sec. 9...flnd be it further enacted, That the specification of certain pow-
ers and duties in this act, to be exercised or performed by the consuls and
vice consuls of the United States, shall not be construed to the exclusion of
others resulting from the nature of their appointments, or any treaty or con-
vention, under which they may act. [Approved, April 14, 1792.]
[Act of 28th Feb., 1803.”
For every certificate of discharge of any seaman, or mariner in a foreign
port, fifty cents. For paying and receiving the amount of wages payable,
on the discharge of seamen in foreign ports, two and a half per cent.
[Act of 1st March, 1823.)
For every verification and certificate (under the said act, regulating
the collection of duties) before a consul or commercial agent, provided each
shipper shall have the right to include all articles shipped by him, in the
same invoice, two dollars.
ãºmmammasºmº
No. 4.—An act supplementary to the “..Act concerning consuls and vices
consuls,” and for the fº protection of flmerican seamen.
U. S. Laws, vol. 3, page 526.
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That before a clearance be granted to any ves-
sel bound on a foreign voyage, the master thereofshall deliver to the collec-
tor of the customs a list, containing the names, places of births and residence,
and a description of the persons who compose his ship's company, to which
list the oath or affirmation of the captain shall be annexed, that the said list
contains the names of his crew, together with the places of their birth and
residence, as far as he can ascertain them, and the said collector shall deli-
ver him a certified copy thereof, for which the collector shall be entitled to
receive the sum of twenty-five cents; and the said master shall, moreover,
enter into bond with sufficient security, in the sum of four hundred dollars,
that he shall exhibit the aforesaid certified copy of the list to the first board-
ing officer, at the first port in the United States at which he shall arrive, on
his return thereto, and then and there also produce the persons named there-
in, to the said boarding officer, whose duty it shall be to examine the men.
with such list, and to report the same to the collector; and it shall be the
duty of the collector at the said port of arrival, (where the same is different
from the port from which the vessel originally sailed,) to transmit a copy of
the list so reported to him, to the collector of the port from which said ves-
sel originally sailed: Provided, That the said bond shall not be forfeited on
account of the said master not producing to the first boarding officer, as
aforesaid, any of the persons contained in the said list, who may be dis-
charged in a foreign country, with the consent of the consul, vice consul,
commercial agent, or vice commercial agent, there residing, signified in
writing, under his hand and official seal, to be produced to the collector
DUTIES OF CONSULS AND VICE consuls. 89
with the other persons composing the crew, as aforesaid; nor on account of
any such person dying or absconding, or being forcibly impressed into other
service, of which satisfactory proof shall be then also exhibited to the col-
lector. * w *
Sec. 2. And be it enacted, That it shall be the duty of every master
and commander of a ship or vessel, belonging to citizens of the United
States, who shall sail from any port of the United States, after the first day
of May next, on his arrival at a foreign port, to deposit his register, sea
letter, and Mediterranean passport, with the consul, vice consul, commer-
cial agent, or vice commercial agent, (if any there be at such port;) that
in case of refusal or neglect of the said master or commander to deposite
the said papers as aforesaid, he shall forfeit and pay five hundred dollars,
to be recovered by the said consul, vice consul, commercial agent, or vice
commercial agent, in his own name, for the benefit of the United States, in
any court of competent jurisdiction; and it shall be the duty of such consul,
vice consul, commercial agent, or vice commercial agent, on such master
or commander producing to him a clearance from the proper officer of the
port where his ship or vessel may be, to deliver to the said master or com-
mander all of his said papers: Provided, such master or commander shall
have complied with the provisions contained in this act, and those of the act
of which this is a supplement. ,
SEc. 3. And be it further enacted, That whenever a ship or vessel, belong-
ing to a citizen of the United States, shall be sold in a foreign country, and
her company discharged, or when a seaman or mariner, a citizen of the Unit-
ted States, shall, with his own consent, be discharged in a foreign country,
it shall be the duty of the master or commander to produce to the consul,
vice consul, commercial agent, or vice commercial agent, the list of his
ship's company, certified as aforesaid, and to pay to such consul, vice consul,
commercial agent, or vice commercial agent, for every seaman or mariner
so discharged, being designated on such list as a citizen of the United States,
three months’ pay, over and above the wages which may then be due to such
mariner or seaman, two-thirds, thereof to be paid by such consul or com-
mercial agent, to each seaman or mariner so discharged, upon his engage-
ment on board of any vessel to return to the United States, and the other
remaining third to be retained for the purpose of creating a fund for the
payment of the passages of seamen or mariners, citizens of the United States,
who may be desirous of returning to the United States, and for the mainte-
nance of American seamen who may be destitute, and may be in such for-
eign port; and the several sums retained for such furſd shall be accounted
for with the treasury every six months, by the persons receiving the same.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the con-
suls, vice consuls, commercial agents, [or] vice commercial agents of the
United States, from time to time, to provide for the mariners, and seamen
12
90 DUTIES OF CONSULS AND WICE CONSULS.
of the United States, who may be found destitute within their districts,
respectively, sufficient subsistence and passages to some port in the United
States, in the most reasonable manner, at the expense of the United States,
subject to such instructions as the secretary of state shall give; and that all
masters and commanders of vessels belonging to citizens of the United
States, and bound to some port of the same, are hereby required and enjoined
to take such mariners or seamen on board of their ships or vessels, at the
request of the said consuls, vice consuls, commercial agents, or vice com-
mercial agents, respectively, and to transport them to the port in the United
States, to which such ships or vessels may be bound, on such terms, not
exceeding ten dollars for each person, as may be agreed between the said
master and consul, or commercial agent. And the said mariners or seamen
shall, if able, be bound to do duty on board such ships or vessels, according
to their several abilities: Provided, That no master or captain of any ship
or vessels shall be obliged to take a greater number than two men to every
one hundred tons of burthen of the said ship or vessel, on any one voyage;
and if any such captain or master shall refuse the same, on the request or
order of the consul, vice consul, commercial agent, or vice commercial
agent, such captain or master shall forfeit and pay the sum of one hundred
dollars for each mariner or seamen so refused, to be recovered, for the ben-
efit of the United States, in any court of competent jurisdiction. And the
certificate of such consul or commercial agent, given under his hand and offi-
cial seal, shall be prima facie evidence of such refusal, in any court of law
having jurisdiction for the recovery of the penalty aforesaid
SEc. 5. And be it further enacted, That the seventh and eighth sections of
the act, entitled “An act concerning consuls and vice consuls,” be and the
same are hereby repealed; and that the secretary of state be authorized to
reimburse the consuls, vice consuls, commercial agents, or vice commercial
agents, such reasonable sums as they may heretofore have advanced for the
relief of seamen, though the same should exceed the rate of twelve cents a
man per diem.
Sec. 6...flnd be it further enacted, That it shall and may be lawful for
every consul, vice consul, commercial agent, and vice commercial agent, of
the United States, to take and receive, for every certificate of discharge of
any seamen or maringrin a foreign port, fifty cents; and for commission on
paying and receiving the amount of wages payable on the discharge of sea-
men in foreign ports, two and a half per centum.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That if any consul, vice consul, com-
mercial agent, or vice commercial agent, shall, falsely, and knowingly, cer-
tify that the property belonging to foreigners is property belonging to citi-
zens of the United States, he shall, on conviction thereof, in any court of
competent jurisdiction, forfeit and pay a fine not exceeding ten thousand
dollars, at the discretion of the court, and be imprisoned for any term not
exceeding three years.
EQUALIZATION OF DUTIES. 91
SEc. 8. Jind be it further enacted, That if any consul, vice consul,
commercial agent, or vice commercial agent, shall grant a passport, or other
paper, certifying that any alien, knowing him or her to be such, is a citizen
of the United States, he shall, on conviction thereof, in any court of com-
petent jurisdiction, forfeit and pay a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars.
Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, That all powers of attorney, executed
after the thirtieth day of June next, in a foreign country, for the transfer of
any stock of the United States, or for the receipt of interest thereon shall
be verified by the certificate and seal of a consul, vice consul, commercial
agent, or vice commercial agent, if any there be, at the place where the
same shall be executed, for which the person giving the certificate shall re-
ceive fifty cents. [.ápproved February 28, 1803.]
EQUALIZATION OF DUTIES.
[By the second article of the convention made at London, on the 3d of July,
1815, the duties of impost and tonnage were equalized between the
United States and Great Britain; in consequence of which an act was
passed on the 1st of March, 1816, declaring that so much of any act as
imposes a higher duty of tonnage, or of imposts, on vessels and articles
imported in vessels, of Great Britain, than on vessels, and articles, im-
ported in vessels, of the United States, contrary to the provisions of that
convention, should, from and after the date of the ratification, and du-
ring its continuance, be deemed and taken to be of no force or effect.
By the 6th section of “An act to regulate the duties on imports and
tonnage,” approved on the 27th of April, 1816, it is declared that the
duty on the tonnage of vessels shall continue the same as the existing
law provides: but this provision is not to be deemed in any wise to im-
pair any rights and privileges which have been, or may be, acquired by
any foreign nation, under the laws and treaties of the United States,
relative to the duty of tonnage on vessels.]
No. 5.—An act to repeal so much of the several acts imposing duties on the
tonnage of ships and vessels, and on goods, wares, and merchandise, im-
ported into the United States, as imposes a discriminating duty on tonnage,
between foreign vessels and vessels of the United States, and between
goods imported into the United States in foreign vessels and vessels of the
United States.
U. S. Laws, vol. 4, page 824.
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That so much of the several acts imposing
duties on the tonnage of ships and vessels, and on goods, wares, and mer-
chandise, imported into the United States, as imposes a discriminating duty
of tonnage, between foreign vessels and vessels of the United States, and
92 DEPOSITE OF CONSULAR PAPERS.
between goods imported into the United States in foreign vessels and ves-
sels of the United States, be, and the same are hereby, repealed, so far as
the same respects the produce or manufacture of the nation to which such
foreign ships or vessels may belong. Such repeal to take effect in favor of
any foreign nation, whenever the president of the United States shall be
satisfied that the discriminating or countervailing duties of such foreign
nation, so far as they operate to the disadvantage of the United States, have
been abolished. [Approved, March 3, 1815.]
DEPOSITE OF FOREIGN CONSULAR PAPERS.
No. 6.—fln act authorizing the Deposite of the Papers of foreign Vessels with
the Consul of their respective Nations.
& U. S. Laws, vol. 6. page 194.
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That the register, or other document in lieu
thereof, together with the clearance and other papers, granted by the officers
of the customs to any foreign ship or vessel, at her departure from the port
or place from which she may have arrived, shall, previously to entry in any
port of the United States, be produced to the collector with whom such entry
is to be made. And it shall be the duty of the master or commander, within
forty-eight hours after such entry, to deposite the said papers with the consul
or vice consul of the nation to which the vessel belongs, and to deliver to the
collector the certificate of such consul or vice consul, that the said papers
have been so deposited; and any master or commander, as aforesaid, who
shall fail to comply with this regulation, shall, upon conviction thereof in any
court of competent jurisdiction, be fined in a sum not less than five hun-
dred dollars nor exceeding two thousand dollars: Provided; That this act
shall not extend to the vessels of foreign nations in whose ports American
consuls are not permitted to have the custody and possession of the register
and other papers of vessels entering the ports of such nation, according to the
provisions of the second section of the act, supplementary to the act “con-
cerning consuls and vice consuls, and for the further protection of American
seamen,” passed the twenty-eighth of February, one thousand eight hun-
dred and three.
SEc. 2...And be it further enacted, That it shall not belawful for any foreign
consul to deliver to the master or commander of any foreign vessel the regis-
ter and other papers deposited with him pursuant to the provisions of this
act, until such master or commander shall produce to him a clearance, in
due form, from the collector of the port where such vessel has been entered;
and any consul offending against the provisions of this act, shall upon con-
viction thereof before the supreme court of the United States, be fined, at
the discretion of the court in a sum not less than five hundred dollars nor
exceeding five thousand dollars. - [Approved, March 3, 1817.]
j
PASSENGER SHIPS AND WESSELS. 93
PASSENGER VESSELS.
No. 7.--in act regulating passenger ships and vessels.
Sec. 1. If the master or other person on board of any vessel, owned in
the whole or in part by a citizen or citizens of the United States, or the
territories thereof, or by a subject or subjects, citizen or citizens, of any
foreign country, shall after the first day of January next, take on board of
such vessel, at any foreign port or place, or shall bring or convey into the
United States, or the territories thereof, from any foreign port or place; or
shall carry, convey, or transport, from the United States, or the territories
thereof, to any foreign port or place, a greater number of passengers than
two for every five tons of such vessel, according to custom-house measure-
ment, every such master, or other person so offending, and the owner of
owners of such vessel, shall severally forfeit and pay to the United States,
the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars, for each and every passenger so
taken on board of such vessel over and above the aforesaid number of two
to every five tons of such vessel; to be recovered by suit, in any circuit or
district court of the United States, where the said vessel may arrive, or
where the owner or owners aforesaid, may reside: Provided, nevertheless,
That nothing in this act shall be taken to apply to the complement of men
usually and ordinarily employed in navigating such vessel.
SEc. 2. If the number of passengers so taken on board of any vessel as
aforesaid, or conveyed or brought into the United States, or transported there-
from as aforesaid, shall exceed the said proportion of two to every five tons
of such vessel, by the number of twenty passengers in the whole, every such
ship or vessel shall be deemed and taken to be forfeited to the United States,
and shall be prosecuted and distributed in the same manner in which the
forfeitures and penalties are recovered and distributed under the provisions
of the act, entitled “An act to regulate the collection of duties on imports
and tonnage.”
SEc. 3. Every vessel bound on a voyage from the United States to any
port on the continent of Europe, at the time of leaving the last port whence
such vessel shall sail, shall have on board, well secured under deck, at least
sixty gallons of water, one hundred pounds of salted provisions, one gallon
of vinegar, and one hundred pounds of wholesome ship bread, for each and
every passenger on board such-vessel, over and above such other provisions,
stores, and live stock, as may be put on board by such master or passenger
for their use; or that of the crew of such vessel; and in like proportion for
a shorter or longer voyage; and if the passengers on board of such vessel in
which the proportion of provisions herein directed shall not have been provi-
ded, shall at any time be put on short allowance, in water, flesh, vinegar,
or bread, during any voyage aforesaid, the master and owner of such vessel
shall severally pay to each and every passenger who shall have been put on
short allowance as aforesaid, the sum of three dollars for each and every
94 PASSENGER SHIPS AND VESSELS.
day they may have been on such short allowance; to be recovered in the
same manner as seamen’s wages are, or may be recovered.
SEc. 4. The captain or master of any vessel arriving in the United States,
or any of the territories thereof, from any foreign place whatever, at the
same time that he delivers a manifest of the cargo, and if there be no cargo,
then at the time of making report or entry of the vessel, pursuant to the ex-
isting laws of the United States, shall also deliver and report to the collector
of the district in which such vessel shall arrive, a list or manifest of all the
passengers taken on board of the said ship or vessel at any foreign port or
place; in which list or manifest it shall be the duty of the said master to
designate, particularly, the age, sex, and occupation, of the said passengers,
respectively, the country to which they severally belong, and that of which
it is their intention to become inhabitants; and shall further set forth whe-
ther any, and what number have died on the voyage; which report and ma-
nifest shall be sworn to by the said master, in the same manner as is directed
by the existing laws of the United States, in relation to the manifest of the
cargo, and that the refusal or neglect of the master aforesaid, to comply with
the provisions of this section, shall incur the same penalties, disabilities,
and forfeitures, as are at present provided for a refusal or neglect to report
and deliver a manifest of the cargo aforesaid.
SEc. 5. Each and every collector of the customs, to whom such manifest
or list of passengers as aforesaid shall be delivered, shall, quarter yearly,
return copies thereof to the secretary of state of the United States, by whom
statements of the same shall be laid before congress at each and every
session. [Approved March 2d, 1819.]
No. 8.-Concerning the navigation of the United States.
[Act of 1st March, 1817.]
SEc. 1. After the thirtieth day of September next, no goods shall be
imported into the United States from any foreign port or place, except in
vessels of the United States, or in such foreign vessels as truly and wholly
belong to the citizens or subjects of that country of which the goods are the
growth, production, or manufacture; or from which such goods, can only
be, or most usually are, first shipped for transportation: Provided, never-
theless, That this regulation shall not extend to the vessels of any foreign
nation which has not adopted, and which shall not adopt a similar regulation.
Sec. 2. All goods, imported into the United States, contrary to the true
intent and meaning of this act, and the ship or vessel wherein the same shall
be imported, together with her cargo, tackle, apparel, and furniture, shall
be forfeited to the United States; and such goods, vessels, and cargo, shall
be liable to be seized, prosecuted, and condemned, in like manner, and
under the same regulations, restrictions, and provisions as have been here-
NAVIGATION OF THE UNITED STATES. 95
tofore established for the recovery, collection, distribution, and remission of
forfeitures to the United States by the several revenue laws.
SEc. 4. No goods shall be imported, under penalty of forfeiture thereof,
from one port of the United States to another port of the United States, in
a vessel belonging wholly or in part to a subject of any foreign power; but
this clause shall not be construed to prohibit the sailing of any foreign vessel
from one to another port of the United States, provided no goods, wares, or
merchandise, other than those imported in such vessel from some foreign
port, and which shall not have been unladen, shall be carried from one port
or place to another, in the United States.
[Act of 18th April, 1818.]
SEc. 1. From and after the thirtieth of September next, the ports of the
United States shall be and remain closed against every vessel owned wholly
or in part, by a subject or subjects of his Britannic majesty, coming or ar-
riving from any port or place in a colony or territory of his Britannic ma-
jesty, that is or shall be, by the ordinary laws of navigation and trade, closed
against vessels owned by citizens of the United States; and such vessel,
that in the course of the voyage, shall have touched at, or cleared out from
any port or place in a colony or territory of Great Britain, which shall or
may be, by the ordinary laws of navigation and trade aforesaid, open to
vessels owned by citizens of the United States, shall, nevertheless, be deemed
to have come from the port or place in the colony or territory of Great Bri-
tain closed as aforesaid, against vessels owned by citizens of the United
States, from which such vessel cleared out and sailed before touching at,
and clearing out from an intermediate and open port or place as aforesaid;
and every such vessel, so excluded from the ports of the United States, that
shall enter or attempt to enter the same, in violation of this act, shall, with
her tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with the cargo on board such
vessel, be forfeited to the United States.
Sec. 2. From and after the aforesaid thirtieth of September next, the
owner, consignee, or agent, of every vessel owned wholly or in part, by a
subject or subjects of his Britannic majesty, which shall have been duly en-
tered in any port of the United States, and on board of which shall have
been there laden for exportation any article or articles of the growth, pro-
duce, or manufacture of the United States, other than provisions and sea
stores necessary for the voyage, shall, before such vessel shall have been
cleared outward at the custom-house, give bond in a sum double the value
of such articles, with one or more sureties, to the satisfaction of the collec-
tor, that the article or articles so laden on board such vessel for exportation,
shall be landed in some port or place other than a port or place in a colony
or territory of his Britannic majesty, which, by the ordinary laws of naviga-
tion and trade, is closed against vessels owned by citizens of the United
96 MAVIGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
States; and any such vessel that shall sail, or attempt to sail from any port
of the United States, without having complied with the provision aforesaid,
by giving bond as aforesaid, shall, with her tackle, apparel, and furniture,
together with the article or articles aforesaid, laden on board the same as
aforesaid, be forfeited to the United States. Provided, always, That no-
thing in this act contained shall be so deemed, or construed so as to violate
any provision of the convention to regulate commerce between the territo-
ries of the United States and his Britannic majesty, signed the third day of
July, one thousand eight hundred and fifteen.
SEc. 3. The form of the bond aforesaid, shall be prescribed by the se-
cretary of the department of the treasury, and the same shall and may be
discharged, and not otherwise, by producing, within one year after the date
thereof, a like certificate, to that required by, and under the regulations
contained in the eighty-first section of the act, “to regulate the collection
of duties on imports,” passed the second day of March, seventeen hundred
and ninety-nine, that the articles of the growth, produce, and manufacture
of the United States, laden as aforesaid, were unladen and landed conform-
ably to the provisions of this act, or, in cases of loss by sea, by capture, or other
unavoidable accident, by the production of such other proofs as the nature
of the case will admit, according to the provisions of the said eighty-first
section of the act aforesaid. *
SEc. 4. All penalties and forfeitures incurred by force of this act, shall
be sued for, recovered, distributed, and accounted for; and may be mitigat-
ed or remitted, in the manner, and according to the provisions of the reve-
nue laws of the United States.
No. 9.-fln act supplementary to an act, entitled “ an act concerning
navigation.”
Act of 15th May, 1820.
SEc. 1. From and after the thirtieth day of September next, the ports of
the United States shall be and remain closed against every vessel owned
wholly, or in part, by a subject or subjects of his Britannic majesty, coming
or arriving by sea, from any port or place in the province of Lower Canada,
or coming or arriving from any port or place in the province of New Bruns-
wick, not included within the act to which this act is supplementary. And
every such vessel, so excluded from the ports of the United States, that
shall enter, or attempt to enter, the same, in violation of this act, shall, with
her tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with the cargo on board such
vessel, be forfeited to the United States. -
Sec. 2. From and after the thirtieth day of September next, the owner,
consignee, or agent, of every vessel owned wholly or in part by a subject
or subjects of his Britannic majesty, which shall have been duly entered in
NAVIGATION OF THE UNITED STATES. 97
any port of the United States, and on board of which shall have been there
laden, for exportation, any article or articles of the growth, produce, or
manufacture, of the United States, other than provisions and sea stores ne-
cessary for the voyage, shall, before such vessel shall have been cleared
outward at the custom-house, give bond, in a sum double the value of such
article or articles, with one or more sureties, to the satisfaction of the col-
lector, that the article or articles so laden on board such vessel, for expor-
tation, shall be landed in some port or place in any province, island, colony,
territory, or possession, belonging to his Britannic majesty, that is men-
tioned or described in this act, or in the act to which this act is supplemen-
tary. And every such vessel that shall sail, or attempt to sail, from anyº
port of the United States, without having complied with the provisions
aforesaid, by giving bond as aforesaid, shall, with her tackle, appa el, and
furniture, together with the article or articles aforesaid, laden on board the
same as aforesaid, be forfeited to the United States. Provided, That no-
thing herein contained shall be deemed or construed so as to violate any
provision of the convention to regulate commerce between the territories of
the United States and his Britannic majesty, signed the third day of July,
one thousand eight hundred and fifteen.
SEc. 3. From and after the thirtieth day of September next, no goods
shall be imported into the United States of America from the province of
Nova Scotia, the province of New-Brunswick, the islands of Cape Breton,
St. Johns, Newfoundland, or their respective dependencies, from the Ber-
muda Islands, the Bahama Islands, the islands called Caicos, or either or
any of the aforesaid possessions, islands, or places, or from any other pro-
vince, possession, plantation, island, or place, under the dominion of Great
Britain in the West Indies, or on the continent of America, south of the
southern boundaries of the United States, except only such goods, wares,
and merchandise, as are truly and wholly of the growth, produce, or manu-
facture, of the province, colony, plantation, island, possession, or place,
aforesaid, where the same shall be laden, and from whence such goods,
wares, or merchandise, shall be directly imported into the United States;
and all goods imported, or attempted to be imported into the United States
of America, contrary to the provisions of this act, together with the vessel
on board of which the same shall be laden, her tackle, apparel, and furni-
ture, shall be forfeited to the United States.
Sec. 4. The form of the bond aforesaid shall be prescribed, and the
same shall be discharged, and all penalties and forfeitures, incurred under
this act, shall be sued for, recovered, distributed, and accounted for, and
the same may be mitigated, or remitted, in the manner, and according to
the provisions, of the act to which this act is supplementary.
98 BRITISH COLONIAL TRADE.
No. 10.--To regulate the Intercourse between the United States and certain
British Colonial Ports.
[Act of 1st March, 1823.)
SEc. 1. From and after the third day of March next, the first, second,
and third sections of the “act concerning navigation, passed April eigh-
teenth, 1818,” and the “act supplementary to an act concerning naviga-
tion,” approved on 15th May, 1820, are hereby suspended for, and during,
the continuance of this act, so far as any of the restrictions or prohibitions
therein contained, limit or interdict the intercourse of navigation or com-
merce between the ports of the United States and the British Colonial ports
"hereinafter mentioned, to wit: Kingston, Savannah Le Mar, Montego Bay,
St. Lucia, Antonia, St. Ann, Falmouth, Maria, Morant Bay, and Annatto
Bay, all in Jamaica.-St. George in Grenada, Roseau in Diminico; St.
Johns in Antigua; San Josef in Trinidad; Scarborough in Tobago; Road
Harbour in Tortola; Nassau in New Providence; Pittstown in Crooked
Island; Kingston in St. Vincent; Port St. George and Port Kingston in
Bermuda; any port where there is a custom-house in Bahamas; Bridgetown
in Barbadoes; St. Johns and St. Andrews, in New Brunswick; Halifax, in
Nova Scotia; Quebec, in Canada; St. Johns, in Newfoundland; George-
town, in Demerara; New Amsterdam, in Berbice; Castries, in St. Lucia;
Bassaterre, in St. Kitts; Charleston, in Nevis; Plymouth in Montserrat.
SEc. 2. From and after said third of March next, the ports of the Uni.
ted States shall be open to any British vessel coming directly from any of
the British colonial ports above enumerated, and it shall be lawful to import
in said vessels being navigated by a master and three-fourths at least, of
the mariners British subjects, any articles of the growth, produce, Of Iſlal-
nufacture of any of said British colonies, the importation of the like articles
to which from elsewhere, is not nor shall mot be prohibited by law, and
which may be exported from any of the said enumerated British ports, to
the United States on equal terms, in vessels belonging to the said states.
SEc. 3. That, on proof being given to the president of the United States,
satisfactory to him, that upon the vessels of the United States admitted into
the above enumerated British colonial ports, and upon any goods, imported
therein, in the said vessels, no other or higher duties of tonnage or impost,
and no other charges of any kind, are levied or exacted than upon British
vessels, or upon the like goods, wares, and merchandise, imported into the
said colonial ports from elsewhere, it shall and may be lawful for the pre-
sident of the United States to issue his proclamation, declaring that no other
or higher duty of impost or tonnage, and no other or higher duty or charge
of any kind, upon any goods, wares, or merchandise, imported from the
above enumerated British colonial ports, in British vessels, shall be levied
or exacted in any of the ports of the United States, (excepting the ports in
the territory of Florida,) than upon the vessels of the United States, and
BRITISH COLONIAL TRADE. 99
|
upon the like goods, wares, or merchandise, imported into the ports of the
United States in the same : Provided always, That until such proofs shall
be given, British vessels coming from the said British colonial ports, and
the goods, wares, and merchandise, imported in the same into the United
States, shall continue to pay the foreign tonnage duty, and the additional
duties upon goods, imported in foreign vessels, prescribed by the “Act to
regulate the duties on imports and tonnage,” approved the twenty-seventh
of April, one thousand eight hundred and sixteen.
SEG. 4. That no articles whatsoever, specie and bullion excepted, other
than articles of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the British colonies
to which the said enumerated ports belong, shall be imported into the Uni-
ted States, in British vessels, coming from any of the said enumerated ports;
and that no articles whatsoever, being of the growth, produce, or manufac-
ture of the British colonies, to which the said enumerated ports belong, shall
be imported into the United States, in any British vessel, other than a ves-
sel coming directly from one of the said enumerated ports, on pain of for-
feiting all such articles, together with the ship or vessel in which the same
shall have been imported, and her guns, tackle, apparel, and furniture.
Sec. 5. That it shall be lawful to export from the United States, directly
to any of the above enumerated British colonial ports, in any vessel of the
United States, or in any British vessel, navigated as by the second section
of this act is prescribed, and having come directly from any of the above
enumerated British colonial ports, any article of the growth, produce, or
manufacture of the United States, or any other article legally imported
therein, the exportation of which, elsewhere, shall not be prohibited by law:
Provided, That when exported in any such British vessel, before the ship-
ment of any such articles, security, by bond, shall be given to the United
States, in a penalty equal to half the value of the said articles; such bond
to be taken of the owner, consignee, or agent, by the collector of the port
at which the said British vessel shall have entered, for the due landing of
the said articles, at the port or ports, being of the British colonial ports
herein above enumerated, for which the said vessel shall clear out, and for
producing a certificate thereof, within twelve months from the date of said
bond, under the hand and seal of the consul or commercial agent of the
United States, resident at the port where the said articles shall have been
landed; or if there shall be no consul or commercial agent of the United
States residing there, such certificate to be under the hand and seal of the
chief officer of the customs at such port, or under the hand and seal of two
known and reputable merchants residing at such port; but such bond may
be discharged, by proof, on oath, by credible persons, that the said articles
were taken by enemies, or perished in the seas. And it shall not be lawful
to export, from the United States, any article whatsoever, to any of the
above enumerated British colonial ports, in any British vessel, ther than
100 BRITISH COLONIAL TRADE.
such as shall have come directly from one of the said ports to the United
States; nor shall it be lawful to export from the United States any article
whatsoever, in any British vessel, having come from any of the said enume-
rated ports, to any other port or place, whatsoever, than directly to one of
the said ports. And in case any such articles shall be shipped or waterborne,
for the purpose of being exported, contrary to this act, the same shall be
forfeited, and shall and may be seized and prosecuted, in like manner as for
any other violation of the revenue laws of the United States.
SEc. 6. That this act, unless repealed, altered, or amended, by congress,
shall be and continue in force so long as the above enumerated British colo-
nial ports shall be open to the admission of vessels of the United States,
conformably to the provisions of the British act of parliament, of the 24th
of June last, being the forty-fourth chapter of the acts of the third year of
George the Fourth. But if at any time, the trade and intercourse between
the United States and all or any of the above enumerated British colonial
ports, authorized by the said act of parliament, should be prohibited by a
British order in council, or by act of parliament, then, from the day of the
date of such order in council, or act of parliament, or from the time that
the same shall commence to be in force, proclamation to that effect having
been made by the president of the United States, each and every provision
of this act, so far as the same shall apply to the intercourse between the
United States and the above enumerated British colonial ports, in B itish
vessels, shall cease to operate in their favor: and each and every provision
of the “Act concerning navigation,” approved on the eighteenth of April,
one thousand eight hundred and eighteen; and of the act supplementary
thereto, approved on the fifteenth of May, one thousand eight hundred and
twenty, shall revive and be in full force.
Sec. 7. That if any British colonial port in the American hemisphere,
other than those herein above enumerated, should, by virtue of a British
order in council, be opened to vessels of the United States, conformably to
the provisions of the said act of parliament of the twenty-fourth of June last,
each and every provision of this act shall extend to the same, from the time
when it shall be so opened to the vessels of the United States.
SEc. 8. That the form of the bond aforesaid shall be prescribed by the
secretary of the treasury; and all penalties and forfeitures, incurred under
this act, shall be sued for, recovered, distributed, and accounted for, and
the same may be mitigated or remitted, in the manner, and according to the
provisions, of the revenue laws of the United States.
No. 11.—President’s Proclamation. [17th March, 1827.]
Whereas, by the 6th section of an act of congress, entitled “An act to
“regulate the commercial intercourse between the United States and certain
“British Colonial ports,” which was approved on the first day of March,
in the year of our Lord, 1823, it is enacted “that this act unless repealed,
BRITISH COLONIAL TRADE. T01
“altered, or amended by congress, shall be and continue in force so long as
“ the above enumerated British Colonial ports shall be open to the admission
“ of the vessels of the United States conformably to the provisions of the Bri-
“tish act of parliament, of the 24th of June last, being the forty-fourth
“chapter of the acts of the third year of George the Fourth: but if, at any
“ time, the trade and intercourse between the United States, and all, or
“any, of the above enumerated British Colonial ports, authorized by the
“ said act of parliament, should be prohibited by a British order in council,
“ or by act of parliament, then, from the day of the date of such order in
“council, or act of parliament, or from the time that the same shall com-
“mence to be in force, proclamation to that effect having been made by the
“president of the United States, each and every provision of this act, so far
“as the same shall apply to the intercourse between the United States, and
“the above enumerated British Colonial ports, in British vessels, shall cease
“to operate in their favor; and each and every provision of the “Act
“concerning navigation approved on the 18th of April, 1818, and of the
“Act supplementary thereto, approved on the 15th of May, 1820, shall
“revive, and be in full force.”
And whereas, by an act of the British parliament, which passed on the
5th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1825, entitled “An act to repeal
the several laws relating to the “customs,” the said act of parliament of
the 24th of June, 1822, was repealed, and by another act of the British par-
liament, passed, on the 5th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1825, in the
sixth year of the reign of George the Fourth, entitled “An act to regulate
the trade of the British possessions abroad,” and by an order of his Britan-
nic majesty in council, bearing date the 27th of July, 1826, the trade and
intercourse authorized by the aforesaid act of parliament, of the 24th of June,
1822, between the United States, and the greater part of the said British
Colonial ports therein enumerated, have been prohibited, upon, and from,
the first day of December last past, and the contingency has thereby arisen
on which the president of the United States was authorized by the 6th sec-
tion aforesaid of the act of congress of 1st March, 1823, to issue a procla-
mation to the effect therein mentioned:
Now, therefore, I, John Quincy Adams, president of the United States
of America, do hereby declare and proclaim that the trade and intercourse
authorized by the said act of parliament of the 24th of June, 1822, between
the United States and the British Colonial ports enumerated in the afore-
said act of congress of the 1st of March, 1823, have been, and are, upon
and from the first day of December, 1826, by the aforesaid two several acts
of parliament of the 5th of July, 1825, and by the aforesaid British order in
council, of the 27th day of July, 1826, prohibited.
Given under my hand at the City of Washington, this 17th day of March,
in the year of our Lord 1827, and the fifty-first of the Independence
of the United States. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
By the President: H. CLAY, Secretary of State.
102 BRITISH COLONIAL TRADE.
No. 12– An act, to amend the acts, regulating the Commercial intercourse
between the United States and certain colonies of Great Britain.
tAct of 29th May, 1830.]
SEC. 1. That whenever the president of the United States shall receive
satisfactory evidence that the government of Great Britain will open the
ports in its colonial possessions in the West Indies, on the continent of
South America, the Bahama Islands, the Caicos, and the Bermuda or Somer
Islands, to the vessels of the United States, for an indefinite or for a limited
term; that the vessels of the United States and their cargoes, on entering
the colonial ports aforesaid, shall not be subject to other or higher duties of
tonnage or impost, or charges of any other description, than would be impo-
sed on British vessels or their cargoes, arriving in said colonial possessions
from the United States; that the vessels of the United States may import
into the said colonial possessions from the United States any article or arti-
cles which could be imported in a British vessel into the said possessions
from the United States; and that the vessels of the United States may ex-
port from the British colonies aforementioned, to any country whatever,
other than the dominions or possessions of Great Britain, any article or ar-
ticles that can be exported therefrom in a British vessel, to any country
other than the British dominions or possessions as aforesaid; leaving the
commercial intercourse of the United States, with all other parts of the
British dominions or possessions, on a footing not less favorable to the Uni-
ted States than it now is, and that then, and in such case, the president of
the United States shall, and he is hereby authorized at any time before the
next session of Congress, to issue his proclamation, declaring that he has
received such evidence; and, thereupon, from the date of such proclamation,
the ports of the United States shall be opened, indefinitely, or for a term
fixed, as the case may be, to British vessels coming from the said British
colonial possessions, and their cargoes, subject to no other or higher duty
of tonnage or impost, or charge of any description whatever, than would be
levied on the vessels of the United States, or their cargoes, arriving from
the said British possessions; and it shall be lawful for the said British ves-
sels to import into the United States, and to export therefrom, any article or
articles which may be imported or exported in vessels of the United States:
and the act, entitled “ An act concerning navigation,” passed on the 18th
day of April, one thousand eight hundred and eighteen; an act supplemen-
tary thereto, passed the fifteenth day of May, one thousand eight hundred
and twenty; and an act entitled “An act to regulate the commercial inter-
course between the United States and certain British ports,” passed on the
first day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-three, are, in
such case, hereby declared to be suspended, or absolutely repealed, as the
case may require.
SEc. 2. That whenever the ports of the United States shall have been
opened, under the authority given in the first section of this act, British yes:
sels and their cargoes shall be admitted to an entry in the ports of the United
States from the islands, provinces, or colonies, of Great Britain, on or near
the North American continent, and north or east of the United States.
BRITISH coloniaL TRADE. 103
No. 13.-Proclamation % the president of the 5th of October, 1830, declar-
ing the ports of the United States to be open to British vessels with their
cargoes, from certain British colonial ports.
By the president of the United States of America. A Proclamation:
Whereas, by an act of the congress of the United States, passed on the
twenty-ninth day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty, it is pro-
vided, that whenever the president of the United States shall receive satis-
factory evidence that the government of Great Britain will open the ports
in its colonial possessions in the West Indies, on the continent of South
America, the Bahama islands, the Caicos, and the Bermuda or Somer islands,
to the vessels of the United States, for an indefinite or for a limited term;
that the vessels of the United States, and their cargoes, on entering the
colonial ports aforesaid, shall not be subject to other or higher duties of
tonnage or impost, or charges of any other other description, than would be
imposed on British vessels, or their cargoes, arriving in the said colonial
possessions from the United States; that the vessels of the United States
may import into the said colonial possessions, from the United States, any
article or articles which could be imported in a British vessel into the said
possessions, from the United States; and that the vessels of the United
States may export from the British colonies, aftermentioned, to any country
whatever, other than the dominions or possessions of Great Britain, any
article or articles that can be exported therefrom in a British vessel, to any
country other than the British dominions or possessions aforesaid; leaving
the commercial intercourse of the United States with all other parts of the
British dominions or possessions on a footing not less favorable to the Unit-
ed States than it now is, that them, and in such case, the president of the
United States shall be authorized, at any time before the next session of
congress, to issue his proclamation, declaring that he has received such
evidence; and that, thereupon, and from the date of such proclamation, the
ports of the United States shall be opened, indefinitely, or for a term fixed,
as the case may be, to British vessels coming from the said British colonial
possessions, and their cargoes, subject to no other or higher duty of tonnage
or impost, or charge of any description whatever, than would be levied on
the vessels of the United States, or their cargoes, arriving from the said
British possessions; and that it shall be lawful for the said British vessels
to import into the United States, and to export therefrom, any article or
articles which may be imported or exported in vessels of the United States;
and that the act, entitled “An act concerning navigation,” passed on the
eighteenth day of April, one thousand eight hundred and eighteen, an act
supplementary thereto, passed the fifteenth day of May, one thousand eight
hundred and twenty, and an act, entitled “An act to regulate the commer-
cial intercourse between the United States and certain British ports,”
passed on the first day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-
three, shall, in such case, be suspended, or absolutely repealed, as the case
may require.
104 COLOMBIAN DUTIES.
And whereas, by the said act, it is further provided, that whenever the
ports of the United States shall have been opened under the authority there-
by given, British vessels and their cargoes shall be admitted to an entry in
the ports of the United States, from the islands, provinces, or colonies of
Great Britain, on or near the North American continent, and north or east
of the United States.
And whereas, satisfactory evidence has been received by the president of
the United States, that, whenever he shall give effect to the provisions of
the act aforesaid, the government of Great Britain will open, for an indefi-
nite period, the ports in its colonial possessions in the West Indies, on the
continent of South America, the Bahama islands, the Caicos, and the Ber-
muda or Somer islands, to the vessels of the United States, and their cargoes,
upon the terms, and according to the requisitions of the aforesaid act of
congress. s
Now, therefore, I, Andrew Jackson, president of the United States of
America, do hereby declare and proclaim that such evidence has been re-
ceived by me; and that, by the operation of the act of congress passed on
the twenty-ninth day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty, the
ports of the United States are, from the date of this proclamation, open to
British vessels coming from the said British possessions, and their cargoes,
upon the terms set forth in said act; the act, entitled “An act concerning
navigation,” passed on the eighteenth day of April, one thousand eight hun-
dred and eighteen, the act supplementary thereto, passed the fifteenth day
of May, one thousand eight hundred and twenty, and the act, entitled “An
act to regulate the commercial intercourse between the United States and
certain British ports,” passed the first day of March, one thousand eight
hundred and twenty-three, are absolutely repealed: the British vessels and
their cargoes are admitted to an entry in the ports of the United States,
from the islands, provinces, and colonies of Great Britain, on or near the
North American continent, and north or east of the United States.
Given under my hand, at the City of Washington, the fifth day of Octo-
ber, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty,
and the fifty-fifth of the Independence of the United States.
ANDREW JACKSON.
By the President: M. WAN BUREN, Secretary of State.
No. 14.—An act to equalize the duties on vessels of the Republic of Columbia,
(Colombia,) and their cargoes.
[Act of 20th April, 1826.] t
Be it enacted, &c. That no other or higher rate of duties shall be imposed
or collected on vessels of the Republic of Columbia (Colombia), and their
cargoes, consisting of articles of the growth, produce, or manufacture,
of said Republic, than are, or may be, payable on vessels of the United
States, with cargoes composed as aforesaid.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the secretary of the treasury be,
SLAVE TRADE. 105
and he is hereby, authorized to return all duties which have been assessed
since the twenty-ninth January, eighteen hundred and twenty-six, on ves-
sels of the Republic of Columbia (Colombia), and their cargoes composed of
articles of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the said Republic, be-
yond the amount which would have been payable on vessels of the United
States and cargoes, composed as aforesaid, imported therein; and that the
same allowances of drawback on exportations, in vessels of the Republic of
Columbia (Colombia), be made as on the like exportations, in vessels of
the United States. d
SEc. 3. And be it further enacted, That this act shall continue and be
in force during the time that the equality for which it provides shall, in all
respects, be reciprocated in the ports of the Republic of Columbia (Colom-
bia); and if, at any time hereafter, the said equality shall not be reciprocated
in the ports of the said Republic, the president may, and he is hereby au-
thorized to, issue his proclamation, declaring that fact, whereupon this act
shall cease and determine. -
SLAVE TRADE. . .
No. 15.-fln act to prohibit the carrying on the slave trade, from the United
States to any foreign place or country.
[Act of March 22, 1794.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, 'That no citizen or citizens of the United States,
or foreigner, or any other person coming into, or residing within, the same,
shall, for himself or any other person whatsoever, either as master, factor,
or owner, build, fit, equip, load, or otherwise prepare, any ship or vessel,
within any port or place of the said United States, nor shall cause any ship
or vessel to sail from any port or place within the same, for the purpose of
carrying on any trade or traffic in slaves, to any foreign country; or for the
purpose of procuring, from any foreign kingdom, place, or country, the in-
habitants of such kingdom, place, or country, to be transported to any fo-
reign country, port, or place, whatever, to be sold or disposed of as slaves:
And if any ship or vessel shall be so fitted out, as aforesaid, for the said
purpose, or shall be caused to sail, so as aforesaid, every such ship or ves-
sel, her tackle, furniture, apparel, and other appertenances, shall be for-
feited to the United States; and shall be liable to be seized, prosecuted, and
condemned, in any of the circuit courts or district court for the district
where the said ship or vessel may be found and seized.
SEC. 2. That all and every person, so building, fitting out, equipping,
loading, or otherwise preparing, or sending away any ship or vessel, know-
ing, or intending, that the same shall be employed in such trade or business,
contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, or any ways aiding or
abetting therein, shall, severally, forfeit and pay the sum of two thousand
dollars, one moiety thereof to the use of the United States, and the other
moiety thereof to the use of him, or her, who shall sue for and prosecute
the same. -
14
196 SLAVE TRADE.
Sec. 3. That the owner, master, or factor, of each and every foreign
ship or vessel, clearing out for any of the coasts or kingdoms of Africa, or
suspected to beintended for the slave trade, and the suspicion being declared
to the officer of the customs, by any citizen, on oath or affirmation, and such
information being to the satisfaction of the said officer, shall first give bond,
with sufficient sureties, to the treasurer of the United States, that none of
the natives of Africa, or any other foreign country or place, shall be taken
on board the said ship or vessel, to be transported, or sold, as slaves, in any
other foreign port or place whatever, within nine months thereafter.
SEc. 4. That if any citizen or citizens of the United States shall, con-
trary to the true intent and meaning of this act, take on board, receive, or
transport, any such persons, as above described, in this act, for the purpose
of selling them as slaves, as aforesaid, he or they shall forfeit and pay, for
each and every person so received on board, transported, or sold, as afore-
said, the sum of two hundred dollars, to be recovered in any court of the
United States proper to try the same; the one moiety thereof to the use of
the United States, and the other moiety to the use of such person or persons
who shall sue for and prosecute the same. -
No. 16.—'An act in addition to the act, entitled “..An act to prohibit the car-
rying on the Slave Trade from the United States to any foreign place
or country.”
[Act of May 10, 1800.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That it shall be unlawful for any citizen of
, the United States, or other person residing within the United States, directly
or indirectly to hold or have any right or property in any vessel employed
or made use of in the transportation or carrying of slaves from one foreign
country, or place to another, and any right or property, belonging as afore-
said, shall be forfeited, and may be libelled and condemned for the use of
the person who shall sue for the same; and such person, transgressing the
prohibition aforesaid, shall also forfeit and pay a sum of money equal to
double the value of the right or property in such vessel, which he held as
aforesaid; and shall also forfeit a sum of money equal to double the value
of the interest which he may have had in the slaves, which at any time may
have been transported or carried in such vessel, after the passing of this
act, and against the form thereof.
SEc. 2. That it shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United States,
or other person residing therein, to serve on board any vessel of the United
States employed or made use of in the transportation or carrying of slaves
from one foreign country or place to another; and any such citizen or other per-
son, voluntarily serving as aforesaid, shall be liable to be indicted therefor,
and on conviction thereof, shall be liable to a fine not exceeding two thou-
sand dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding two years.
SEc. 3. That if any citizen of the United States shall voluntarily serve
on board of any foreign ship or vessel, which shall hereafter be employed
SLAVE TRADE. 107
in the slave trade, he shall, on conviction thereof, be liable to and suffer the
like forfeitures, pains, disabilities and penalties as he would have incurred,
had such ship or vessel been owned or employed, in whole or in part, by any
person or persons residing within the United States. -
SEC. 4. That it shall be lawful for any of the commissioned vessels of
the United States, to seize and take any vessel employed in carrying on
trade, business, or traffic, contrary to the true intent and meaning of this
or the said act to which this is an addition; and such vessel, together with
her tackle, apparel and guns, and the goods or effects, other than slaves,
which shall be found on board, shall be forfeited, and may be proceeded
against in any of the district or circuit courts, and shall be condemned for
the use of the officers and crew of the vessels making the seizure, and be
divided in the proportion directed in the case of prize: And all persons in-
terested in such vessel or in the enterprize or voyage in which such vessel
shall be employed at the time of such capture, shall be precluded from all
right or claim to the slaves found on board such vessel as aforesaid, and
from all damages or retribution on account thereof: And it shall moreover
be the duty of the commanders of such commissioned vessels to apprehend
and take into custody every person found on board of such vessel so seized
and taken, being of the officers or crew thereof, and him or them convey as
soon as conveniently may be, to the civil authority of the United States in
some one of the districts thereof, to be proceeded against in the due course
of law.
Sec. 5. That the district and circuit courts of the United States shall have
cognizance of all acts and offences against the prohibitions herein contained.
SEC. 6. Provided, nevertheless, That nothing in this act contained shall
be construed to authorize the bringing into either of the United States, any
person or persons, the importation of whom is, by the existing laws of such
state, prohibited.
SEc. 7. That the forfeitures which shall hereafter be incurred under
this, or the said act, to which this is in addition, not otherwise disposed of,
shall accrue and be one moiety thereof to the use of the informer, and the
other moiety to the use of the United States, except where the prosecution
shall be first instituted on behalf of the United States, in which case the
whole shall be to their use.
No. 17. An act to prevent the importation of certain persons into certain
states, where, by the laws thereof, their admission is prohibited.
[Act of February 28, 1803.] gº
SEC. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That, from and after the first day of April
next, no master or captain of any ship or vessel, or any other person, shall
import or bring, or cause to be imported or brought, any negro, mulatto, or
other persºn of colour, not being a native, a citizen, or registered seaman
of the United States, or seamen, natives of countries beyond the Cape of
108 SLAVE TRADE.
Good Hope, into any port or place of the United States, which port or place
shall be situated in any state which by law has prohibited or shall prohibit
the admission or importation of such negro, mulatto, or other person of co-
lour; and if any captain or master aforesaid, or any other person, shall im-
port or bring, or cause to be imported or brought into any of the ports or
places aforesaid, any of the persons whose admission or importation is pro-
hibited, as aforesaid, he shall forfeit and pay the sum of one thousand dol-
lars for each and every negro, mulatto, or other person of colour aforesaid
brought or imported as aforesaid, to be sued for and recovered by action of
debt, in any court of the United States; one half thereof to the use of the
United States, the other half to any person or persons prosecuting for the
penalty; and in any action instituted for the recovery of the penalty afore-
said, the person or persons sued may be held to special bail: Provided al-
ways, That nothing contained in this act shall be construed to prohibit the
admission of Indians, º
SEc. 2. That no ship or vessel arriving in any of the said ports or places
of the United States, and having on board any negro, mulatto, or other per-
son of colour, not being a native, a citizen, or registered seaman of the Uni-
ted States, or seamen natives of countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope
as aforesaid, shall be admitted to an entry. And if any such negro, mulatto,
or other person of colour, shall be landed from on board any ship or vessel,
in any of the ports or places aforesaid, or on the coast of any state prohibit-
ing the admission or importation, as aforesaid, the ship or vessel, together
with her tackie, apparel, and furniture, shall be forfeited to the United
States, and one half of the nett proceeds of the sales on such forfeiture shall
inure and be paid over to such person or persons on whose information the
seizure on such forfeiture shall be made. -
Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of the collectors and other officers of
the customs, and all other officers of the revenue of the United States, in
the several ports or places situated as aforesaid, to notice and be governed
by the provisions of the laws now existing, of the several states prohibiting
the admission or importation of any negro, mulatto, or other person of co-
lour, as aforesaid. And they are hereby enjoined vigilantly to carry into
effect the said laws of said states, conformably to the provisions of this act;
any law of the United States to the contrary notwithstanding.
No. 18.--An act to prohibit the importation of Slaves into any port or place
within the jurisdiction of the United States, from and after the first day of
January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eight.
Act of March 2, 1807.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted,’ &c. That from and after the first day of Janu-
ary, one thousand eight hundred and eight, it shall not be lawful to import
or bring into the United States, or the territories thereof, from any foreign
kingdom, place, or country, any negro, mulatto, or person of colour,
SLAVE TRADE. 109
with intent to hold, sell, or dispose of such negro, mulatto, or person of
colour, as a slave, or to be held to service or labour.
SEc. 2. That no citizen or citizens of the United States, or any other
person, shall, from and after the first day of January, in the year of our Lord
one thousand eight hundred and eight, for himself, or themselves, or any
other person whatsoever, either as master, factor, or owner, build, fit,
equip, load, or otherwise prepare any ship or vessel, in any port or place
within the jurisdiction of the United States, nor shall cause any ship or
vessel to sail from any port or place within the same, for the purpose of
procuring any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, from any foreign king-
dom, place, or country, to be transported to any port or place whatsoever,
within the jurisdiction of the United States, to be held, sold, or disposed
of as slaves, or to be held to service or labour: and if any ship or vessel
shall be so fitted out for the purpose aforesaid, or shall be caused to sail
so as aforesaid, every such ship or vessel, her tackle, apparel, and furni-
ture, shall be forfeited to the United States, and shall be liable to be seized,
prosecuted, and condemned in any of the circuit courts, or district courts,
for the district where the said ship or vessel may be found or seized.
SEc. 3. That all and every person so building, fitting out, equipping,
loading, or otherwise preparing, or sending away, any ship or vessel,
knowing or intending that the same shall be employed in such trade or
business, from and after the first day of January, one thousand eight hun-
dred and eight, contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, or any
ways aiding or abetting therein, shall severally forfeit and pay twenty
thousand dollars; one moiety thereof to the use of the United States, and
the other moiety to the use of any person or persons who shall sue for and
prosecute the same to effect. * & ~ *
Sec. 4. If any citizen or citizens of the United States, or any person
resident within the jurisdiction of the same, shall, from and after the first
day of January, one thousand eight hundred and eight, take on board,
receive, or transport, from any of the coasts of the kingdoms of Africa,
or from any other foreign kingdom, place, or country, any negro, mulatto,
or person of colour, in any ship or vessel, for the purpose of selling them
in any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States as slaves,
or to be held to service or labour, or shall be in any ways aiding or abetting
therein, such citizen or citizens, or person, shall severally forfeit and pay
five thousand dollars; one moiety thereof to the use of any person or per-
sons who shall sue for and prosecute the same to effect. And every such
ship or vessel in which such negro, mulatto, or person of colour, shall
have been taken on board, received, or transported, as aforesaid, her tackle,
apparel,and furniture,and the goods and effects which shall be found on board
the same, shall be forfeited to the United States, and shall be liable to be
seized, prosecuted, and condemned, in any of the circuit courts or dis-
116) SLAVE TRADE.
trict courts in the district where the said ship or vessel may be found or
seized. And neither the importer, nor any person or persons claiming
from or under him, shall hold any right or title whatsoever to any negro,
mulatto, or person of colour, nor to the service or labour thereof, who
may be imported or brought within the United States, or territories thereof,
in violation of this law, but the same shall remain subject to any ragula-
tions not contravening the provisions of this act, which the legislatures of
the several states or territories at any time hereafter may make, for dis-
posing of any such negro, mulatto, or person of colour. *
SEc. 5. That if any citizen or citizens of the United States, or any
other person resident within the jurisdiction of the same, shall, from and
after the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and eight, con-
trary to the true intent and meaning of this act, take on board any ship or
vessel from any of the coasts or kingdoms of Africa, or from any other
foreign kingdom, place, or country, any negro, mulatto, or person of
colour, with intent to sell him, her, or them, for a slave, or slaves, or
hold to service or labour, and shall transport the same to any port or
place within the jurisdiction of the United States, and there sell such negro,
mulatto, or person of colour, so transported as aforesaid, for a slave, or
to be held in service or labour, every such offender, shall be deemed guilty
of a high misdemeanor, and being thereof convicted, before any court hav-
ing competent jurisdiction, shall suffer imprisonment for not more than ten
years, nor less than five years, and be fined not exceeding ten thousand
dollars, nor less than one thousand dollars.
Sec. 6. That if any person or persons whatsoever shall, from and
after the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and eight, pur-
chase or sell any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, for a slave, or be
held to service or labour, who shall have been imported, or brought from
any foreign kingdom, place, or country, or from the dominions of any
foreign state immediately adjoining to the United States, into any port or
place within the jurisdiction of the United States, after the last day of
December, one thousand eight hundred and seven, knowing at the time of
such purchase or sale, such negro, mulatto, or person of colour, was so
brought within the jurisdiction of the United States, as aforesaid, such
purchaser and seller shall severally forfeit and pay for every negro, mu-
latto, or person of colour, so purchased or sold as aforesaid, eight hun-
dred dollars; one moiety thereof to the United States, and the other
moiety to the use of any person or persons who shall sue for and prosecute
the same to effect: Provided, That the aforesaid forfeiture shall not extend
to the seller or purchaser of any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, who
may be sold or disposed of in virtue of any regulation which may hereafter
be made by any of the legislatures of the several states in that respect, in
pursuance of this act, and the constitution of the United States.
SLAVE TRADE, 1 11
Sec. 7. That if any ship or vessel shall be found, from and after the
first day of January one thousand eight hundred and eight, in any river,
port, bay, or harbour, or on the high seas, within the jurisdictional limits
of the United States, or hovering on the coast thereof having on board any
negro, mulatto, or person of colour, for the purpose of selling them as
slaves, or with intent to land the same, in any port or place within the
jurisdiction of the United States, contrary to the prohibition of this act,
every such ship or vessel, together with her tackle, apparel, and furniture,
and the goods or effects which shall be found on board the same, shall be
forfeited to the use of the United States, and may be seized, prosecuted
and condemned, in any court of the United States, having jurisdiction
thereof. , And it shall be lawful for the President of the United States,
and he is hereby authorized, should he deem it expedient, to cause any of
the armed vessels of the United States to be manned and employed to
cruise on any part of the coast of the United States or territories thereof,
where he may judge attempts will be made to violate the provisions of this
act, and to instruct and direct the commanders of armed vessels of the
United States, to seize, take, and bring into any port of the United States,
all such ships or vessels; and moreover to seize, take, and bring into any
port of the United States, all ships or vessels of the United States, where-
soever found on the high seas, contravening the provisions of this act, to
be proceeded against according to law; and the captain, master, or com-
mander of every such ship or vessel, so found and seized as aforesaid,
shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and shall be liable to be
prosecuted before any court of the United States, having jurisdiction there-
of; and being thereof convicted, shall be fined not exceeding ten thousand
dollars, and be imprisoned not less than two years, and not exceeding four
years. And the proceeds of all ships and vessels, their tackle, apparel,
and furniture, and the goods and effects on board of them, which shall be
so seized, prosecuted, and condemned, shall be divided equally between
the United States and the officers and men who shall make such seizure,
take, or bring the same into port for condemnation, whether such seizure
be made by an armed vessel of the United States, or revenue cutters there-
of, and the same shall be distributed in like manner as is provided by law
for the distribution of prizes taken from an enemy : Provided, That the
officers and men, to be entitled to one half of the proceeds aforesaid, shall
safe keep every negro, mulatto, or person of colour, found on board of
any ship or vessel, so by them seized, taken, or brought into port for con-
demnation, and shall deliver every such negro, mulatto, or person of
colour, to such person or persons as shall be appointed by the respective
states to receive the same; and if no such person or persons shall be ap-
pointed by the respective states, they shall deliver every such negro, mu-
latto, or person of colour, to the overseers of the poor of the port or place
112 SLAVE TRADE.
where such ship or vessel may be brought and found, and shall immediately
transmit to the governor, or chief magistrate of the state, an account
of their proceedings, together with the number of such negroes, mulattoes,
or persons of colour, and a descriptive list of the same, that he may give
directions respecting such negroes, mulattoes, or persons of colour.
Sec. 8. That no captain, master, or commander of any ship or vessel,
of less burthen than forty tons, shall, from and after the first day of Janua-
ry, one thousand eight hundred and eight, take on board and transport any
negro, mulatto, or person of colour, to any port or place whatsoever, for the
purpose of selling or disposing of the same as a slave, or with intent that the
same may be sold or disposed of to be held to service or labour, on penalty
of forfeiting for every such negro, mulatto, or person of colour, so taken on
board and transported as aforesaid, the sum of eight hundred dollars; one
moiety thereof to the use of the United States, and the other moiety to any
person, or persons, who shall sue for and prosecute the same to effect: Pro-
vided, however, That nothing in this section shall extend to prohibit the
taking on board or transporting on any river, or inland bay of the sea, with-
in the jurisdiction of the United States, any negro, mulatto, or person of
colour, (not imported contrary to the provisions of this act,) in any vessel
or species of craft whatever. - - i -º-
Sec. 9. That the captain, master, or commander of any ship or vessel
of the burthen of forty tons or more, from and after the first day of January,
one thousand eight hundred and eight, sailing coastwise from any port in
the United States, to any port or place within the jurisdiction of the same,
having on board any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, for the purpose of
transporting them to be sold or disposed of as slaves, or to be held to ser-
vice or labour, shall, previous to the departure of such ship or vessel, make
out and subscribe duplicate manifests of every such negro, mulatto, or per-
son of colour, on board such ship or vessel, therein specifying the name and
sex of each person, their age and stature, as near as may be, and the class
to which they respectively belong, whether negro, mulatto, or person of co-
lour, with the name and place of residence of every owner, or shipper of the
same, and shall deliver such manifests to the collector of the port, if there
be one, otherwise to the surveyor, before whom the captain, master or com-
mander, together with the owner, or shipper, shall severally swear or af-
firm, to the best of their knowledge and belief, that the persons therein spe-
cified were not imported or brought into the United States from and after
the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and eight, and that,
under the laws of the state, they are held to service or labour; whereupon
the said collector, or surveyor, shall certify the same on the said manifests,
one of which he shall return to the said captain, master, or commander,
with a permit, specifying thereon the number, names, and general descrip-
tion of such persons, and authorising him to proceed to the port of his des-
*
SLAVE TRADE. 118
tination. And if any ship or vessel, being laden and destined as aforesaid,
shall depart from the port where she may then be, without the captain, mas-
ter, or commander having first made out and subscribed duplicate
manifests, of every negro, mulatto, and person of colour, on board such
ship or vessel, as aforesaid, and without having previously delivered the
same to the said collector and surveyor, and obtained a permit, in manner
as herein required, or shall, previous to her arrival at the port of destina-
tion, take on board any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, other than
those specified in the manifests, as aforesaid, every such ship or vessel, to-
gether with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, shall be forfeited to the use
of the United States, and may be seized, prosecuted, and condemned, in
any court of the U. States having jurisdiction thereof; and the captain, mas-
ter, or commander, of every such ship or vessel, shall moreover forfeit, for
every such negro, mulatto, or person of colour, so transported, or taken
on board, contrary to the provisions of this act, the sum of one thousand
dollars; one moiety thereof to the United States, and the other moiety to
the use of any person or persons, who shall sue for and prosecute the same
to effect.
SEc. 10. That the captain, master, or commander, of every ship or ves-
sel, of the burthen of forty tons or more, from and after the first day of Jan-
uary, one thousand eight hundred and eight, sailing coastwise, and having
on board any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, to sell or dispose of as
slaves, or to be held to service or labour, and arriving in any port within
the jurisdiction of the United States, from any other port within the same,
shall, previous to the unlading or putting on shore any of the persons afore-
said, or suffering them to go on shore, deliver to the collector, if there be
one, or, if not, to the surveyor residing at the port of her arrival, the mani-
fest certified by the collector or surveyor of the port from whence she sailed,
as is herein before directed; to the truth of which, before such officer, he
shall swear or affirm; and if the collector or surveyor shall be satisfied there-
with, he shall thereupon grant a permit for unlading, or suffering such negro,
mulatto, or person of colour to be put on shore; and if the captain, master,
or commander, of any such ship or vessel, being laden as aforesaid, shall
neglect or refuse to deliver the manifest at the time and in the manner here-
in directed, or shall land or put on shore any negro, mulatto, or person of
colour, for the purpose aforesaid, before he shall have delivered his mani-
fest, as aforesaid, and obtained a permit for that purpose, every such cap-
tain, master, or commander, shall forfeit and pay ten thousand dollars; one
moiety thereof to the United States, the other moiety to the use of any per-
son or persons who shall sue for and prosecute the same to effect.
15
114 SLAVE TRADE.
No. 19. An act in addition to “..An act to prohibit the introduction ſimpor-
tation] of slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the Uni-
ted States, from and º the first day of January, in the year of our
Lord, one thousand eight hundred and eight,” and to repeal certain parts
of the same.
[Act of April 20, 1818.]
SEC. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That, from and after the passing ºf his act,
it shall not be lawful to import or bring, in any manner whatsoever, into the
United States, or territories thereof, from any foreign kingdom, place, or
country, any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, with intent to hold, sell,
or dispose of, any such negro, mulatto, or person of colour, as a slave, or
to be held to service or labour; and any ship, vessel, or other water craft,
employed in any importation as aforesaid, shall be liable to seizure, prose-
cution, and forfeiture, in any district in which it may be found; one half
thereof to the use of the United States, and the other half to him or them
who shall prosecute the same to effect.
SEc. 2. That no citizen or citizens of the U. States, or any other person
or persons, shall, after the passing of this act, as aforesaid, for himself, them-
selves, or any other person or persons whatsoever, either as master, factor, or
owner, build, fit, equip, load, or otherwise prepare, any ship or vessel, in any
port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States, nor cause any such
ship or vessel to sail from any port or place whatsoever, within the jurisdiction
of the same, for the purpose of procuring any negro, mulatto, or person of co-
lour, from any foreign kingdom, place, or country, to be transported to any
port or place whatsoever, to be held, sold, or otherwise disposed of as slaves,
or to be held to service or labour; and if any ship or vessel shall be so built,
fitted out, equipped, laden, or otherwise prepared for the purpose aforesaid,
every such ship or vessel, her tackle, apparel, furniture, and lading, shall
be forfeited, one moiety to the use of the United States, and the other to
the use of the person or persons who shall sue for said forfeiture, and prose-
cute the same to effect; and such ship or vessel shall be liable to be seized
prosecuted and condemned, in any court of the United States, having com-
petent jurisdiction.
SEc. 3. That every person or persons so bulding, fitting out, equipping,
Ioading, or otherwise preparing, or sending away, or causing any of the acts
aforesaid to be done, with intent to employ such ship or vessel in such trade
or business, after the passing of this act, contrary to the true intent and
meaning thereof, or who shall, in any wise, be aiding or abetting therein,
shall, severally, on conviction thereof, by due course of law, forfeit and
pay a sum not exceeding five thousand dollars, nor less than one thousand
dollars, one moiety to the United States, and the other to the use of the per-
son or persons, who shall sue for such forfeiture, and prosecute the same
with effect, and shall moreover be imprisoned for a term not exceeding se-
ven years, nor less than three years.
SLAVE TRADE, i 15
SEc."4. That if any citizen or citizens of the United States, or other
person or persons resident within the jurisdiction of the same, shall, from
and after the passing of this act, take on board, receive, or transport, from
any of the coasts or kingdoms of Africa, or from any other foreign kingdom,
place or country, or from sea, any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, not
being an inhabitant, nor held to service by the laws of either of the states or
territories of the United States, in any ship, vessel, boat, or other water
craft, for the purpose of holding, selling, or otherwise disposing of, such
person as a slave, or to be held to service or labour, or be aiding or abetting
therein, every such person or persons, so offending, shall, on conviction, by
due course of law, severally forfeit and pay a sum not exceeding five thou-
sand, nor less than one thousand dollars, one moiety to the use of the Uni-
ted States, and the other to the person or persons who shall sue for such
forfeiture and prosecute the same to effect; and, moreover, shall suffer im-
prisonment, for a term not exceeding seven years nor less than three years,
and every ship or vessel, boat, or other water craft, on which such negro,
mulatto, or person of colour, shall have been taken on board, received
or transported, as aforesaid, her tackle, apparel, and furniture; and the
goods and effects which shall be found on board the same, or shall have
been imported therein in the same voyage, shall be forfeited, one moiety to
the use of the United States, and the other to the use of the person or per-
sons who shall sue for and prosecute the same to effect; and every such
ship or vessel shall be liable to be seized, prosecuted, and condemned, in
any court of the United States having competent jurisdiction.
SEc. 5. That neither the importer or importers, nor any person or per-
SOIAS claiming from or under him or them, shall hold any right, interest, or
title whatsoever, in or to any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, nor to
the service or labour thereof, who may be imported or brought into the Uni-
ted States or the territories thereof in violation of the provisions of this act,
but the same shall remain subject to any regulations, not contravening said
provisions, which the legislatures of the several states or territories, may at
any time heretofore have made, or hereafter may make, for disposing of any
such negro, mulatto, or person of colour.
SEc. 6. That if any person or persons whatsoever shall, from and after
the passing of this act, bring within the jurisdiction of the United States, in
any manner whatsoever, any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, from any
foreign kingdom, place, or country, or from sea, or shall hold, sell or other-
wise dispose of, any such negro, mulatto, or person of colour, so brought in
as a slave, or to be held to service or labour, or be in any wise aiding or ab-
etting therein, every person so offending shall, on conviction thereof by due
course of law, forfeit and pay, for every such offence, a sum not exceeding
ten thousand nor less than one thousand dollars, one moiety to the use of the
United States, and the other to the use of the person or persons who shall sue
T 16 SLAVE TRADE.
i
for such forfeiture, and prosecute the same to effect; and, moreover, shall
suffer imprisonment, for a term not exceeding seven years, nor less than
three years.
Sec. 7. That, if any person or persons whatsoever shall hold, purchase,
sell, or otherwise dispose of, any negro mulatto, or person of colour, for a
slave, or to be held to service or labour, who shall have been imported or
brought, in any way, from any foreign kingdom, place, or country, or from
the dominions of any foreign state immediately adjoining to the United
States, into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States,
from and after the passing of this act, every person so offending, and every
person aiding or abetting therein, shall severally forfeit and pay, for every
negro, mulatto, or person of colour, so held, purchased, sold, or disposed of,
one thousand dollars, one moiety to the use of the United States, and the
other to the use of the person or persons who may sue for such forfeiture,
and prosecute the same to effect, and to stand committed until the said for-
feiture be paid: Provided, That the aforesaid forfeiture shall not extend to
the seller or purchaser of any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, who may
be sold or disposed of in virture of any regulations which have been hereto-
fore, or shall hereafter be, lawfully made by any legislature of any state or
territory in pursuance of this act and the constitution of the United States.
SEc. 8. That in all prosecutions under this act, the defendant or de-
fendants shall be holden to prove that the negro, mulatto, or persons of co-
lour, which he or they shall be charged with having brought into the United
States, or with purchasing, holding, selling, or otherwise disposing of, and
which, according to the evidence in such case, the said defendant or defen-
dants shall have brought in aforesaid, or otherwise disposed of, was brought
into the United States at least five years previous to the commencement of
such prosecution, or was not brought in, holden, purchased, or otherwise
disposed of, contrary to the provisions of this act ; and in failure thereof,
the said defendant or defendants shall be judged guilty of the offence of
which he or they may stand accused.
SEc. 9. That any prosecution, information, or action, may be sustained,
for any offence under this act, at any time within five years after such of.
fence shall have been committed, any law to the contrary notwithstanding.
SEc. 10. That the first six sections of the act to which this is an addi-
tion, shall be and the same are hereby repealed : Provided, That all offen-
ces committed under the said sections of the act aforesaid, before the pas-
sing of this act, shall be prosecuted and punished, and any forfeiture which
have been incurred under the same shall be recovered and distributed, as if
this act had not been passed.
No. 20.--An act in addition to the acts prohibiting the slave trade.
- [Act of March 3, 1819.]
SEC. 1. Be it enacted, That the president of the United States be, and
he is hereby, authorized, whenever he shall deem it expedient, to cause any
SLAVE TRADE. 117
of the armed vessels of the United States to be imployed to cruize on any of
the coasts of the United States, or territories thereof, or on the coast of
Africa, or elsewhere, where he may judge attempts may be made to carry
on the slave trade by citizens or residents of the United States, in contra-
vention of the acts of congress prohibiting the same, and to instruct and di-
rect the commanders of all armed vesssls of the United States, to seize, take,
and bring into any port of the United States, all ships or vessels of the
United States, wheresoever found, which may have taken on board, or which
may be intended for the purpose of taking on board, or of transporting, or
may have transported, any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, in violation
of any of the provisions of the act, entitled “An act in addition to an act to
prohibit the importation of slaves into any port or place within the jurisdic-
tion of the United States, from and after the first day of January, in the
year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eight, and to repeal cer-
tain parts of the same:” or of any other act or acts prohibiting the traffic in
slaves, to be proceeded against according to law: And the proceeds of all
ships and vessels, their tackle, apparel, and furniture, and the goods and
effects on board of them, which shall be so seized, prosecuted, and condem-
ned, shall be divided equally between the United States and the officers
and men who shall seize, take, or bring, the same into port for condemna-
tion, whether such seizure be made by an armed vessel of the United States
or revenue cutter thereof: And the same shall be distributed in like man-
ner as is provided by law for the distribution of prizes taken from an enemy.
Privided, That the officers and men, to be entitled to one-half of the pro-
ceeds aforesaid shall safe keep every negro, mulatto, or person of colour,
found on board of any ship or vessel so seized, taken, or brought into port,
for condemnation, and shall deliver every such negro, mulatto, or person
of colour, to the marshal of the district into which they are brought, if into
a port of the United States, or, if elsewhere, to such person or persons as
shall be lawfully appointed by the president of the United States, in the
manner hereinafter directed, transmitting to the president of the United
States, as soon as may be, after such delivery, a descriptive list of such ne-
groes, mulattoes, or persons of colour, that he may give directions for the
disposal of them. Ånd provided further, That the commanders of such
commissioned vessels do cause to be apprehended, and taken into custody,
every person found on board of such vessel, so seized and taken, being of
the officers or crew thereof, and him or them convey, as soon as convenient-
ly may be, to the civil authority of the United States, to be proceeded
against, in due course of law, in some of the districts thereof.
Sec. 2. That the president of the United States be, and he is hereby
authorized to make such regulations and arrangements as he may deem ex-
pedient, for the safe-keeping, support, and removal beyond the limits of
the United States, of all such negroes, mulattoes, or persons of colour, as
may be so delivered and brought within their jurisdiction; and to appoint a
118 SLAVE TRADE.
proper person or persons, residing upon the coast of Africa, as agent or
agents for receiving the negroes, mulattoes, or persons of colour, delivered
from on board vessels, seized in the prosecution of the slave trade, by com-
manders of the United States’ armed vessels.
Sec. 3. That a bounty of twenty-five dollars be paid to the officers and
crews of the coiu ssioned vessels of the United States, or revenue cutters,
for each and every negro, mulatto, or person of colour, who shall have
been, as hereinbefore provided, delivered to the marshal or agent duly ap-
pointed to receive them: And the secretary of the treasury is hereby auth-
orized and required to pay, or cause to be paid, to such officer and crews,
or their agent, the aforesaid bounty, for each person delivered as aforesaid.
SEC. 4. That when any citizen, or other person, shall lodge information,
with the attorney for the district of any state or territory, as the cause may
be, that any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, has been imported there-
in, contrary to the provisions of the acts in such case made and provided,
it shall be the duty of the said attorney forthwith to commence a prosecu-
tion, by information; and process shall issue against the person charged
with holding such negro, negroes, mulatto, mulattoes, person or persons of
colour, so alleged to be imported contrary to the provisions of the acts afore-
said: And if, upon the return of the process executed, it shall be ascertain-
ed, by the verdict of the jury, that such negro, negroes, mulatto, mulattoes,
person, or persons of colour, have been brought in, contrary to the true
intent of the meaning of the acts in such cases made and provided, then the
court shall direct the marshal of the said district to take the said negroes,
mulattoes, or persons of colour, into his custody, for safe keeping, subject
to the orders of the president of the United States; and the informer or in-
formers, who shall have lodged the information, shall be entitled to receive,
over and above the portion of the penalties accruing to him or them by the
provisions of the acts in such case made and provided, a bounty of fifty
dollars, for each and every negro, mulatto, or person of colour, who shall
have been delivered into the custody of the marshal; and the secretary of
the treasury is hereby authorized and required to pay, or cause to be paid,
the aforesaid bounty, upon the certificate of the clerk of the court for the
district where the prosecution may have been had, with the seal of office
thereto annexed, stating the number of negroes, mulattoes, or persons
of colour, so delivered.
Sec. 5. That it shall be the duty of the commander of any armed vessel
of the United States, whenever he shall make any capture under the provi-
sions of this act, to bring the vessel and her cargo, for adjudication, into
some of the ports of the state or territory to which such vessel, so captured,
shall belong, if he can ascertain the same; if not, then to be sent into any
convenient port of the United States.
SEo. 6. That all such acts, or parts of acts, as may be repugnant to the
provisions of this act, shall be, and the same are hereby, repealed.
SLAVE TRADE. 119
SEc. 7. That a sum, not exceeding one hundred thousand dollars, be,
and the same is hereby, appropriated to carry this law into effect.
No. 21.--An act making an appropriation for the suppression of the slave
trade. -
[Act of May 24, 1828.]
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, That the sum of thirty thousand dollars be, and
the same is hereby appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the treasu-
ry not otherwise appropriated, for the suppression of the slave trade, pursu-
ant to the act of congress of the third day of Miarch, one thousand eight
hundred and nineteen.
No. 22.--An act more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain
crimes against the United States and for other purposes.
[Act of March 3, 1825.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, That, if any person or persons, upon the high seas,
or in any arm of the sea, or in any river, haven, creek, basin, or bay, with-
in the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and out
of the jurisdiction of any particular state, shall commit the crime of wilful
murder, or rape, or shall, wilfully and maliciously, strike, stab, wound,
poison, or shoot at, any other person, of which striking, stabbing, wound-
ing, poisoning, or shooting, such person shall afterwards die, upon land,
within or without the United States, every person so offending, his or her
counsellors, aiders, or abettors, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall,
upon conviction thereof, suffer death. -
SEc. 5. That, if any offence shall be committed on board of any ship or
vessel, belonging to any citizen or citizens of the United States, while lying
in a port or place within the jurisdiction of any foreign state or sovereign,
by any person belonging to the company of said ship, or any passenger, on
any other person belonging to the company of said ship, or any other pas-
senger, the same offence shall be cognizable and punishable by the proper
circuit court of the United States, in the same way and manner, and under
the same circumstances, as if said offence had been committed on board of
such ship or vessel on the high seas, and without the jurisdiction of such
foreign sovereign or state: Provided, always, That, if such offender shall
be tried for such offence, and acquitted or convicted thereof, in any compe-
tent court of such foreign state or sovereign, he shall not be subject to an-
other trial in any court of the United States. . . .
Sec. 6. That, if any person or persons, upon the high seas, or in any
arm of the sea, or in any river, haven, creek, basin, or bay, within the admi-
ralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and out of the juris-
diction of any particular state, shall, by surprise, or by open force or
violence, maliciously attack, or set upon, any ship or vessel belonging in
whole or part, to the United States, or to any citizen or citizens thereof,
120 CRIMES, OFFENCES, &c.
or to any other person whatsoever, with an intent unlawfully to plunder
the same ship or vessel, or to despoil any owner or owners thereof of any
moneys, goods, or merchandize, laden on board thereof, every person so
offending, his or her counsellors, aiders, or abettors, shall be deemed guilty
of felony; and shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by fine, not exceed-
ing five thousand dollars, and by imprisonment and confinement to hard
labour, not exceeding ten years, according to the aggravation of the of.
fence. -
SEc. 7. If any person or persons, upon the high seas, or in any other of
the places aforesaid, with intent to kill, rob, steal, commit rape, or to do or
perpetrate any other felony, shall break or enter any ship or vessel, boat,
or raft; or if any person or persons shall, wilfully and maliciously, cut,
spoil, or destroy, any cordage, cable, buoys, buoy-rope, headfast, or other
fast, fixed to any anchor or moorings, belonging to any ship, vessel, boat,
or raft, every person so offending, his or her counsellors, aiders and abet-
tors, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall, on conviction thereof, be
punished by fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, and by imprisonment
and confinement to hard labour, not exceeding five years, according to the
aggravation of the offence.
Sec. 8. If any person or persons, upon the high seas, or in any of the
places aforesaid, shall buy, receive, or conceal, or aid in concealing any mo-
ney, goods, bank notes, or other effects or things which may be the subject
of larceny, which have been feloniously taken or stolen, from any other per-
son, knowing the same to have been taken or stolen, every person, so of.
fending, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be prosecuted
therefor, although the principal offender chargeable, or charged with the
larceny, shall not have been prosecuted or convicted thereof; and shall, on
conviction thereof, be punished by fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars,
and imprisonment and confinement to hard labour, not exceeding three
years, according to the aggravation of the offence.
Sec. 9. If any person or persons shall plunder, steal, or destroy, any mo-
ney, goods, merchandize, or other effects, from or belonging to any ship or
vessel, or boat, or raft, which shall be in distress, or which shall be wreck-
ed, lost, stranded, or cast away, upon the sea, or upon any reef, shoal, bank,
or rocks of the sea, or in any other place within the admiralty and mari-
time jurisdiction of the United States, or if any person or persons shall
wilfully obstruct the escape of any person endeavouring to save his or her
life from such ship, or vessel, boat, or raft, or the wreck thereof, or if any
person or persons shall hold out or show any false light, or lights, or extin-
guish any true light, with intention to bring any ship or vessel, boat, or raft,
being or sailing upon the sea, into danger, or distress, or shipwreck, every
person, so offending, his or her counsellors, aiders, and abettors, shall be
deemed guilty of felony, and shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by
CRIMES, OFFENCES, &c. 121
fine, not exceeding five thousand dollars, and imprisonment and confine-
ment to hard labor, not exceeding ten years, according to the aggravation of
the offence. -
Sec. 10. If any master or commander of any ship or vessel, belonging,
in whole, or in part, to any citizen or citizens of the United States, shall,
during his being abroad, maliciously, and without justifiable cause, force
any officer, or mariner, of such ship or vessel, on shore, leave him behind,
in any foreign port or place, or refuse to bring home again all such of the
officers and mariners, of such ship or vessel, whom he carried out with him,
as are in a condition to return, and willing to return, when he shall be rea-
dy to proceed on his homeward voyage, every master or commander, so
offending, shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by fine, not exceeding
five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment, not exceeding six months, accord-
ing to the aggravation of the offence. g
Sec. 11. If any person or persons, shall, wilfully and maliciously, set
on fire, or burn, or otherwise destroy, or cause to be set on fire, or burnt,
or otherwise destroyed, or aid, procure, abet, or assistin setting on fire,
or burning or otherwise destroying, any ship or vessel of war of the United
States, afloat on the high seas, or in any arm of the sea, or in any river,
haven, creek, basin, or bay, within the admiralty jurisdiction of the Uni-
ted States, and out of the jurisdiction of any particular state, every per-
son, so offending, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall, on conviction
thereof, suffer death: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be
construed to take away or impair the right of any court martial to punish
any offence, which, by the laws of the United States, may be punishable by
such court. h
Sec. 12. If any officer of the United States shall be guilty of extortion,
under or by colour of his office, every person so offending shall, on convic-
tion thereof, be punished by fine, not exceeding five hundred dollars, or by
imprisonment, not exceeding one year, according to the aggravation of the
offence.
Sec. 13. If any person, in any case, matter, hearing, or other proceed-
ing, when an oath or affirmation shall be required to be taken or adminis-
tered, under or by any law or laws of the United States, shall, upon the tak-
ing of such oath or affirmation, knowingly and wilfully swear or affirm false-
ly, every person, so offending, shall be deemed guilty of perjury, and shall,
on conviction thereof, be punished by fine, not exceeding two thousand dol-
lars, and by imprisonment and confinement to hard labour, not exceeding
five years, according to the aggravation of the offence. And if any person
or persons shall knowingly or willingly procure any such perjury to be
committed, every person so offending, shall be deemed guilty of suborna-
tion of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by fine, not
exceſs two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment and confinement to
122 CRIMES, OFFENCES, &c.
hard labour, not exceeding five years, according to the aggravation of the
offence.
Sec. 14. And the trial of all offences which shall be committed upon the
high seas, or elsewhere, out of the limits of any state or district, shall be in
the district where the offender is apprehended, or into which he may be first
brought.
Sec. 22. That, if any person or persons, upon the high seas, or in any
arm of the sea, or in any river, haven, creek, basin, or bay, within the ad-
miralty jurisdiction of the United States, and out of the jurisdiction of any
particular state, on board any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the
United States, or any citizen or citizens thereof, shall, with a dangerous
weapon, or with intent to kill, rob, steal, or to commit a mayhem, or rape,
or to perpetrate any other felony, commit an assault, on another, such per-
son shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by fine, not exceeding three
thousand dollars, and by imprisonment and confinement to hard labour, not
exceeding three years, according to the aggravation of the offence.
SEc. 23. That, if any person or persons shall, on the high seas, or with-
in the United States, wilfully and corruptly conspire, combine, and con-
federate, with any other person or persons, such other person or persons
being either within or without the United States, to cast away, burn, or
otherwise destroy, any ship or vessel, or to procure the same to be done,
with intent to injure any person. or body politic, that hath underwritten, or
shall thereafterwards underwrite, any policy of insurance thereon, or on
goods on board thereof, or with intent to injure any person, or body politic,
that hath lent or advanced, or thereafter shall lend or advance, any money
on such vessel, on bottomry or respondentia, or shall, within the United
States, build or fit out, or aid in building or fitting out, any ship or vessel,
with intent that the same shall be cast away, burnt, or destroyed, for the
purpose or with the design aforesaid, every person so offending, shall, on
conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of felony, and shall be punished by
fine, not exceeding ten thousand dollars, and by imprisonment, and con-
finement to hard labor, not exceeding ten years.
Mo. 23.- An act to continue in force “..An act to protect the commerce of
the United States and punish the crime of piracy,” and also to make
further provision for punishing the crime of piracy.
[Act of May 15, 1820.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That the first second third and fourth, sec-
tions of an act entitled “An act to protect the commerce of the United
States and punish the crime of piracy,” passed on the third day of March
one thousand eight hundred and nineteen, be, and the same are hereby,
continued in force from the passing of this act for the term of two years,
aid from thence to the end of the next session of Congress and no longer.
Sec. 2. That the fifth section of the said act be, and the same is here-
CRIMES, OFFENCES, &c. 128
by, continued in force, as to all crimes made punishable by the same, and
heretofore committed, in all respects as fully as if the duration of the said
section had been without limitation.
Sec. 3. That if any person shall, upon the high seas, or in any open
roadstead, or in any haven, basin, or bay, or in any river where the sea ebbs
and flows, commit the crime of robbery, in or upon any ship or vessel, or upon
any of the ship’s company, of any ship or vessel, or the lading thereof, such
person shall be adjudged to be a pirate ; and, being thereof convicted, be-
fore the Circuit Court of the United States for the district into which he
shall be brought or in which he shall be found, shall suffer death. And if
any person engaged in any piratical cruize or enterprise, or being of the
crew or ship’s company of any piratical ship or vessel, shall land from such
ship or vessel, and on shore, shall commit robbery, such person shall be ad-
judged a pirate; and, on conviction thereof, before the Circuit Court of the
United States for the district into which he shall be brought, or in which he
shall be found, shall suffer death: Provided, That nothing in this section
contained shall be construed to deprive any particular State of its jurisdic-
tion over such offences, when committed within the body of a county, or au-
thorize the courts of the United States to try any such offenders, after con-
viction or acquittance, for the same offence in a state court.
SEc. 4. That if any citizen of the United States, being of the crew or
ship’s company of any foreign ship or vessel engaged in the slave trade, or
any person whatever, being of the crew or ship's company of any ship or
vessel, owned in the whole or part, or navigated for, or in behalf of, any
citizen or citizens of the United States, shall land from any such ship or
vessel, and, on any foreign shore, seize any negro or mulatto, not held to
service or labour by the laws of either of the states or territories of the
United States, with intent to make such negro or mulatto a slave, or shall
decoy, or forcibly bring or carry, or shall receive, such negro or mulatto
on board any such ship or vessel, with intent as aforesaid, such citizen or
person shall be adjudged a pirate ; and, on conviction thereof, before the
Circuit Court of the United States for the district wherein he may be
brought or found, shall suffer death. -
SEc. 5. That if any citizen of the United States, being of the crew or
ship's company of any foreign ship or vessel engaged in the slave trade, or
any person whatever, being of the crew or ship’s company of any ship or
vessel, owned wholly or in part, or navigated for, or in behalf of, any citizen
or citizens of the United States,shall forcibly confine or detain, or aid and abet
in forcibly confining or detaining, on board such ship or vessel,any negro or
mulatto not held to service by the laws of either of the states or territories
of the United States, with intent to make such negro or mulatto a slave, or
shall, on board any such ship or vessel, offer or attempt to sell, as a slave, any
negro or mulatto not held to service as aforesaid, or shall on the high seas,
124 DISCRIMINATING DUTIES.—HANSEATIC CITIES, &c.
or any where on tide water, transfer or deliver over, to any other ship or
vessel, any negro or mulatto, not held to service as aforesaid, with intent to
make such negro or mulatto a slave, or shall land, or deliver on shore, from
on board any such ship or vessel, any such negro or mulatto, with intent to
make sale of, or having previously sold, such negro or mulatto, as a slave,
such citizen or person shall be adjudged a pirate ; and, on conviction there-
of, before the Circuit Court of the United States for the district wherein he
shall be brought or found, shall suffer death. +
Mo. 24.—An act concerning discriminating duties of tonnage and impost.
HAct of January 7, 1824.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted &c. That, from and after the first day of January,
one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four, during the continuance of this
act, and under the limitations hereinafter mentioned, so much of the seve-
ral acts imposing duties on the tonnage of vessels in the ports of the United
States, as imposes a discriminating duty between foreign vessels and ves-
sels of the United States, is hereby suspended, so far as respects vessels truly
and wholly belonging to subjects or citizens of the Kingdom of the Neth-
erlands, of Prussia, of the imperial Hanseatic Cities of Hamburg, Lubeck
and Bremen, of the Dukedom of Oldenburg, of the Kingdom of Norway, of
the Kingdom of Sardinia, and of the Empire of Russia.
SEo. 2. And be it further enacted, That so much of the several acts im-
posing duties on goods, wares and merchandize, imported into the United
States, as imposes a discriminating duty between goods imported into the
United States in foreign vessels, and in vessels of the United States, be,
and the same is hereby, suspended, so far as the same respects the produce
or manufactures of the territories in Europe, of any of the abovementioned
nations, or such produce and manufactures as can only be, or most usually
are, first shipped from a port or place in the said territories in Europe, or
either of them, respectively, the same being imported in vessels truly and
wholly belonging to the subjects or citizens of each of the said nations res-
pectively, the vessels of each nation importing its own produce and manu-
factures as aforesaid.
SEo. 3. And be it further enacted, That the suspension of the discrimina-
ting duties of tonnage and impost, in the two preceding sections of this act
prescribed, shall continue, in behalf of each of the above mentioned nations
on condition that, and so long as the vessels of the United States, and truly
and wholly belonging to the citizens thereof, and all goods and merchan-
dize, of the produce and manufacture of the United States, laden therein,
and imported into any of the ports of the said nations in Europe, respective-
ly, shall be exempted from all and every discriminating duty of impost or
tonnage, direct or indirect, whatsoever, other or higher than is levied upon
the vessels and merchandize therein imported, belonging to the subjects or
PISCRIMINATING DUTIES.—ROME. 125
citizens of each of the said nations, respectively. But if, in any of the
territories in Europe, of either of the said nations, any such discriminating
duty shall at any time, be imposed or levied on vessels wholly belonging to
the citizens of the United States, or on the merchandize imported as afore-
said in them, then, and from that time, the said suspension herein prescribed
shall cease, and determine, so far as respects the vessels and merchandize
imported into the United States in them, of such nations: and all the provi-
sions of the acts, imposing discriminating foreign tonnage and impost du-
ties in the United States, shall revive and be in full force, with regard to
the said nation.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That, upon satisfactory evidence be-
ing given to the President of the United States, by the government of any
foreign nation, that no discriminating duties of tonnage or impost are im-
posed or levied within the ports of the said nation, upon vessels wholly be-
longing to citizens of the United States, or upon merchandize, the produce
or manufacture thereof, imported in the same, the President is hereby au-
thorized to issue his proclamation, declaring that the foreign discriminat-
ing duties of tonnage and impost within the United States, are and shall be
suspended and discontinued, so far as respects the vessels of the said na-
tion, and the merchandize of its produce or manufacture, imported intº the
United States in the same: the said suspension to take effect from the time
of such notification being given to the President of the United States, and
to continue so long as the reciprocal exemption of vessels, belonging to citi-
2ens of the United States, and merchandize as aforesaid, thereon laden,
shall be continued, and no longer.
No. 25.-Proclamation of the President, of the 7th June, 1827, declaring
the discriminating duties on impost and tonnage, to be suspended so far
as they relate to vessels, &c. of the subjects of the Pope.
By the President of the United States.—Proclamation.
Whereas, by an act of congress of the United States, of the seventh of
January, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four, entitled “An act
concerning discriminating duties of tonnage and impost,” it is provided,
that upon satisfactory evidence being given to the president of the United
States, by the government of any foreign nation, that no discriminating du-
ties of tonnage or impost are imposed or levied within the ports of the said
nation, upon vessels wholly belonging to citizens of the United States, or
upon merchandize, the produce or manufacture thereof, imported in the
same, the president is thereby authorized to issue his proclamation, declar-
ing that the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the
United States are, and shall be suspended and discontinued, so far as res-
pects the vessels of the said nation, and the merchandize of its produce, or
manufacture, imported into the United States, in the same: the said sus-
pensien te take effect frena the time of such notification being given to the
126 DiscriMINATING DUTIES.–PRUSSIA.
president of the United States, and to continue so long as the reciprocal
exemption of vessels belonging to citizens of the United States, and mer.
chandize, as aforesaid, therein laden, shall be continued, and no longer.
And whereas satisfactory evidence was given to the president of the
United States, on the 30th day of May last, by count Lucchesi, consul
general of his holiness the Pope, that all foreign and discriminating duties
of tonnage and impost within the dominions of his holiness, so far as res-
pected the vessels of the United States, and the merchandize of their pro-
duce or manufacture, imported in the same, were suspended and discon-
tinued.
Now, therefore, I, John Quincy Adams, president of the United States,
conformably to the fourth section of the act of congress aforesaid, do hereby
proclaim and declare that the foreign and discriminating duties of tonnage
and impost within the United States, are, and shall be suspended and dis-
continued, so far as respects the vessels of the subjects of his holiness the
Pope, and the merchandize of the produce or manufacture of her domin-
ions. imported into the United States in the same: the said suspension to
take effect from the 30th of May aforesaid, and to continue, so long as the
reciprocal exemption of vessels belonging to citizens of the United States,
and merchandize as aforesaid, therein laden, shall be continued, and no
longer. r
Given under my hand, at the city of Washington, this seventh day of
June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-
seven, and of the Independence of the United States the fifty-first.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
By the president:—H. CLAY, Secretary of State.
No. 26.--An act in addition to an act, entitled “..An act concerning dis-
criminating duties of tonnage and impost,” and to equalize the duties on
Prussian vessels and their cargoes.
[Act of May 24, 1828.]
SEC 1. Be it enacted, That, upon satisfactory evidence being given to
the president of the United States, by the government of any foreign na-
tion, that no discriminating duties of tonnage or impost are imposed or le-
vied in the ports of the said nation, upon vessels wholly belonging to citi-
zens of the United States, or upon the produce, manufacture, or merchan-
dize, imported in the same from the United States, or from any foreign
country, the president is hereby authorized to issue his proclamation, de-
claring that the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and impost, within
the United States are, and shall be, suspended and discontinued, so far as
respects the vessels of the said foreign nation, and the produce, manufac-
tures, or merchandize imported into the United States in the same, from
the said foreign nation, or from any other foreign country; the said suspen-
sion to take effect from the time of such notification being given to the pre-
DISCRIMINATING DUTIES.–HANOVER. 127
sident of the United States, and to continue so long as the reciprocal ex-
emption of vessels, belonging to citizens of the United States, and their
cargoes, as aforesaid, shall be continued, and no longer.
Sec. 2. That no other or higher rate of duties shall be imposed or col-
lected on vessels of Prussia, or of her dominions, from whencesoever com-
ing, nor on their cargoes, howsoever composed, than are, or may be, paya-
ble on vessels of the United States and their cargoes.
Sec. 3. That the secretary of the treasury be, and he is hereby, author-
ized to return all duties which have been assessed, since the fifteenth day
of April, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, on Prussian vessels,
and their cargoes, beyond the amount which would have been payable on
vessels of the United States, and their cargoes; and that the same allowan-
ces of drawback be made on merchandize exported in Prussian vessels as
would be made on similar exportations in vessels of the United States.
SEc. 4. That so much of this act as relates to Prussian vessels, and
their cargoes, shall continue and be in force during the time that the equal-
ity for which it provides shall, in all respects, be reciprocated in the ports
of Prussia, and her dominions; and if, at any time hereafter, the said equal- ..
ity shall not be reciprocated in the ports of Prussia, and her dominions,
the president may, and he is hereby, authorized to issue his proclamation,
declaring that fact, and thereupon so much of this act as relates to Prus-
sian vessels, and their cargoes, shall cease and determine.
No. 27.-Proclamation of the president of the 1st July, 1828, declaring the
discriminating duties on impost and tonnage to be suspended so far as
zelates to the vessels, &c. of the kingdom of Hanover.
By the President of the United States of America.—Proclamation.
Whereas, by an act of the congress of the United States, of the seventh
of January, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four, entitled “An act
concerning discriminating duties of tonnage and impost,” it is provided
that, upon satisfactory evidence being given to the president of the United
States, by the government of any foreign nation, that no discriminating du-
ties of tonnage or impost are imposed or levied within the ports of the said
nation, upon vessels belonging wholly to citizens of the United States, or
upon merchandize, the produce or manufacture thereof, imported in the
same, the president is thereby authorized to issue his proclamation, declar-
ing that the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the
United States, are, and shall be suspended and discontinued, so far as res-
pects the vessels of the said nation, and the merchandize of its produce, or
manufacture, imported into the United States, in the same: the said sus-
pension to take effect from the time of such notification being given to the
president of the United States, and to continue so long as the reciprocal
exemption of vessels, belonging to citizens of the United States, and mer.
chandize, as aforesaid, thereon laden, shall be continued, and no longer.
128 BISCRIMINATING DUTIES-AUSTRIA.
And, whereas, satisfactory evidence has been received by me, from his
Britannic majesty, as king of Hanover, through the right honorable Charles
Richard Vaughan, his envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary,
that vessels wholly belonging to citizens of the United States, or merchan-
dize, the produce or manufacture thereof, imported in such vessels, are not,
nor shall be, on their entering any Hanoverian port, subject to the payment
of higher duties of tonnage or impost than are levied on Hanoverian ships,
or merchandize, the produce or manufacture of the United States, import-
ed in such vessels.
Now, therefore, I, John Quincy Adams, President of the United States
of America, do hereby declare and proclaim, that so much of the several
acts imposing duties on the tonnage of ships and vessels, and on goods,
wares and merchandize, imported into the United States, as imposed a dis-
criminating duty of tonnage between the vessels of the kingdom of Hano-
ver, and vessels of the United States, and between goods imported into the
United States in vessels of the kingdom of Hanover, and vessels of the
United States, are suspended and discontinued, so far as the same respects
the produce or manufacture of the said kingdom of Hanover; the said sus-
pension to take effect this day, and to continue henceforward, so long as
the reciprocal exemption of the vessels of the United States, and of the
merchandize laden therein, as aforesaid, shall continue in the ports of the
kingdom of Hanover.
Given under my hand, at the city of Washington, the first day of July,
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight,
and the fifty-second of the Independence of the United States.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
By the President:—H. CLAY, Secretary of State.
No. 28.-Proclamation of the president of the 3d June, 1829, declaring the
discriminating duties on impost and tonnage, to be suspended, so far as
they relate to the vessels, &c. of Austria.
By the President of the United States of America.—Proclamation.
Whereas, by an act of the congress of the United States, of the 24th of
May, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight, entitled “An act in
addition to an act, entitled “An act concerning discriminating duties of
tonnage and impost,” and to equalize the duties on Prussian vessels and
their cargoes,” it is provided that, upon satisfactory evidence being given
to the president of the United States, by the government of any foreign na-
tion, that no discriminating duties of tonnage or impost are imposed or le-
vied in the ports of the said nation, upon vessels wholly belonging to citi-
Žens of the United States, or upon the produce, manufactures or merchan-
dize, imported in the same from the United States, or from any foreign
country, the president is thereby authorized to issue his proclamation, de-
claring that the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and impost, within
DISCRIMINATING DUTIES-OLDENBURG. 129
the United States, are, and shall be suspended and discontinued, so far as
respects the vessels of the said foreign nation, and the produce, manufac-
tures, or merchandize, imported into the United States in the same, from
the said foreign nation, or from any other foreign country, the said suspen-
sion to take effect from the time of such notification being given to the pre-
sident of the United States, and to continue so long as the reciprocal ex-
emption of vessels belonging to citizens of the United States, and their
cargoes, as aforesaid, shall be continued, and no longer.
And whereas satisfactory evidence has lately been received by me, from
his imperial majesty, the emperor of Austria, through an official communi-
cation of the Baron de Lederer, his consul general in the United States,
under date of the 29th of May, 1829, that no other or higher duties of ton-
nage and impost are imposed or levied, since the first day of January last,
in the ports of Austria, upon vessels wholly belonging to citizens of the
United States, and upon the produce, manufactures, or merchandize in-
ported in the same from the United States, and from any foreign country
whatever, than are levied on Austrian ships and their cargoes, in the same
ports, under like circumstances.
Now, therefore, I, Andrew Jackson, president of the United States of
America, do hereby declare and proclaim, that so much of the several acts
imposing discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the United
States, are, and shall be, suspended and discontinued, so far as respects
the vessels of Austria, and the produce, manufactures, and merchandize
imported into the United States in the same, from the dominions of Austria,
and from any other foreign country whatever: the said suspension to take
effect from the day above mentioned, and to continue thenceforward, so
long as the reciprocal exemption of the vessels of the United States, and
the produce, manufactures, and merchandize imported into the dominions
of Austria, in the same, as aforesaid, shall be continued on the part of the
government of his imperial majesty the emperor of Austria.
Given under my hand, at the city of Washington, this third day of June,
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-nine,
and of the Independence of the United States the fifty third.
ANDREW JACKSON.
By the President:—M. WAN BUREN, Secretary of State.
No. 29.—Proclamation of the President, of the 18th September, 1830, sus-
pending duties of impost and tonnage, relating to the vessels and goods,
&c. of the dukedom of Oldenburg.
By the President of the United States of America—Proclamation. -
Whereas, by an act of the congress of the United States, of the 24th o
May, one thousand eight hundred and twenty eight, entitled “An act, in
addition to an act, entitled ‘An act concerning discriminating duties of
* impost,” and to equalize the duties on Prussian vessels and
| 30 DISCRIMINATING DUTIES-OLDENBURG.
their cargoes,” it is provided that, upon satisfactory evidence being given
to the president of the United States, by the government of any foreign na-
tion, that no discriminating duties of tonnage or impost are imposed or le-
vied, in the ports of the said nation, upon vessels wholly belonging to citi-
zens of the United States, or upon the produce, manufactures, or merchan-
dize, imported in the same, from the United States, or from any foreign
country, the president is thereby authorized to issue his proclamation, de-
claring that the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within
the United States are, and shall be suspended and discontinued, so far as
respects the vessels of the said foreign nation, and the produce, manufac-
tures, or merchandize, imported into the United States in the same, from
the said foreign nation, or from any other foreign country; the said suspen-
sion to take effect from the time of such notification being given to the pre-
sident of the United States, and to continue so long as the reciprocal ex-
emption of vessels belonging to the citizens of the United States and their
cargoes, as aforesaid, shall be continued, and no longer.
And whereas satisfactory evidence has lately been received by me, from
his royal highness the grand duke of Oldenburg, through an official com-
munication of F. A. Mensch, his consul in the United States, under date
of the 15th September, 1830, that no discriminating duties of tonnage or
Impost are imposed or levied, in the ports of the grand dukedom of Olden-
burg, upon vessels wholly belonging to citizens of the United States, or up-
on the produce, manufactures, or merchandize, imported in the same, from
the United States, or from any other country.
Now, therefore, I, Andrew Jackson, president of the United States of
America, do hereby declare and proclaim, that so much of the several acts
imposing discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the United.
States, are, and shall be suspended and discontinued, so far as respects the
vessels of the grand dukedom of Oldenburg, and the produce, manufctures
and merchandize, imported into the United States in the same, from the
grand dukedom of Oldenburg, and from any foreign country whatever; the
said suspension to take effect from the day above mentioned, and to con-
tinue thenceforward, so long as the reciprocal exemption of the vessels of
the United States, and the produce, manufactures and merchandize, im-
ported into the grand dukedom of Oldenburg, in the same, as aforesaid,
shall be continued on the part of the government of his royal highness the
grand duke of Oldenburg,
Given under my hand at the city of Washington, the eighteenth day of
September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
thirty, and the fifty-fifth of the Independence of the United States.
t ANDREW JACKSON,
By the President:—M. WAN BUREN, Secretary of State. -
FRENCH COMMERCIAL CONVENTION. 181
No. 30.—ffn act for carrying into effect the Convention of Navigation and
Commerce between the United States and France, concluded at Washing-
ton, on the twenty-fourth day of June, eighteen hundred and twenty-two.
[Act of March 3, 1823.]
SEC. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That the act to impose a new tonnage duty
on French ships or vessels, approved on the fifteenth day of May, one
thousand eight hundred and twenty, be, and the same is hereby repeal ed.
SEC 2. And be it further enacted, That for the term of two years,
from and after the thirtieth day of September last articles of the growth,
produce or manufacture, of France, imported into the United States, in,
French vessels, shall pay an additional duty of three dollars and seventy
five cents per ton of merchandise, according to the tenor of the Convention
of Navigation and Commerce between the United States and France, con-
cluded on the twenty-fourth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and
twenty-two, over and above the duties collected upon the like articles,
also of the growth, produce or manufacture, ºf France, when imported
in vessels of the United States: Provided always, That no discriminating
duty shall be levied upon the productions of the soil or industry of France,
imported in French bottoms, into the ports of the United States, for transit
or re-exportation.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That, from and after the expiration of
two years from the said thirtieth day of September last, in case of the contin-
uance in force of the said Convention and so long as the same shall continue
in force, the extra duties, specified in the second section of this act, shall,
from and after the said thirtieth day of September, one thousand eight hun-
dred and twenty-four be diminished by one fourth of the whole amount; and
afterwards, by one-fourth of said amount, from year to year, so long as
neither of the parties to the said Convention shall have declared the inten-
tion of renouncing the same in the manner therein provided, and until the
whole of such discriminating and extra duty shall have been done away.
SEc. 4. And be it further enacted, That during the continuance in
force of the said Convention, the duties of tonnage, light money, pilotage,
port charges, brockerage, [brokerage,J and all other duties, upon foreign
shipping, over and above those paid by vessels of the United States, other
than those specified in the second section of this act, shall not exceed, for
French vessels in the ports of the United States, ninety-four cents per ton
of the vessel’s French passport.
SEc. 5. And be it further enacted, That the Secretary of the Treasury
be, and he is hereby, authorized to cause to be refunded, from any monies
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, any extra duties levied before
the twenty-fourth day of June last, by virtue of the act of Congress of the
fifteenth of May, one thousand eight hundred and twenty, imposing a new
tonnage duty on French ships or vessels.
*
132 MARTINIQUE AND GUADALOUPE.
Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That, if the second separate article
of the said Convention, concluded on the twenty-fourth of June last, should
be ratified by both the contracting parties thereto, and the ratiº eation there-
of should be exchanged, on or before the twenty third day of June next,
then, from and after the expiration of two months, subsequent to the said
exchange of ratifications, and during the continuance in force of the said
separate article, the extra duties specified in the second section of this act
shall be levied only upon the excess of value of the merchandise imported
into the United States in any French vessel, over the value of the merchan.
dise exported from the United States in the same vessel, upon the same voy-
“age; so that, if the value of the articles exported shall equal or exceed that
of the articles imported in the same vesssel, (not including articles import-
ed for transit or re-exportation,) no such extra duties shall be levied ; and
if the articles exported are less in value than those imported, the extra
duties shall be levied only upon the amount of difference of their value.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That all acts, or parts of acts of Con-
gress, incompatible with the execution of each and every article of the said
Convention, concluded on the twenty-fourth of June last, and of its ratified
separate article, be and the same are hereby repealed.
COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE WITH MARTINIQUE & GUADALOUPE.
No. 31.--An act regulating cómmercial intercourse with the Islands of
. Martinique and Guadaloupe.
[Act of May 9, 1828.]
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, That all French vessels coming directly from the
islands of Martinique and Guadaloupe, and laden with articles, the growth
or manufacture of either of said islands, and which are permitted to be ex-
ported therefrom in American vessels, may be admitted into the ports of
the United States on payment of no higher duties on tonnage, or on their
eargoes, as aforesaid, than are imposed on American vessels, and on like
cargoes imported in American vessels: Provided, That if the president of
the United States shall, at any time, receive satisfactory information that
the privileges allowed to American vessels and their cargoes at said islands,
by the French ordinance of February fifth, one thousand eight hundred and
twenty-six, have been revoked or annulled, he is hereby authorized, by
proclamation to suspend the operations of this act, and withhold all privi-
leges allowed under it.
APPREHENSION OF DESERTERs.
No. 32.—An act to provide for the apprehension and delivery of deserters
from certain foreign vessels in the ports of the United States.
[Act of March 2, 1829.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, That on application of a consul or vice-consul of
any foreign government, having a treaty with the United States, stipulating
DESERTERS.–RUSSIAN TREATY, FIFTH ART. 133
for the restoration of seamen deserting, made in writing, stating that the
person therein named has deserted from a vessel of any such government
while in any port of the United States, and on proof by the exhibition of the
register of the vessel, ship’s roll, or other official document, that the person
named belonged, at the time of desertion, to the crew of said vessel, it shall
be the duty of any court, judge, justice, or other magistrate, having compe-
tent power, to issue warrants to cause the said person to be arrested for ex-
amination; and if, on examination, the facts stated are found to be true,
the person arrested, not being a citizen of the United States, shall be deli-
vered up to the said consul or vice-consul, to be sent back to the dominions
of any such government, or, on the request, and at the expense of the saidº
consul or vice-consul, shall be detained until the consul or vice-consul finds
an opportunity to send him back to the dominions of any such government:
Provided nevertheless, That no person shall be detained more than two
months after his arrest; but at the end of that time shall be set at liberty,
and shall not be again molested for the same cause: And provided further,
That if any such deserter shall be found to have committed any crime or
offence, his surrender may be delayed until the tribunal before which the
case shall be depending, or may be cognizable, shall have pronounced its
sentence, and such sentence shall have been carried into effect.
RUSSIA.—CONTRAVENTIONS OF FIFTH ARTICLE OF TREATY.
No. 33.--An act for the punishment ºf contravenſions of the fifth article of
- the treaty between the United States and ſºussia.
[Act of May 19, 1828.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, That if any one, being a citizen of the United
States, or trading under their authority, shall, in contravention of the sti-
pulations entered into by the United States with the emperor of all the
Russias, by the fifth article of the treaty, signed at St. Fetersburg, on the
seventeenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hun-
dred and twenty-four, sell, or cause to be sold, to the natives of the country
on the north-west coast of America, or any of the islands adjacent thereto,
any spirituous liquors, fire-arms, or other arms, powder or munitions of war
of any kind, the person so offending shall be fined in a sum not less than
fifty, nor more than two hundred dollars, or imprisoned not less than thirty
days, nor more than six months.
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That the superior courts in each of the
territorial districts, and the circuit courts and other courts of the United
States, of similar jurisdiction in criminal causes, in each district of the
United States, in which any offender against this act shall be first appre-
hended or brought for trial, shall have, and are hereby invested with, full
power and authority to hear, try and punish, all crimes, offences and mis-
demeanors, against this act; such courts proceeding therein in the same
manner as if such crimes, oftences and misdemeanors, had been Committed
within the bounds of their respective districts,
134 CLAIMS ON DENMARK.
No. 34.—An act to provide for the adjustment of claims of persons entitled
to indemnification wrider the convention between the United States and
his majesty the King of //enmark, of the twenty-eighth March, eighteen
hundred and thirty, and for the distribution among such claimants of
the sums to be paid by the Ilanish Government to that of the United States,
according to the stipulation of the said convention.
[Act of February 25, 1831.]
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That the commissioners who are or may be
appointed by the president of the United States, by and with the advice
an’ſ consent of the Senate, in pursuance of the third article of the conven-
"tion between the United States of America and his Majesty the King of
Denmark, signed at Copenhagen the twenty-eighth day of March, one thous-
and eight hundred and thirty, shall meet at Washington City, in the District
of Columbia, and, within the space of two years from the time of their first
meeting, shall receive, examine, and decide upon the amount and validity
of all such claims as may be presented to them, and are provided for by the
convention referred to, according to the merits of the several cases, and
to justice, equity, and the law of nations, and according to the provisions of
said convention.
SEc. 2. That all records, documents, or other papers, which now are in
or hereafter, during the continuance of this commission, may come into the
possession of the Department of State, in relation to such claims, shall be
delivered to the commission aforesaid. 4
SEc. 3. That the said commissioners, or a majority of them, with their
Secretary, whose appointment is hereinafter provided for, shall convene in
this city on the first Monday of April next, and shall proceed to execute the
duties of their commission; and the Secretary of State shall be, and he is
hereby authorized and required forth with, after the passing of this act, to
give notice of the said intended meeting, to be published in one or more pub-
lic gazettes in the city of Washington, and in such other public papers,
published elsewhere in the United States, as he may designate.
Sec. 4. That the said commissioners shall proceed immediately after
their meeting in the city of Washington, with all convenient despatch, to
arrange and docket the several claims, and to consider the evidence
which shall have been, or which may be offered by the respective claim-
ants allowing such further time for the production of such further evi-
dence as may be required, and as they shall think reasonable and
just: and they shall thereupon proceed to determine the said claims, and to
award distribution of the sums to be received by the United States from the
King of Denmark under the stipulations of the convention aforesaid, among
the several claimants, according to their respective rights.
Sec. 5. That the said commissioners shall be, and they are hereby au-
thorized and empowered to make all needful rules and regulations, not con-
€LAIMS ON DENMARK. 135
travening the laws of the land, the provisions of this act, or the provisions of
the said convention, for carrying their said commission into full and com-
plete effect.
Sec. 6. That the President of the United States be and he is hereby,
authorized, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint a
Secretary to the said commission.
Sec. 7. That the said commissioners and Secretary shall severally take
an oath for the faithful performance of the duties of their respective offices.
Sec. 8. That the compensation of the respective officers for whose ap-
pointment provision is made by this act shall not exceed the following sums:
to each of the said commissioners at the rate of three thousand dollars per
annum, and to the Secretary of the Board at the rate of two thousand dol-
lars per annum; and the president of the United States shall be, and he is
hereby, authorized to make such provision for the contingent expenses of
the said commission as shall appear to him reasonable and proper; and the
said salaries and expenses shall be paid out of any money in the Treasury,
not otherwise appropriated.
SEC 9. That all moneys to be received from the Danish Government
under the convention aforesaid, shall be paid into the Treasury of the Unit-
ed States, and shall constitute a fund for satisfying the awards of the com-
mission provided for by this act.
SEc. 10. That all communications to or from the Secretary of the Board
of Commissioners on the business of the commission, shall pass by mail free
of postage.
SEc. 11. That as soon as the said commission shall be executed and com-
pleted, the records, documents, and all other papers in the possession of
the commission or its officers shall be disposited in the office of the Sec-
retary of State.
CONVENTION OF INDEMNITY WITH FRANCE. 137
No. 35.-Jīn Āct to carry into effect the convention between the Cºnited States
and his Majesty the King of the French, concluded at Paris on the fourth
of July, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-one.
[Act of July 13, 1832.]
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United
States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint
three commissioners, who shall form a board, whose duty it shall be to re-
ceive and examine all claims which may be presented to them under the
convention between the United States and France, of the fourth of July,
one thousand eight hundred and thirty one, which are provided for by the
said convention, according to the provisions of the same, and the principles
of justice, equity, and the law of nations. The said board shall have a
secretary, versed in the English, French, and Spanish languages, and a
clerk, both to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate; and the commissioners, secretary, and clerk, shall,
before they enter on the duties of their offices, take oath well and faithful-
ly to perform the duties thereof.
SEc. 2. And be it further enacted, That the said commissioners shall
be, and they are hereby, authorized to make all needful rules and regula-
tions, not contravening the laws of the land, the provisions of this act. or
the provisions of the said convention for carrying their said commission in-
to full and complete effect.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the board so constituted shall meet
on the first Monday of August next at the city of Washington; and, within
two years from the time of its meeting, shall terminate its duties. And the
Secretary of State is required forthwith, after the passing of this act, to
give notice of the said meeting; to be published in two newspapers in
Washington, and in such other papers as he may think proper.
SEc. 4. And be it further enacted, That all records, documents, or other
papers, which now are in, or hereafter, during the continuance of this com-
mission, may come into the possession of the Department of State, in rela-
tion to such claims, shall be delivered to the commission aforesaid.
SEc. 5...And be it further enacted, That the compensation of the respective
officers, for whose appointment provision is made by this act, shall not ex-
ceed the following sums, namely: to each of the said commissioners, at the
rate of three thousand dollars per annum; to the Secretary of the board at
the rate of two thousand dollars per annum; and to the clerk at the rate of
fifteen hundred dollars per annum. And the President of the United States
shall be, and he is hereby authorized, to make such provision for the con-
tingent expenses of the said commission, as shall appear to him reasonable
and proper; and the said salaries and expenses shall be paid out of any moe
hey in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
18 s
138 CONVENTION OF INDEMNITY WITH FRANCE.
SEc. 6. And be it further enacted, That the said commissioners shall re-
port to the Secretary of State a list of the several awards made by them: a
certified copy whereof shall be transmitted to the Secretary of the Treasury,
who shall thereupºn distribute, in ratable proportions, among the persons in
whose favor the awards shall have been made, such moneys as may have
been received into the Treasury in virtue of this act, according to the pro-
portions which their respective awards shall bear to the whole amount then
received, first deducting such sums of money as may be due the United
States from said persons in whose favor said awards shall be made; and
shall also cause certificates to be issued by the Secretary of the Treasury,
in such form as he may prescribe, showing the proportion to which each
may be entitled of the amount that may thereafter be received; and, on the
presentation of the said certificates at the Treasury, as the nett proceeds of
the general instalments, payable by the French Government, shall have
been received, such proportions thereof shall be paid to the legal holders
of the said certificates.
SEc. 7, And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Sec-
retary of the Treasury to cause the several instalments, with the interest
thereon, payable to the United States in virtue of the said convention, to
be received from the French Government, and transferred to the United
States, in such manner as he may deem best, and the nett proceeds thereof
to be paid into the Treasury ; and, on the payment of the proceeds of each
of the said instalments, there shall be set apart, of the money in the Trea-
sury, such further sum as would have been received from the nett proceeds
of such instalment, if the reservation stipulated by the fourth article of the
said convention had not been deducted; and the moneys which may be thus
set apart, together with those which may be received into the Treasury un-
der this act, shall be, and the same are hereby, appropriated, to satisfy the
awards herein provided for.
SEc. 8. And be it further enacted, That all communications to or from
the secretary of the board of commissioners, on the business of the commis-
sion, shall pass by mail free of postage.
SEc. 9. And be it further enacted, That, as soon as said eommission
shall be executed and completed, the records, documents, and all other pa-
pers in the possession of the commission or its officers, shall be deposited
in the office of the Secretary of State.
SEc. 10. And be it further enacted, That for the term of ten years,
from and after the second day of February, one thousand eight hundred and
thirty-two, wines, the produce of France, shall be admitted into the United
States on paying duties not exceeding the following rates on the gallon,
(such as is at present used in the United States,) that is to say: six cents
for red wine in casks, ten cents for white wine in casks, and twenty-two
cents for wine of all sorts in bottles.
COLOMBIA—PORTUGAL-SPAIN. 139
No. 36. An Act for giving effect to a commercial arrangement between
the United States and the Republic of Colombia.
[Act of May 19, 1832.]
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That vessels of the Republic of Colombia,
and their cargoes, whether of foreign or domestic produce or manufacture,
which shall come direct from the ports of that nation to the United States,
shall pay no greater duties on importation, anchorage, tonnage, or any
other kind, than are now, or hereafter may be, levied on the vessels of the
United States.
Sec. 2. That the restriction of coming direct from a port in Colombia,
contained in the preceding section, shall be taken off, as soon as the Presi-
dent shall receive satisfactory evidence, that a like restriction is taken off
from vessels of the United States in the ports of the Republic of Colombia,
and shall make known the same by his proclamation declaring the fact.
Sec. 3. That if the President of the United States shall at any time
receive satisfactory information that the privileges allowed or which may
be allowed to American vessels and their cargoes in the ports of Colombia,
corresponding with those, extended, or to be extended by this act, to Co-
lombian vessels and their cargoes in the ports of the United States, have
been revoked or annulled, he is hereby authorized, by proclamation, to
suspend the operation of either or both of the provisions of this act, as the
case may be, and to withhold any or all the privileges allowed, or to be al-
lowed, to Colombian vessels or their cargoes.
No. 37. An act to eacempt the vessels of Portugal from the payment of du-
ties on tonnage.
[Act of May 25, 1832.]
SEc. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That no duties upon tonnage shall be here-
after levied or collected of the vessels of the kingdom of Portugal: Provi-
ded always, That whenever the President of the United States, shall be
satisfied that the vessels of the United States are subjected in the ports of
the kingdom of Portugal, to payment of any duties of tonnage, he shall, by
proclamation declare the fact, and the duties now payable by the vessels of
that kingdom, shall be levied and paid, as if this act had not been passed.
No. 38. An Act concerning Tonnage Duty on Spanish Vessels.
[Act of July 13, 1832.]
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, &c. That no other or greater duty of tonnage
be levied in the ports of the United States on vessels owned wholly by sub-
jects of Spain, coming from a port in Spain, than shall, by the Secretary of
the Treasury be ascertained to have been paid on American vessels in the
ports of Spain previous to the twentieth October, one thousand eight hun-
dred and seventeen.
140 TONN AGE DUTY-SPAIN.
Sec. 2. That vessels owned wholly by Spanish subjects, coming from
any of the colonies of Spain, either directly or after touching at any other
port or place, shall pay, in the ports of the United States, the same rate o
duty on tonnage that shall be levied on American vessels in the Spanish co-
lonial port from whence such Spanish vessel shall have last departed; the
said amount to be ascertained by the Secretary of the Treasury, who is
hereby authorized, from time to time, to give directions, to the officers of
the customs of the United States for the collection of such duties, so as to
conform the said duties to any variation that may take place in the duties
levied on American vessels in such Spanish ports.
SEc. 3. That whenever the President shall be satisfied that the discrim-
inating or countervailing duties of tonnage levied by any foreign nation on
the ships or vessels of the United States, shall have been abolished, he may
direct that the tonnage duty on the vessels of such nation shall cease to be
levied in the ports of the United States; and cause any duties of tonnage
that may have been levied on the vessels of such foreign nation, subsequent
to the abolition of its discriminating duties of tonnage to be refunded.
SEc. 4 That the second and third sections of this act shall be in force
and take effect from and after the first day of January next.
GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE. 141
ExTRACTS rRow TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS,
BE I'VEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND OTHER POWERS.
Desirous of embracing every material point, connected with the object of
this work, it has been deemed proper to introduce extracts from some of
the Conventions of Commerce, Mavigation, &c. as at present subsisting
between the leading Powers of Europe ; collected from sources,
probably, not at all times within the reach of every public officer.
We have, therefore, extracted those conventional parts, only, that
may probably be useful, or interesting, to this country, in its intercourse
with Foreign Nations: at the same time, we have carefully endea-
vored to preserve their most important provisions, in order to show the
basis, on which most of these conventions, (framed about the period of
the general pacification of Europe in 1815) appear to be established: more-
over, as a commercial community, and from our geographical posi-
tion in America, it must be admitted that we have a deep interest, in
many of the stipulations of the following public documents, and, of
course, they are appropriately added to this volume.]
GREAT BIRITAIN AND FRANCE,
No. 1. Treaty of peace and friendship between Great Britain and France.
Signed at Utrecht, the 31st March, [11th April,l 1713. ExtRAct.
X. The most christian king shall restore to the kingdom and queen of
Great Britain, to be possessed in full right forever, the bay and streights of
Hudson, together with all lands, seas, sea coasts, rivers, and places situate
in the said bay and streights, and which belong thereunto, no tracts of land
or of sea being excepted, which are at present possessed by the subjects of
France. All which, as well as any buildings there made, in the condition
they now are, and likewise all fortresses there erected, either before or
since the French seized the same, shall, within six months from the ratifica-
tion of the present treaty, or sooner, if possible, be well and truly delivered
to the British subjects, having commission from the queen of Great Britain
to demand and receive the same, entire and undemolished, together
with all the cannon and cannon-ball which are therein, as also with a quan-
tity of powder, if it be there found, in proportion to the cannon-ball, and
with the other provision of war usually belonging to cannon. It is, how-
ever, provided, that it may be entirely free for the company of Quebec,
and all other the subjects of the most christian king whatsoever, to go by
land, or by sea, whithersoever they please, out of the lands of the said bay,
together with all their goods, merchandizes, arms, and effects, of what na-
ture or condition soever, except such things as are above reserved in this
article. But it is agreed on both sides, to determine within a year, by com-
142 GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE. [Utrecht,
missaries to be forthwith named by each party, the limits which are to be
fixed between the said bay of Hudson and the places appertaining to the
French; which limits, both the British and French subjects shall be wholly
forbid to pass over, or thereby to go to each other by sea or by land. The
same commissaries shall also have orders to describe and settle,in like manner,
the boundaries between the other British and French colonies in those parts.
XI. The abovementioned most christian king shall take care that satis-
faction be given, according to the rule of justice and equity, to the English
company trading to the bay of Hudson, for all damages and spoil done to
their colonies, ships, persons, and goods, by the hostile incursions and de-
predations of the French, in time of peace, an estimate being made the eof
by commissaries to be named at the requisition of each party. The same
commissaries shall moreover inquire as well into the complaints of the Brit-
ish subjects, concerning ships taken by the French in time of peace, as also
concerning the damages sustained last year in the island called Montserat,
and others, as into those things of which the French subjects complain, re-
lating to the capitulation in the island of Nevis, and castle of Gambia, also
to French ships, if perchance any such have been taken by British subjects
in time of peace; and in like manner into all disputes of this kind, which
shall be found to have arisen between both nations, and which are not yet
ended; and due justice shall be done on both sides without delay.
XII. The most christian king shall take care to have delivered to the
queen of Great Britain, on the same day that the ratifications of this treaty
shall be exchanged, solemn and authentic letters, or instruments, by virtue
whereof it shall appear, that the island of St. Christopher’s is to be possessed
alone hereafter by British subjects, likewise all Nova Scotia or Acadie, with
its ancient boundaries, as also the city of Port Royal, now called Annapo-
lis Royal, and all other things in those parts which depend on the said lands
and islands, together with the dominion, propriety, and possession of the
said islands, lands, and places, and all right whatsoever, by treaties, or by
any other way obtained, which the most christian king, the crown of France,
or any the subjects thereof, have hitherto had to the said islands, lands,
and places, and the inhabitants of the same, are yielded and made over to
the queen of Great Britain, and to her crown, forever, as the most chris-
tian king doth at present yield and make over all the particulars above said;
and that in such ample manner and form, that the subjects of the most
christian king shall hereafter be excluded from all kind of fishing in the said
seas, bays, and other places, on the coasts of Nova Scotia, that is to say, on
those which lie towards the east, within thirty leagues, beginning from the
island commonly called Sable, inclusively, and thence stretching along
towards the south-west.
XIII*. The island called Newfoundland, with the adjacent islands, shall
* Renewed by Article W. of the treaty of Paris, 1783.
11 April, 1713.] GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE. I 43
from this time forward belong of right wholly to Britain; and to that end,
the town and fortress of Placentia, and whatever other places in the said
island are in the possession of the French, shall be yielded and given up,
within seven months from the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty, or
sooner, if possible, by the most christian king, to those who have a commis-
sion from the queen of Great Britain for that purpose. Nor shall the most
christian king, his heirs and successors, or any of their subjects, at any
time hereafter, lay claim to any right to the said island and islands, or to
any part of it, or them. Moreover, it shall not be lawful for the subjects
of France to fortify any place in the said island of Newfoundland, or to
erect any buildings there, besides stages made of boards, and huts necessa-
ry and usual for drying of fish; or to resort to the said island, beyond the
time necessary for fishing, and drying of fish. But it shall be allowed to
the subjects of France to catch fish, and to dry them on land, in that part
only, and in no other besides that, of the said island of Newfoundland,
which stretches from the place called Cape Bonavista to the northern point
of the said island, and from thence running down by the western side,
reaches as far as the place called Point Riche. But the island called Cape
Breton, as also all others, both in the mouth of the river of St. Lawrence,
and in the gulph of the same name, shall hereafter belong of right to the
French, and the most christian king shall have all manner of liberty to for-
tify any place or places there.
XIV. It is expressly provided, that in all the said places and colonies to
be yielded and restored by the most christian king, in pursuance of this
treaty, the subjects of the said king may have liberty to remove themselves
within a year, to any other place, as they shall think fit, together with all
their moveable effects. But those who are willing to remain there, and to
be subject to the kingdom of Great Britain, are to enjoy the free exercise of
their religion, according to the usage of the church of Rome, as far as the
laws of Great Britain do allow the same.
XV. The subjects of France inhabiting Canada, and others, shall here-
after give no hinderance or molestation to the five nations or cantons of In-
dians, subject to the dominion of Great Britain, nor to the other natives of
America, who are friends to the same. In like manner, the subjects of
Great Britain shall behave themselves peaceably towards the Americans
who are subjects or friends to France; and on both sides they shall enjoy
full liberty of going and coming on account of trade. As also the natives
of those countries shall, with the same liberty, resort, as they please, to the
British and French colonies, for promoting trade on one side and the other,
without any molestation or hinderance, either on the part of the British
subjects or of the French. But it is to be exactly and distinctly settled by
commissaries, who are, and who ought to be accounted the subjects and
friends of Britain or of France.
144 GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE. [Paris, 10 Feb. 1768.
No. 2. Definitive Treaty between Great Britain and France (and Spain.)
Signed at Paris, the 10th February, 1763. Extr Act. (7% anslation.)
V.* The subjects of France shall have the liberty of fishing and drying,
on a part of the coasts of the Island of Newfoundland, such as it is specified
in Article 13 of the Treaty of Utrecht; which Article is renewed and
confirmed by the present Treaty (except what relates to the Island of Cape
Breton, as well as to the other Islands and coasts in the mouth and in the
Gulph of St. Lawrence. And His Britannic Majesty consents to leave
to the subjects of the Most Christian King the liberty of fishing in the
Gulph St. Lawrence, on condition that the subjects of France, do not exer-
cise the said fishery, but at the distance of three leagues from all the coasts
belonging to Great Britain, as well those of the continent, as those of the
islands situated in the said Gulph St. Lawrence. And as to what relates
to the fishery on the Coast of the Islands of Cape Breton out of the said
Gulph, the subjects of the Most Chistian King shall not be permitted to
exercise the said fishery, but at the distance of fifteen leagues from the
coast of the Island of Cape Breton; and the fishery on the coasts of Nova
Scotia or Acadia, and every where else out of the said Gulph, shall remain
on the footing of former Treaties.
VI. The King of Great Britain cedes the Islands of St. Pierre and Mi-
quelon, in full right, to His Most Christian Majesty, to serve as a shel-
ter to the French fishermen: and His said Most Christian Majesty, en-
gages not to fortify the said Islands; to erect no buildings upon them, but
merely for the convenience of the fishery; and to keep upon them a guard
of fifty men only for the police.
VII. In order to re-establish peace on solid and durable foundations,
and to remove for ever all subject of dispute with regard to the limits of the
British and French territories on the continent of America; it is agreed,
that, for the future, the confines between the dominions of his Britannic
Majesty, and those of his most Christian Majesty, in that part of the world,
shall be fixed irrevocably by a line drawn along the middle of the river
Mississippi, from its source to the river Iberville, and from thence, by a
line drawn along the middle of this river, and the lakes Maurepas and
Pontchartrain, to the sea; and for this purpose, the most Christian King
cedes in full right, and guaranties to his Britannic Majesty, the river and
port of the Mobile, and every thing which he possesses, or ought to possess,
on the left side of the river Mississippi, except the town of New Orleans,
and the island in which it is situated, which shall remain to France; pro-
vided that the navigation of the river Mississippishall be equally free, as well
to the subjects of Great Britain as to those of France, in its whole breadth.
and length, from its source to the sea, and expressly that part which is
between the said island of New Orleans and the right bank of that river, as
well as the passage both in and out of its mouth. It is further stipulated,
*Renewed by article 6, of the Treaty of Versailles, 1783.
Sept. s. 1783.] G. BRITAIN–FRANCE–SPAIN. 1A5
that the vessels belonging to the subjects of either nation shall not be
stopped visited, or subjected to the payment of any duty whatsoever. The
stipulations, inserted in the IVth article. in favour of the inhabitants of
Canada, shall also take place with regard to the inhabitants of the countries
ceded by this a ticle,
Done at Paris the 10th of Febuary, 1763.
BED FORD, C. P. S. [L. s.] C Horse UL, Duc DF PR Aslin, [L. s.
El M A Rq. DE GR IMALDI, [L. S.
No. 3. Definitive Treaties befuseen Great Britain and France. Signed at Ver-
sailes, 3d of September, 1783 *
Extr Act. (Translation, as laid befºre Parliament.)
IV. His Majesty the King of Great Britain is maintained in His right to
the Island of Newfoundland, and to the adjacent Islands, as the whole where
assured to Him by the Thirteenth Article of the Treaty of Utrecht; except-
ing the Islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, which are ceded in full right,
by the present Treaty, to His Most Christian Majesty.
W. His Majesty the Most Christian King, in order to prevent the quar-
rels which have hitherto arisen between the two Nations of England and
France, consents to renounce the right of fishing, which belongs to Him in
virtue of the aforesaid Article of the Treaty of Utrecht, from Cape Bona-
vista to Cape St. John, situated on the eastern coast of New foundland, in
fifty degrees North latitude, and His Majesty the King of Great Britain
consents on His part, that the fishery assigned to the subjects of His Most
Christain Majesty, beginning at the said Cape St John, passing to the north,
and descending by the western coast of the Island of Newfoundland. shall
extend to the place called Cape Raye, situated in forty-seven degrees, fifty
minutes latitude. The French fishermen shall enjoy the fishery which is
assigned to them by the present Article, as they had the right to enjoy that
which was assigned to them by the Treaty of Utrecht.
VI. With regard to the fishery in the Gulph of St. Lawrence, the French
shall continue to exercise it conformably to the fifth Article of the Treaty
of Paris.
Done at Versailles. the 3d of September. 1783.
(Signed) MANch Este R, [L. s.] GRAvi ER DE VERGENNEs. [L. S.]
No. 4. The Definitive Treaty of Peace and Friendship between his Bri.
tannic Majesty, and the King of Spain. Signed at Versailles, the 3d ºf
September. 1783. Extr Act.
W. His Britannic Majesty cedes and guaranties, in full right. to his
Catholic Majesty, East Florida, as also West Florida. His Catholic
Majesty agrees that the British inhabitants, or others who may have been
subjects of the King of Great Britain in the said countries, may retire in
full security and liberty, where they shall think proper, and may sell their
estates, and remove their effects, as well as their persons, without being
19
146 FRANCE. [Versailles, Sept. 3,1788.
restrained in their emigration, under any pretence whatsoever, except on
account of debts, or criminal prosecutions; the term limited for this emigra-
tion being fixed to the space of eighteen months, to be computed from the
day of the exchange of the ratifications of the present treaty: but if from
the value of the possessions of the English proprietors, they should not be
able to dispose of them within the said term, then his Catholic Majesty shall
grant then a prolongation proportioned to that end. It is further stipulated,
that his Britannic Majesty shall have the power of renoving from East
Fiorida all the effects which may belong to him whether artillery, or other
ImatterS.
No. 5. British Declaration, signed a Versailles, 3d of September, 1783.
XTRACT.
The King having entirely agreed with His Most Christian Majesty upon
the Articles of the Definitive Treaty. will seek every means which shall not
only ensure the execution thereof, with His accustomed good faith and punc-
tuality. but will besides give, on His part. all possible efficacy to the princi-
ples which shall prevent even the least foundation of dispute for the future.
To this end, and in order that the fishermen of the two nations may not
give cause for daily quarrels, His Britannic Majesty will take the most pos-
itive measures for preventing His subjects from interrupting, in any manner,
by their competition, the fishery of the French, during the temporary exer-
cise of it which is granted to them, upon the coasts of the Island of Newfound-
land; and He will, for this purpose, cause the fixed settlements which shall
be formed there, to be removed. His Britannic Majesty will give orders,
that the French fishermen be not incommoded, in cutting the wood necessary
for the repair of their scaffolds, huts, and fishing vessels.
The thirteenth article of the Treaty with Utrecht, and the method of car-
rying on the fishery which has at all times been acknowledged, shall be the
plan upon which the fishery shall be carried on there; it shall not be deviated
from by either party; the French fishermen building only their scaffolds, con-
fining themselves to the repair of their fishing vessels, and not wintering
there; the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, on their part, not molesting, in
any manner, the French fishermen, during their fishing, nor injuring their
scaffolds during their absence.
The King of Great Britain, in ceding the Islands of St. Pierre and Mi-
quelon to France, regards them as ceded for the purpose of serving as a real
shelter to the French fishermen, and in full confidence that these possessions
will not become an object of jealousy between the two nations; and that the
fishery between the said Islands, and that of Newfoundland, shall be lim-
ited to the middle of the channel.
Given at Versailles, the 3d of September, 1783.
º (Signed) MANCHESTER, [L. s.]
Paris, May 30, 1814.] TREATY OF PARIs. º 147
No. 6. French Counter-Declaration, signed at Versailles, the 3d of Septem-
ber, 1783. Extra Act.
The principles which have guided the King. in the whole course of the
negociations which preceded the re-estabiishment of peace, must have con-
viaced the King of Great Britain, that His Majesty has had no other de-
sign than to render it solid and lasting, by preventing, as much as p Ssible,
in 'te four quarters of the world, every subject of discussion and quarrel.
T.e Šing of Great Britain undoubtedly places too much confidence in the
uprightness of His Majesty’s intentions, not to rely upon His constant at-
te, ion to prevent the Islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon from becoming an
object of jealousy between the two nations.
As to the fishery on the coasts of Newfoundland, which has been the ob-
ject of the new arrangements settled by the two Sovereigns upon this mat-
ter, it is suificiently ascertained by the fifth Article of the Treaty of Peace
sia ed this day, and by the Declaration likewise delivered to-day, by His
Brita, nic Majesty’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary: and
His Majesty declares, that He is fully satisfied on this head.
In regard to the fishery between the Island of Newfoundland, and those
of St. Pierre and Miquelon, it is not to be carried on, by either party, but to
the middle of the channel, and flis Majesty will give the most positive or-
ders, that the French fisher men shall not go be vond this line. His Majes-
ty is firmly persuaded that the King of Great Britain will give like orders
to the English fishermen.
Given at Versailles, the 3d of September, 1783.
(Signed) G R Av IER DE VERGENNES.
No. 7. Definitive Treaty between Great Britain and France. Signed at Paris,
the 30th day of May, 1814.” Extº Act.
I. There shall be from this day foward perpetual peace and friendship
between His Britannic Majesty and His Allies on the one part, and His
Majesty the King of France and Navarre on the other, their heirs and suc-
cessors, their dominions and subjects, respectively.
V. The navigation of the Rhine, from the point where it becomes naviga-
ble unto the sea, and vice versa, shall be free, so that it can be interdicted
to no one:—and at the future Congress, attention shall be paid to the estab-
lishment of the principles according to which the duties to be raised by the
States, bordering on the Rhine may be regulated, in the mode the most
impartial, and the most favorable to the commerce of all nations.
The future Congress, with a view to facilitate the communication between
nations, and continually to render them less strangers to each other, shall
likewise examine and determine in what manner the above provision can
be extended to the other rivers which, in their navigable course, separate
or traverse different States.
*Confirmed by Article 11, of the Definitive Treaty 20 November, 1816.
148 “TREATY OF PARIS. [Paris;
VII. The Island of Malta and its dependencies shall belong in full right
and Sovereignty to His Britannic Majesty.
VIII. His Britannic Majesty, stipulating for Himself and His Allies,
engages to restore to His Most Christian Majesty, within the term which
shall be hereafter fixed, the colonies, fisheries, factories and establishments
of every kind, which were possessed by France on the 1st of January, 1792,
in the seas and on the continents of America, Africa, and Asia; with the
exception however of the Islands of Tobago and St. Lucia and of the Isle
of France and its dependencies, especially Rodrigues and the Sechelles,
which several colonies and possessions His Most Christian Majesty cedes
in full right and Sovereignty to His Britannic Majesty, and also the por-
tion of St. Domingo ceded to France by the Treaty of Basle, and which
His Most Christian Majesty restores in full right and Sovereignty to His
Catholic \'ajesty.
IX. His Majesty the King of Sweden and Norway, in virtue of the
arrangements stipulated with the Allies, and in execution of the preceding
Article, consents that the Island of Guadaloupe be restored to His Most
Christian Majesty, and gives up all the rights He may have acquired over
that island.
X. Her Most Faithful Majesty in virtue of the arrangements stipulated
with Her Allies and in execution of the 8th Article, engages to restore
French Guyana as it existed on the 1st of January, 1792, to His Most
Christian Majesty, within the term hereafter fixed.
The renewal of the dispute which existed at that period on the subject of
the frontier, being the effect of this stipulation, it is agreed that that dispute
shall be terminated by a friendly arrangement between the two Courts,
under the mediation of His Britannic Majesty.
XI. The places and forts in those colonies and settlements, which, by
virtue of the 8th, 9th, and 10th Articles, are to be restored to His Most
Christian Majesty, shall be given up in the state in which they may be at
the moment of the signature of the present Treaty.
XII. His Britannic Majesty guarantees to the subjects of His Most
Christian Majesty the same facilities, privileges, and protection, with
respect to commerce, and the security of their persons and property within
the limits of the British Sovereignty on the Continent of India, as are now
or shall be granted to the most favoured nations.
His M st Christian Majesty, on His part, having nothing more at heart
than the perpetual duration of Peace between the two Crowns of England
and of France, and wishing to do His utmost to avoid any thing which
might, affect their mutual good understanding, engages not to erect any for-
tifications in the establishments which are to be restored to Him within
the limits of the British Sovereignty upon the Continent of India, and only
to place in those establishments the number of troops necessary for the
maintenance of the police.
May 30, 1814.] TREATY OF PARIS. I 49
XIII. The French right of fishery upon the great bank of Newfoundland,
upon the coasts of the island of that name, and of the adjacent islands in
the Gulph of St. Lawrence, shall be replaced upon the footing in which it
stood in 1792.
Xi V. Those colonies, factories, and establishments, which are to be
restored to His Most Christian Majesty by His Britannic Majesty or His
Allies, in the Northern Seas, or in the Seas and on the Continents of
America and Africa, shall be given up within the three months, and those
which are beyond the Cape of Good Hope, within the six months which
follow the ratification of the present Treaty.
XV. Antwerp shali for the future be solely a commercial port.
XVI. The high Contracting Parties, desirous to bury in entire oblivion
the disseusions which have agitated Europe, declare and promise that no
individual, of whatever rank or condition he may be, in the countries re-
stored and ceded by the present Treaty shall be prosecuted, disturbed or
molested. in his person or property, under any pretext whatsoever, either
on account of his conduct or political opinions, his attachment either to any
of the Contracting Parties, or to any Government which has ceased to exist,
or for any other reason, except for debts contracted towards individuals, or
acts posterior to the date of the present Treaty.
XV iſ. The native inhabitants and aliens, of whatever nation or con-
dition they may be, in those countries which are to change Sovereigns, as
well in virtue of the present Treaty as of the subsequent arrangements to
which it may give rise, shall be allowed a period of six years, reckoning
from the exchange of the ratifications, for the purpose of disposing of their
property, if they think fit, whether it be acquired before or during the
present war, and retiring to whatever country they may choose.
XVIII. The Allied Powers, desiring to offer His Most Christian Majesty
a new proof of their anxiety to arrest, as far as in them lies, the bad con-
sequences of the disastrous epoch fortunately terminated by the present
peace, renounce all the sums which their governments claim from France,
whether on account of contracts, supplies, or any other advances whatsoever
to the French Government, during the different wars which have taken
place since 1792.
His Most Christian Majesty, on His part, renounces every claim which
He might bring foward against the Allied Powers on the same grounds.
In execution of this Article, the high Contracting Parties engage recipro-
cally to deliver up all titles, obligations, and documents, which relate to
the debts They may have mutually cancelled.
XIX. The French Government engages to liquidate and pay all debts
it may be found to owe in countries beyond its own territory, on account
of contracts, or other formal engagements between individuals, or private
establishments, and the French Authorities, as well for supplies, as in satis-
faction of legal engagements,
1 5ſ) - TREATY OF PARIS. [Paris,
XX. The high Contracting Parties, immediately after the exchange of
the ratifications of the present Treaty, shall name commissioners to direct
and superintend the execution of the whole of the stipulations contained in
the 18th and 19th Articles. These Commissioners shall undertake the
examination of the claims referred to in the preceding Article, the liquida-
tion of the sums claimed, and the consideration of the manner in which
the French Government may propose to pay them. They shall also be
charged with the delivery of the titles, bonds, and the documents relating
to the debts which the high Contracting Parties mutually canceſ, so that the
approval of the result of their labors shall complete that reciprocal renunciation.
XXI. The debts which in their origin were specially thorigaged upon the
countries no longer belonging to France, or were contracted for the sup; ºrt
of their internal administration, shall remain at the charge of the said coun-
tries. Such of those debts as have been converted into inscriptiºns in the
great book of the public debt of France, shall accordingly be accounted for
with the French Government after the 22d of December, 1813.
The deeds of all those debts which have been prepared for inscription,
and have not yet been entered, shall be delivered to the Governments of
the respective countries. The statement of all these debts shall be drawn
up and settled by a joint commissio 1.
XXII. The French Government shall remain charged with the reim-
bursement of all sums paid by the subjects of the said countries into the
French coffers, whether under the denomination of surety, deposit, or
consignment.
In like manner all French subjects, employed in the service of the said
eountries, who have paid sums under the denomination of surety, deposit,
or consignment, into their respective territories,shall be faithfully reimbursed.
XXIII. The functionaries holding situations requiring securities, who
are not charged with the expenditure of public money shall be reimbursed
at Paris, with the interest, by fifths and by the year, dating from the signa-
ture of the present Treaty. With respect to those who are accountable,
this reimbursement shall commence, at the latest, six months after the pre-
sentation of their accounts, except only in case of malversation. A copy
of the last account shall be transmitted to the Government of their countries,
to serve for their information and guidance.
XXIV. The judicial deposits and consignments upon the “caisse
d'amortissement,” in the execution of the law of 28 Nivose, year 13, (18 Jan.
1806,) and which belongs to the inhabitants of countries France ceases to
possess, shall, within the space of one year from the exchange of the ratifi-
cations of the present Treaty, be placca in the hands of the Authorities of
the said countries with the exception of those deposits and consignments
interesting French subjects, which last will remain in the “caisse d’amor-
tissement,” and will only be given up on the production of the vouchers,
resulting freia the decision of competent authorities.
JMay 30, 1814.] TREATY OF PARIS. 151
XXV. The funds deposited by the corporations and public establish-
ments in the “caisse de service,” and in the ‘‘ caisse d’amortissement,” or
other “ caisse.” of the French Government, shall be reimbursed by fifths,
payable from year to year, to commence from the date of the present
Treaty; deducting the advances which have taken place, and subject to
such regular charges as may have been brought forward against these funds
by the creditors of said corporations, and the said public establishments.
XXVI. From the first day of January, 1814, the French Government
shall cease to be charged with the payment of pensions, civil, military and
ecclesiastical, pensions for retirement, and allowances for reduction, to any
individual who shall cease to be a French subject.
XXVII, National domains acquired for valuable considerations by French
subjects in the late departments of Belgium, and of the left bank of the
Rhine, and the Alps beyond the ancient limits of France, and which now
cease to belong to Her, shall be guaranteed to the purchasers.
XXVIII. The abolition of the “droit d'Aubaine,” “ de Détraction,” and
other duties of the same nature, in the countries which have been formerly
incorporated, or which have reciprocally made that stipulation with France,
shall be expressly maintained. -
XXIX. The French Government engages to restore all bonds, and other
deeds which may have been seized in the provinces occupied by the French
armies or administrations ;...and in cases where such restitution cannot be
effected, these bonds and deeds become and continue void.
XXX. The sums which shall be due for all works of public utility not yet
finished, or finished after the 31st of December, 1812, whether on the Rhine
or in the departments detached from France by the present Treaty, shall be
placed to the account of the future possessors of the Territory, and shall be
paid by the commission charged with the liquidation of the debts of that country.
XXXI All archives, maps, plans and documents whatever, belonging to
the ceded countries, or respecting their administration, shall be faithfully
given up at the same time with the said countries: or if that should be im-
possible, within a period not exceeding six months after the cession of the
countries themselves.
This stipulation applies to the archives, maps and plates, which may have
been carried away from the countries during their temporary occupation by
the different armies.
XXXIII. The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged within the period of fifteen days, or sooner if possible.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed and af-
fixed to it the seals of their arms.
Done at Paris, the 30th of May, in the year of our Lord, 1814.
(Signed) CASTLE REAgn, [L. S.] LE PRINCE DE BENEVENT, [L. s.]
A BER DERN. [L. S.
CATH ca RT, L. s.]
CHARLEs STEwART, Lieut. Gen. [L. s.]
152 FRANCE–SLAVE TRADE. [March 29, 1815.
No. 8. Additional Article to the Definitive Treaty between Great Britain
and Frajice. Signed at Paris, 20th November, 1815.
The high Contracting Powers, sincerely desiring to give effect to the
measures on which they deliberated at the Congress of Vienna, relative to
the complete and universal abolition of the Slave Trade, and having, each
in their respective dominions, prohibited, without restriction. their colonies
and subjects from taking any part whatever in this traffic, engage to renew
conjointly their efforts, with the view of securing finai success to those prin-
ciples which they proclaimed in the declaration of the 4th (8th) of Febru-
ary, 1815 and of concerting without loss of time, through their ministers at
the Courts of London and of Paris, the most effectual measures for the en-
tire and definitive abolition of a Commerce so odious and so strongly con-
demned by the laws of religion and nature.
The present Additional Article shall have the same force and effect as if
it were inserted, word for word, in the Treaty signed this day. It shall be
included in the ratification of the said Treaty.
It witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and have affixed there unto the seals of their arms
Done at Paris, this 20th day of November, in the year of our Lord, 1815.
(Signed) CAsti.ERE A G H [L. S.] Signed Ric HELIEU, [L. s.]
WELLING To N, LL. S.]
No. 9. Inperial French Decree, abolishing tie Slave Trade, 29th March,
1815. TRANSLATION.
Napoleon, Emperor of the French. Our Ministers of State having been
heard, we have decreed, and do decree as follows:
I. From the date of the publication of the present Decree, the trade in
Negroes is abolished.
No vessel shall be permitted to fit out for this trade, either in the ports
of France, or in those of our colonies.
II. There shall not be introduced, to be sold in our colonies, any Ne-
gro from this trade, whether it be French or foreign.
III. Any infraction of this Decree shall be punished by the confisca-
tion of the ship and cargo, which shall be pronounced by our courts and
tribunals.
IV The ship-owners, however, who, before the publication of the pre-
sent Decree, shall have fitted out expeditions for the trade, may sell the
produce in our colonies.
V. Our Ministers are charged with the execution of the present Decree.
At the Palace of the Tuileries, 29th March, 1815. NAPOLEoN.
By the Emperor, the Minister Secretary of State.
THE DUKE of BASSANG!
Eondon, Jan.26, 1826.] G. BRITAIN AND FRANCE. 153
No. 10. Convention of Commerce and Navigation be 'ween Great Britain
and France. Signed at London, January 26, 1826.
In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, on the one part, and His Majesty the King of France and Navarre,
on the other part, being equally animated by the desire of facilitating the
commercial intercourse between their respective subjects: and being per-
suaded that nothing can more contribute to the fulfilment of their mutual
wishes in this respect, than to simplify and equalize the regulations which
are now in force relative to the navigation of both Kingdoms. by the reci-
procal abrogation of all discriminating duties levied upon the vessels of
either of the two nations in the ports of the other, whether under the head
of duties of tonnage, harbour. light-house, pilotage, and others of the same
description, or in the shape of increased duties upon goods on account of
their being imported or exported in other than national vessels—have named
as their Plenipotentiaries to conclude a Convention for this purpose, that
is to say:—
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, the Right Honourable George Canning, a Member of His said
Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council, a Member of Parliament. and
His said Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; and
the Right Honourable William Huskisson, a Member of His said Majesty’s
Most Honourable Privy Council, a Member of Parliament, President of
the Committee of Privy Council for Affairs of Trade and Foreign Planta-
tions, and Treasurer of His said Majesty’s Navy—
And His Majesty the King of France and Navarre, the Prince Jules,
Count de Polignac, a Peer of France, Maréchal-de-Camp of His Most
Christian Majesty’s Forces, and His Ambassador at the Court of His
Britannic Majesty, &c:—
Who, after having communicated to each other their respective full
powers, found to be in due and proper form, have agreed upon and con-
cluded the following Articles:
ARt. 1. From and after the 5th of April of the present year, French
vessels coming from or departing for the ports of France, or, if in ballast,
coming from, or departing for any place. shall not be subject, in the ports
of the United Kingdom, either on entering into, or departing from the same,
to any higher duties or tonnage, harbour, light house, pilotage, quarantine,
or other similiar or corresponding duties, of whatever nature or under
whatever denomination, than those to which British vessels, in respect of
the same voyages are or may be subject, on entering into or departing from
such ports; and, reciprocally, from and after the same period, British
vessels coming from or departing for the ports of the United Kingdom. or,
if in ballast, coming from or departing for any place, shall not be subject,
20
154 G. BRITAIN AND FRANCE. [London,
in the ports of France, either on entering into, or departing from the same,
to any higher duties of tonnage. harbour, light-house, pilotage. quarantine,
or other similar or corresponding duties, of whatever nature or under
whatever denomination, than those to which French vessels, in respect of
the same voyages, are or may be subject, on entering into or departing from
such ports; whether such duties are collected separately, or are consolidated
in one and the same duty;-His Most Christian Majesty reserving to himself
to regulate the amount of such duty or duties in France, according to the
rate at which they are or may be established in the United Kingdom: at the
same time, with the view of diminishing the burthens imposed upon the
navigation of the two Countries, His Most Christian Majesty will always
be disposed to reduce the amount of the said burthens in France, in propor-
tion to any reduction which may hereafter be made of those now levied in
the ports of the United Kingdom.
II. Goods wares and merchandize, which can or may be legally im-
ported into the ports of the United Kingdom from the ports of France, if
so imported in French vessels, shall be subject to no higher duties than if
imported in British vessels, and, reciprocally, goods, wares, and merchan-
dize, which can or may be legally imported into the ports of France, from
the ports of the United Kingdom, if so imported in British vessels, shall be
subject to no higher duties than if imported in French vessels. The pro-
duce of Asia. Africa, and America, not being allowed to be imported from
the said countries, nor from any other, in French vessels, nor from France
in French, British or any other vessels, into the ports of the United Kingdom
for home consumption, but only for warehousing and re-exportation, His
Most Christian M jesty reserves to himself to direct that, in like manner,
the produce of Asia, Africa, and America, shall not be imported from the
said countries, nor from any other, in British vessels, nor from the United
Kingdom, in British, French, or any other vessels, into the ports of France,
for the consumption of that Kingdom, but only for warehousing and re-
exportation.
With regard to the productions of the countries of Europe, it is under-
stood between the High Contracting Parties, that such productions shall
not be imported, in British ships, into France, for the consumption of that
Kingdom, unless such ships shall have been laden there with in some port
of the United Kingdom; and that His Britannic Majesty may adopt, if he
shall think fir, some corresponding restrictive measure, with regard to the
productions of the countries of Europe, imported into the ports of the
United Kingdom in French vessels: the High Contracting Parties reserving,
however, to themselves the power of making, by mutual consent, such
relaxations in the strict execution of the present Article, as they may think
useful to the respective interests of the two countries, upon the principle of
mutual concessions, affording each to the other reciprocal or equivalent
advantages.
January 26, 1826.] G. BRITAIN AND FRANCE. 155
l II. All goods, wares. and merchandize, which can or may be legally
exported from the ports of either of the two countries, shall, on their export,
pay the same duties of exportation, whether the exportation of such goods,
wares, and inerchandize, be made in British or in French vessels provided
the said vessels proceed, respectively, direct from the ports of the one
country, to those of the other. And all the said goods, ware-, and merchan-
dize, so exported in British or French vessels, shall be reciprocally entitled
to the same bounties, drawbacks, and other allowances of the same nature,
which are granted by the regulations of each country, respectively
IV. It is mutually agreed between the High Contracting Parties, that
in the intercourse of navigation between their twº countries, the vessels of
any third power shall in no case, obtain more favourable conditions than
those stipulated in the present Convention, in favour of British and French
vessels.
V The fishing-boats of either of the two countries, which may be forced
by stress of weather to seek shelter in the ports, or on the coasts of the
other country, shall not be subject to any duties or port charges, of any
description whatsoever; provided the said boats; when so driven in by
stress of weather, shall not discharge or receive on bºard any cargo, or por-
tion of cargo, in the parts, or on the parts of the coasts where they shall
have sought shelter.
Vl. It is agreed that the provisions of the present Convention between
the High Contracting Parlies, shall be reciprocally extended and in force,
in all the possessions subject to their respective dominion in Europe.
VII. The present Convention shall be in force for the term of iO years
from the 5th of April of the present year; and further, until the end of 12
months after either of the High Contracting Parties shall have given notice
to the other of its intention to terminate its operation; each of the High
Contracting Parties reserving to itself the right of giving such notice to the
other at the end of the said term of 10 years: and it is agreed between
them, that, at the end of the 12 month’s extension agreed to on both sides,
this Convention, and all the stipulations thereof, shall altogether cease and
determine.
VIII. The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications
shall be exchanged in London, within the space of one month, or sooner if
possible.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
Done at London, the 26th day of January, in the year of our Lord 1826.
[L. S. J GEORGE CANNING. [L. s.] LE PRINGE DE PoliGNAG.
[L. S.] WILLIAM Huskisson.
156 G. BRITAIN AND FRANCE. [London, Jan.26,1826.
A DDITIONAL ARTICLE.
ART. I. From and after the 1st of October of the present year, French
vessels shall be all well to sail from any port wha ever of the countries,
under the lominion of His Most Christian M jesty, to all the colonies of
the United Kingdom (except those possessed by the East India Company)
and to import into the said colonies all kinds of merchandise, (being pro-
ductions the growih ºr manufacture of France, or of any country under
the dominion of France) with the exceptiºn of such as are prohibited to be
imported into the said colonies, or are permitted to be imported only from
countries under the British do minion: and the said French vessels, as well
as the merchandize imported in the same, shall not be subject, in the
colonies of the United Kingdom, to other or higher duties that, those to
which iEritish vessels inay be subject, on importing the same merchandize
from any foreign country, or which are imposed upon the merchandize
itself.
The same facilities shall be granted, reciprocally, in the colonies of
France, with regard to the importation, in British vessels, of all kinds
of merchandize, (being productions the growth and manufacture of the
United Kingdºm, or of any country under the British dominion) with
the exception of such as are prohibited to be imported into the said colonies,
or are permitted to be imported only from countries under the dominion of
France. And whereas all goods, the produce of any foreign country may
now be imported into the colonies of the United Kingdom, in the ships of
that country, with the exception of a limited list of specified articles, which
can only be imported into the said colonies in British ships, His Majesty
the King of the United Kingdom reserves to himself the power of adding to
the said list of excepted articles any other, the prouace of the French
dominions, the addition whereof may appear to His Majesty to be necessary
for placing the commerce and navigation to be permitted to the subjects of
each of the High Contracting Parties with the colonies of the other, upon a
footing of fair reciprocity.
II. From and after the same period, French vessels shall be allowed to
export from all the colonies of the United Kingdom, (except those possessed
by the East India Company) all kinds of merchandize, which are not
prohibited to be exported from such colonies in vesseis other than those of
Great Britain; and the said vessels, as well as the merchandize exported
in the sa:me, shall not be subject to other or higher duties than those to which
British vessels may be subject, on exporting the said merchandize, or which
are imposed upon the merchandize itself; and they shall be entitled to the
same bounties, drawbacks, and other allowances of the same nature, to which
British vessels would be entitled, on such exportation.
The same facilities and privileges shall be granted, reciprocally, in all
the colonies of France, for the exportation, in British vessels, of all kinds
Utrecht, Ap. 11,1713.] NAVIGATION AND COMMERCE. I 57
of merchandize, which are no prohibited to be exported from such colonies
in vessels other than those of France.
These two Additional Articles shall have the same force and validity
as if they were inserted word for word, in the Convention signed this
day. They shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at
the same time.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the
same, and have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
D, e a Lºndon, the 26th day of January, in the year of our Lord 1826.
[L. s. GEORGE CANNING. [L. S.] LE PRINCE DE Polic NAC.
[L. s.] Willia M. Huskisson.
No. 11. Eactract from the Treaty of Navigation and Commerce, between
Queen Annº. of Great Britain, and Lewis the XIV, King of France,
concluded at Utretch, the 11th ºf .7prºl, 1713. [Omitted at page 144.]
XV11. It shall be lawful for all and singular the subjects of the Queen
of Great Britain and of the most Christian King, to sail with their ships
with all manner of liberty and security, no distinction being made who are
the proprietors of the merchandizes laden thereon, from any port, to the
places of those who are now, or shall be hereafter, at enmity with the Queen
of Great Britain, or the most Christian King; it shall likewise be lawful
for the subjects and inhabitants aforesaid to sail with the ships and mer-
chandizes aforementioned, and to trade with the same liberty and security
from the places, ports, and havens of those who are enemies of both, or of
either party, without any opposition or disturbance whatsoever, not only
directly from the places of the enemy aforementioned to neutral places, but
also from one place belonging to an enemy to another place belonging to an
enemy, whether they be under the jurisdiction of the same Prince, or under
several. Aid as it is now stipulated concerning ships and goods, that free
ships shall also give a freedom to goods, and that every thing shall be
deemed to be free and exempt which shall be found on board the ships
belonging to the subjects of either of the confederates, although the
whole lading, or any part thereof, should appertain to the enemies of
either of their Majesties, contraband goods being always excepted, on the
discovery whereof, matters shall be managed according to the sense of the
subsequent articles; it is also agreed, in like manner, that the same liberty
be extended to persons who are on board a free ship, with this effect, that
although they be enemies to both, or to either party, they are not to be
taken out of that free ship, unless they are soldiers, and in actual service of
the enemies.
XVIII. This liberty of navigation and commerce shall extend to all
kinds of merchandizes excepting those only which follow in the next
article, and which are signified by the name of Contraband:
158 FRENCH WEST INDIA TRADE. [June 1, 1826.
XIX. Under this name of contraband, or prohibited goods, shall be
comprehended arms, great guns, bombs, with their fusees and other things
belonging to them; fire-balls, gunpowder, match, cannºn ball, pikes swords,
lances, spears, halberds, mortars, petards, granadoes, salt petre, musket-
ball, helumets, head-pieces, breast-plates, coats of mail, and the like kinds
of arms proper for arming soldiers, musket-rests, belts, horses with their
furniture, and all other warlike instruments whatever.
XX. These merchandizes which follow shall not be reckoned among pro-
hibited goods; that is to say, all sorts of cloths, and all other manufactures
woven of any wool, flax, silk, cotton, or any other materials whatever; all
kinds of cloaths and wearing-apparel, together with the species whereof they
are used to be made; gold and silver, as well coined as uncoined, tin, iron,
lead, copper, brass, coals; as also wheat and barley, and any other kind of
corn and pulse; tobacco, and likewise all manner of spices, salted and
smoked flesh, salted fish, cheese and butter, beer, oils, wines, sugars, and
all sorts of salt, and, in general. all provisions which serve for the nourish-
ment of mankind and sustenance of life. Furthermore, all kinds of cotton,
hemp, flax, tar, pitch, ropes, cables, sails, sail-cloth, anchors, and any parts
of anchors; also shipmasts, planks, boards. and beams. of what trees soever;
and all other things proper either for building or repairing ships; and all
other goods whatever, which have not been worked into the form of any
instrument or thing prepared for war, by land or by sea, shall nºt be reputed
contraband, much less such as have been already wrought and made up for
any other use; all which shall wholly be reckoned among free goods, as
likewise all other merchandizes and things which are not comprehended
and particularly mentioned in the preceding article, so that they may be
transported and carried, in the freest manner, by the subjects of both con-
federates, even to places belonging to an enemy, such towns or places being
only excepted as are at that time besieged, blocked up round about, or
invested.
No. 12. British Order in Council, granting to French Vessels certain Priv-
ileges of Trading with the British Possessions in the West Indies and
.ſłmerica.
At the Court at Carlton-House, the 1st of June, 1826. Present, the King’s Most Excellent
Majesty in Council.
Whereas by a certain Act of Parliament passed in the 6th year of the
reign of His present Majesty, (Cap. 114) intituled “An Act to regulate
the trade of the British possessions abroad,” after reciting that “By the
law of navigation, foreign ships are permitted to import into any of the Bri-
tish possessions abroad, from the countries, to which they belong, goods, the
produce of those countries, and to export goods from such possessions, to
be carried to any foreign country whatever; and that it is expedient that
such permission should be subject to certain conditions ;” it is enacted
April 29 1831.] BRITISH AMERICAN TRADE. 1.59
... That the privileges thereby granted to foreign ships shall be limited to
the ships of those countries which, having colonial possessions, shall grant
the like privileges of trading with those possessions to British ships ; unless
His Majesty, by His O der in Council, shall, in any case deem it expedi-
ent to grant the whole, or any of such privileges to the ships of any foreign
country, although the conditions aforesaid shall not, in all respects, be ful-
filled by such foreign country.” And whereas the conditions mentioned
and referred to in and by the said Act of Parliament, have not in all respects
been fulfilled by the Government of France; but nevertheless His Majesty,
by and with the advice of His Privy Council, doth deem it expedient to
grant certain of the privileges aforesaid to the ships of France ; His Majes-
ty doth therefore, by and with the advice of His Privy Council, and in pur-
suance and exercise of the powers and authority in him vested by the said
Act of Parliament, declare and grant, that it shall and may be law ful for
French ships to import into any of the British possessions in the West In-
dies and America, from the dominions of His Most Christian Majesty, such
goods being the produce of those dominions as are mentioned and enumer-
ated in the table subjoined to this present Order, and to export goods from
such British possessions, to be carried to any foreign country whatever:
And the Right Honourable the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty’s
Treasury, and the Right Honourable Earl Bathurst, one of His Majesty’s
Principal Secretaries of State, are to give the necessary directions herein
as to them may respectively appertain. JAS. BULLER.
Table referred to in the preceding Order:—
Wheat, flour, biscuit, bread, meal, peas, beans, rye, callavances, oats, barley, indian corn,
rice, shingles, red oak staves or headings, white oak staves or headings, wood, lumber, wood-
hoops, live stock, hay and straw, coin and bullion, diamonds, salt, fruit and vegetables fresh,
cotton wool,
All articles subject, on importation, to a duty ad valorem ; and on which articles the amount
of such duty shall not, at the time of importation, exceed £7. 108. for every £100 of the value
of the same.
No. 13. An Act to amend an act of the sixth year of his late Majesty, to re-
gulate the Trade of the British possessions abroad. (22d April, 1831.)
Abno Primo Gulielmi IV. Regis. Cap. XXIV.
Whereas, by an act passed in the sixth year of His late Majesty’s reign,
intituled, ſºn Act to regulate the Trade of the British Possessions abroad,
and by subsequent acts made and passed to alter and amend the said act,
certain duties of customs are imposed on articles of foreign production
when imported or brought into the British Possessions in America : And
whereas it is expedient to repeal some of the said duties, and to alter or
vary others of them: Be it therefore enacted by the King’s Most Excel-
lent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual
and Temporal, and Commons, in the present Parliament assembled, and by
the authority of the same, That from and after the fifteenth day of April,
| 60 BRITISH AMERICAN TRADE. [July 5, 1825.
one thousand eight hundred and thirty-one, so much of the said acts as im-
poses any duty in any of the British Possessions in America, upon the im-
portation or bringing in of corn or grain unground, or of meal or flour not
made of wheat, or of bread or biscuit, or of rice, or of live stock, shall be
and the same is hereby repealed.
II. And be it further enacted, That so much of any of the said acts as
impºses any duty in the provinces of Upper or Lower Canada upon the im-
portation or bringing in of wheat flour, or of beef, pork, hams or bacon, or
of wood or lumber, shall be and the same is hereby repealed.
III. And be it further enacted, That so much of any of the said Acts as
imposes any duty, in Aew Brunswick, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward’s Is-
land, upon wood or lumoer, shall be and the same is hereby repealed.
IV. And be it further enacted, That so much of any of the said as im-
poses any duty. in the British possessions on the Continent of South Amer-
ica, or in the West Indies, or in the Bahama or Bermuda Islands, upon
wheat flour, or upon beef, pork, hams, or bacºn, or upon wood or lumber,
when imported from any of the British possessions in Aorth America, shall
be and the same is hereby repealed.
V. And be it further enacted. That upon the importation from any fo-
reign court ry 1, tº the British possessions on the Continent of South dmer-
ica. or in the PWest Indies, or in the Bahama or Bermuda Islands, of the
articles in entioned in the following table, there shall be raised, collected,
and paid unto His Majesty, the several temporary additional duties as the
same are set forth in the said table (that is to say :)
*-*. TA13LE OF ADDITIONAL DUTIF.S.
Staves and headings, until the first day of January, 1834—the 1000, º º :E0 11 3
Or, and from the first of January, 183 i, to the first day of January, 1836, the 1000, 0 7 3
White or vºllow pine lumber, until the first day of January, 1834—the 1000 feet of
one inch thick. O 7 0
On and from the first day of January, 1834, to the first day of January, 1836, the
1000 feet of one inch thick. O 5 ()
V1 And be it further enacted, That the duties imposed by this Act
shall be raised, levied, collected, and paid unto His Majesty in like manner
as if such duties had been imposed by the said first mentioned Act, and had
been set forth in the Table of duties therein contained.
No. 14. Act of the British Parliament, “to regulate the Trade of the Bri-
tish Possessions Jībroad.” [5th July, 1825...]
XXXII. And be it further enacted, That the same tonnage duties shall
be paid upon all vessels or boats of the United States of America, import-
ing any goods into either of the Provinces of Upper or Lower Canada, as
are, or may be for the time being, payable in the United States of America,
on British vessels or boats entering the harbours of the State from whence
such goods shall have been imported.
k
June 3, 1824.] BRITISH ACT-FISHERIES. 16t
No. 15. Act of the British Parliament, relating to the Fisheries carried on
upon the Banks and Shores of Newfoundland. [3d June, 1824.]
II. And be it further enacted, That no alien, or stranger whatsoever
shall at any time hereafter take bait, or use any sort of fishing whatsoever
in Newfoundland, or the coasts, bays, or rivers, thereof, or on the coast of
Labrador, or in any of the islands or places within or dependant upon the
Government of the said Colony; always excepting the rights and privileges
granted by Treaty to the subjects or citizens of any foreign State or Power
in amity with His Majesty.
XII. And be it further enacted. That it shall and may be law ful for His
Majesty, his heirs, and successors. by advice of his or their Council. from
time to time to give such orders and instructions to the Governor of New-
foundland, or to any officer or officers on that station. as he or they shall
deem proper and necessary to fulfil the purposes of any Treaty or Treaties
now in force between His Majesty and any foreign State or Power; and in
case it shall be necessary to that end, to give orders and instructions to the
Governor or other officer or officers aforesaid, to remove or caused to be re-
moved any stages, flakes, train-fats, or other works whatever, for the pur-
pose of carrying on the fishery, erected by His Majesty's subjects on that
part of the coast of Newfoundland which lies between Cape Saint John, pass-
ing to the north, and descending to the western coast of the said island to
the place called Cape Raye, and also all ships, vessels, and boats, belonging
to His Majesty’s subjects which shall be found within the limits aforesaid,
and also in case of refusal to depart from within the limits aforesaid, to com-
pel any of His Majesty’s subjects to depart from thence; any law, custom,
or usage to the contrary notwithstanding.
XIII. And be it further enacted. That if any person or persons shall re-
fuse, upon requisition made by the Governor, or any officer or officers acting
under him in pursuance of His Majesty’s orders and instructions as aforesaid,
to depart from within the limits aforesaid, or otherwise to conform to such
requisitions and directions as such Governor or other officer as aforesaid
shall make or give for the purposes aforesaid, every such person or persons
so refusing or otherwise offending against the same, shall forfeit the sum of
50 pounds sterling money. Provided always, that every such suit or prose-
cution, if the same be commenced in Newfoundland, shall be commenced
within one year; and if commenced in any of His Majesty’s Courts of Re-
cord at Westminister, within 2 years from the time of the commission of
such offence.
XVIII. And be it further enacted, That this Act shall continue and be
in force for 5 years, and from thence until the end of the then next session
of Parliament.
21
j62 G. BRITAIN–EAST INDIA TRADE. [July 19, 1797.
No. 16 Act of the British Parliament. " for r gulati. g the T atte with the
British Possessions in India by the Ships ºf Nations in amity with His
Majesty " [19th July 1797.]
Whereas by an Act passed in the 12th year of the reign of His late Ma-
jesty King Charles II. [Cap. 18.] it ti uled “An Act for the encourag-
ing and increasing of Shipping and Navigation,” it was enacted, that from
and after the 1st day of December, 1660, and from thence forward, no
goods or commodities shall be imported into or exported out of any lands,
islands, plantations, or territories, to His Majesty belonging or in his pos-
session, or which may hereafter belong unto or be in the possession of His
Majesty, his heirs and successors, in Asia, Africa, and America. in any
other ship or ships, vessel or vessels, than such as do truly and without
fraud belong unto the people of England or lieland, dominion of Wales,
or town of Berwick-upon Tweed, or are the built of and belonging to any
of the said lands. islands. plantations, or territories, as the proprietors and
right owners thereof, and whereof the master and three fourths of the mar-
iners at least are English. under certain penalties and forfeitures therein
mentioned: And whereas it is expedient that the ships and vessels of coun-
tries and states in amity with His Majesty should be allowed to import
goods and commodities unto and to export the same from the British terri-
tories in India. subject to certain restrictions and regulations; be it there-
fore enacted by the King's Most Excellent Majesty. by and with the ad-
vice and conserit of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in
this pre-ent Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that
from and after the passing of this Act, and during the continuance of the
exclusive trade of the United Company of Merchants of England trading
to the East Indies. and during the term for which the possessions of the
British territories in India is secured to the said United Company, it shall
and may be lawful for the ships and vessels of countries and states in ani-
ty with Hi- Majesty to import into and export from the British possessions
in India, such goods and commodities as they shall be permitted to import
into and export from the said possessions by the directors of the said com-
pany, who are hereby directed to frame such regulations for carrying on
the trade to and from the said possessions, and the countries and states in
amity with His Majesty, as shall seem to them most conducive to the in-
terest and prosperity of the said British possessions in India, and of the
British Empire ; and no ship or vessel belonging to any of the subjects of
states or countries in amity with His Majesty shall be liable to seizure, con-
fiscation, or forfeiture, or other penalty, for exporting from or importing
into the said British possessions in India any goods or commodities, the im-
portation ºr exportation of which respectively shall be permitted by the
said regulations: any thi g in the said herein before recited Act of the 12th
*Cited as unrepealed in Act 7 and 8, Geo. 4, Cap. 74, July 20, 1817,
Kiel, Jan. 14, 1814 G. BRITAIN AND DENMARK, [63
year of the reign of King Charles II. to the contrary notwithstanding: pro-
vided always, that it shall not be lawful for the directors of the said United
Company to frame any regulations for the conduct of the said trade, which
shall be inconsistent with any Treaty or Treaties which shall have been or
may be entered into by His Majesty, his heirs and successors, and any
country or state at amity with His Majesty, or which may be inconsistent
with any Act or Acts of Parliament which have been passed for the regula-
tion ºf the trade and commerce of the said British territories in India.
II. And be it further enacted, That all such regulations as shall be fram-
ed by the said court of directors. for carrying on the trade to and from the
British possessions in India, and the countries and states in amity with His
Majesty, shall be and they are hereby directed to be subject to the super-
intendance, direction, and control of the board of commissioners for the af.
fairs of India, in the same manner as all acts, operations, and cºncerns,
which any wise relate to or concern the civil and military Governments and
revenues of the British territories and acquisitions in the East Indies, now
al’e.
III. And be further enacted, That it shall not be lawful for any General
Court of Proprietors to alter or change, or to direct or order or authorize
the altering or changing, any resolution of the Court Directors, or to re-
scind, revoke, suspend, or vary the same, in so far as the same relates to the
intercourse of Foreign nations in amity with His Majesty and the British
territories in lndia.
Ne. 17. Treaty of Peace, between Great Britain and Denmark. Signed at
Aiel, 14th January, 1814.
ExtR Act. (Translation, as laid before Parliament.)
I. From the moment of the signature of the present Treaty, there shall
be peace and friendship between their Majesties the King of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the King of Denmark, and be-
tween their respective Kingdons, States, and subjects, in all parts of the
world. All hostilities between them shall cease, and all prizes taken from
the subjects of the respective nations shall be considered as null from the
day of the signature of the present Treaty and shall be restored on both
sides to their respective owners.
II. The respective prisoners of war shall, immediately after the ratifica-
tion of the present Treaty, be restored, en masse, on payment, on both sides,
of the private debts which they shall have contracted.
III. His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland consents to restore to His Danish Majesty all the possessions and
colonies which have been conquered by the British arms in this present war,
except the Island of Heligolanºl, which His Britannic Majesty reserves to
Himself with full and unlimited sovereignty.
164 G. BRITAIN AND DENMARK. [Kiel, Jan. 14, 1814.
* IV. The restoring of the colonies shall be performed according to the
same rules and principles which were laid down when His Britannic Majes-
ty gave up to His Danish Majesty these same colonies in the year 1801. —
With regard to the island of Anholt, it is agreed that it shall be given back
one non n after the ratification of the present Treaty, unless the season and
the difficulty of navigation should present insurmountable obstacles.
VII. The couluercial relations between the subjects of the high Contrac-
ting Parties shall agai return to the usual order, as existing before the pre-
sent war began.f They moreover reciprocally agree to adopt measures, as
soon as possible, for giving the same greater force and extent.
WI11. His Majesty the King of the United Kingdoin of Great Britain
and Ireland, and the British nation, being extremely desirous of totally
abolishing the Slave Traile, the King of Denmark engages to co-operate with
His sold Majesty for the completion of so beneficent a work, and to prohi-
bit all His suijects, in the most effectual manner, and by the iſ ost solemn
laws, from taking any share in such trade.
X1. The sequestrations which have been laid, by either of the Contrac-
ting Parties, on property not already confiscated or condemned, shall be
raised immediately after the ratification of this Treaty.
XII. His M jesty the King of Sweden having engaged, by Article VI.
of the Treaty of Alliance with his Britannic Majesty, concluded at Stock-
holin, the 3d of March, 1813, to grant for a period of twenty years, to be
computed from the exchange of the ratifications of the said Treaty: to the
subjects of His Britannic Majesty, the privileges of dépôt in the port of
Stralsund, of ail articles being the growth or manufacture of Great Britain, or
of her colonies, laden on board of British or Swedish vessels, on paying a
duty of one per cent, ad valorem, on such articles and merchandise, on im-
port and export; His Majesty the King of Denmark promises to fulfil, in
His new character of Sovereign of Swedish Pomerania, the said stipulation,
by sui)stituting Danish for Swedish bottoms.
XIII. All the ancient Treaties of Peace and Commerce between the for-
mer Sovereigns of England and Denmark are hereby renewed in their full
extent, so far as they are not contradictory to the stipulations of the pre-
sent treaty.
Done at Kiel, the 14th January, 1814.
Signed.
EDw ARD THoRNto N, [L. s.] EDMUND Bourk E, DL, S.]
* Excepted in the British Negotiation.
+ 1807. # Ratifications exchanged at Stockholm, 7th April, 1813.
London, Aug. 13,1814] G. BRITAIN AND NETHERLANDS. 165
No. 18. Convention between Great Brit in and the Netherlands. Signed at
London. August 13, 1814.
In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.
The United Provinces of the Netherland-, under the favor of Divine
Providence, having been restored to their independence, and having been
placed by the loyalty of the Dutch people and the achievemennts of the Al-
lied Powers under the Government of the Illustrious House of Orange: and
His Britannic Majesty being desirous of entering into such arrangements
with the Prince Sovereign of the United Netherlands, concerning the Col-
onies of the said United Netherlands, which have been conquered by His
M.j 'sty’s arms during the late war, as may conduce to the prosperity of
the said States, and may afford a lasting testimony of His Maj'sty’s friend-
ship and attachment to the family of Orange, and to the Dutch nation: the
said high Contracting Parties, equally animated by those sentiments of cor-
dial good will and attachment to each other, have nominated Their Plenipo-
tentiaries: namely, His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, the Right Honorable Robert Stewart, Wiscount Castle-
rearh, one of His said Majesty’s Most Honorable Privy Council; a VMember
of Parliament, Colonel of the Londonderry Regiment of Militia, Knight of
the Most Noble Order of the Garter, and His Principal Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, &c. &c.; and His Royal Highness the Prince of Orange-
Nassau, Prince Sovereign of the United Netherlands, His Excellency Hen-
ry Fagel, His Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary at the Court
of His Britannic Majesty:-who, after having exchanged their full Powers,
found in good and due form, have agreed to the following Articles:
I. His Britannic Majesty engages to restore to the Prince Sovereign of
the United Netherlands, within the term which shall be hereafter fixed, the
Colonies, Factories, and establishments which were possessed by Holland
at the commencement of the late war, viz. on the 1st of January, 1803, in
the Seas and on the Continents of America, Africa and Asia; with the ex-
ception of the Cape of Good Hope and the Settlements of Demerara, Esse-
quibo, and Berbice of which possessions the high Contracting Parties reserve
to Themselves the right to dispose by a Supplementary Convention, hereaf-
ter to be negotiated according to Their mutual interests, and especially with
reference to the provisions contained in the 6th and 9th Articles of the Trea-
ty of Peace signed between His Britannic Majesty and His Most Christian
Majesty on the 30th of May, 1814.”
II. His Britannic Majesty agrees to cede in full Sovereignty the Island
of Banca, in the Eastern Seas, to the Prince Sovereign of the Nether-
lands, in exchange for the Settlement of Cochin and its dependencies on
the coast of Malabar, which is to remain in full Sovereignty to his Britan-
nic Majesty.
III. The places and forts in the Colonies and Settlements, which, by
virtue of the two preceding Articles, are to be ceded and exchanged by the
* See page 147.
166 G. BRIT AIN AND NETHERLANDS. [London,
two high Contracting Parties, shall be given up in the state in which they
may be at the moment of the signature of the present Convention.
IV. His Britannic Majesty guarantees to the subjects of His Royal
Highness the Prince Sovereign of the United Netherlands, the same facilities,
privileges; and protection, with respect to commerce and the security of
their persons and property within the linits of the British Sovereignty on
the Continent of India, as are now or shall be granted to the most favored
nations.
His Royal Highness the Prince Sovereign, on His part, having nothing
more at heart than the perpetual duration of peace between the Crown of
England and the United Netherlands, and wishing to do his utmost to avoid
any thing which might affect their mutual good understanding, engages not
to erect any fortifications in the Establishments which are to be restored to
Him within the limits of the British Sovereignty upon Continent of India,
and only to place in those establishments the number of troops necessary
for the maintenance of the police.
V. Those colonies, factories, and establishments, which are to be ceded
to His Royal Highness the Prince Sove eign of the United Netherlands by
His Britannic Majesty, in the Seas or on the Continent of America, shall be
given up within three moths, and those which are bevoid the Cape of Good
Hope within the six months which follow the ratification of the present
Convention.
VI. The high Contracting Parties, desirous to bury in entire oblivion
he dissentions which have agitated Europe, declare and promise, that no
in fividu.l., of whatever rank or condition he may be, in the countries retor-
ed and ceded by the present Treaty, shall be prosecuted, disturbed, or
molested in his person or property, under any pretext whatsoever, either on
account of his conduct or political opinions, his attachment either to any of
the Contracting Parties, or to any Government which has ceased to exist,
or for any other reason except for debts contracted towards individuals, or
acts posterior to the date of the present Treaty.
VII. The native inhabitants and aliens, of whatever nation or condition
they may be, in those countries which are to change Sovereigns, as well in
virtue of the present Convention as of the subsequent arrangements to
which it may give rise, shall be allowed a period of six years, reckoning
from the exchange of the ratifications for the purpose of disposing of their
property, if they think fit, whether it be acquired before or during the late
war, and retiring to whatever country they may choose.
VIII. The Prince Sovereign of the United Netherlands, anxious to co-
operate, in the m ist effectual manner, with His Majesty the King of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, so as to bring about the
total abolition of the trade in slaves on the coast of Africa, and having
spontaneously issued a Decree dated the i5th of June 1814, wherein it is
dug is, 1814 G. BRITAIN AND NETHERLANDs. 167
enjoi.ed, that no ships or vessels whatsoever, destined for the trade in
slaves. be cleared out or equipped in any of the barbours or places of His
Doninions, nor admitted to the forts or possessions on the coasts of Guinea,
and that no inhabitants of that country shall be sold or exported as slaves,
—does moreover hereby engage to prohibit al. His subjects, in the most
effectual manner and by the most solemu laws, from taking any share what-
soever in such inhuman traffic.
IX. The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be duly exchanged at London within three weaks from date thereof, or
sooner if possible.
In witness whereof. we the undersigned Plenipotentiaries, in virtue of
our respective full Powers, have signed the present Convention, and have
affixed thereto the seals of our arms.
Done at London, this 13th day of August, 1814.
Signed CASTLERE A.G.H. [L. S.] H. FAGEL, [L. s.]
ADDITIONAL ARTICLES,
I. In order the better to provide for the defence and incorporation of the
Belgic Provinces with Holland, and also to provide, in conformity to
Article IX of the Treaty of Paris, a suitable compensation for the rights
ceded by His Swedish Majesty under the said Article, which compensation,
it is understood. in the event of the above reunion, Holland should be
liable to furnish, in pursuance of the above stipulations; it is hereby agreed
between the high Contracting Parties, that His Britannic Majesty shall
take upon Himself, and engage to defray the following charges:
1st. The payment of 1,000,000 sterling to Sweden, in satisfaction of
the claims aforesaid, and in pursuance of a Convention this day executed
with His Swedish Majesty’s Plenipotentiary to that effect, (a copy of which
Convention is annexed to these Additional Articles.)
2dly. The advance of 2,000,000 sterling, to be applied, in concert with
the Prince Sovereign of the Netherlands, and in aid of an equal sum to
be furnished by Him towards augmenting and improving the defences of
the Low Countries.
3dly To bear, equally with Holland, such farther charges as may be
agreed upon between the said high Contracting Parties and their Allies,
towards the final act satisfactory settlement of the Low Countries in union
with Holland, and under the dominion of the House of Orange, not ex-
ceeding, in whole, the sum 3,000,000 sterling, to be defrayed by Great
Britain.
In consideration, and satisfaction of the above engagements, as taken by
His Britannic Majesty, the Prince Sovereign of the Netherlands agrees to
cede in full Sovereignty to His Britannic Majesty, the Cape of Good Hope,
and the Settlements of Demerara, Essequibo and Berbice, upon the condi-
168 NETHERLANDS—SLAVE TRADE. [May 4, 1818.
tion nevertheless, that the subjects of the said Sovereign Prince, being pro-
prietors in the said Colonies or Settlements, shali be at liberty (under such
regulations as may hereafter be agreed upon in a Supplementary Couven-
tion) to carry on trade between the said Settlements and the Territories in
Europe of the said Sovereign Prince.
It is also agreed between the two high Contracting Parties, that the
ships of every kind belonging to Holland, shall have permission to resort
freely to the Cape of Good Hope for the purposes of refreshment and
repairs, without being liable to other charges than such as British subjects
are required to pay.
II. The small district of Bernagore, situated close to Calcutta, being
requisite to the due preservation of the peace and police of that city, the
Prince of Orange agrees to cede the said district to His Britannic M jesty,
upon a pavment of such sum annually to His Royal Highness as may be
considered, by Commissioners to be appointed by the respective Govern-
ments. to be just and reasonable, with reference to the profits or revenue
usually derived by the Dutch Government from the same.
Il I. The present Additional Articles shall have the same force and
validity as if they were inserted word for word in the Convention signed
this day. They shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged
at the same time and place.
In witness whereof, we, the undersigned Plenipotentiaries have signed,
and affixed to them the seals of our arms.
Done at London, this 13th day of August. 1814.
Signed CASTLE REAGH, I L. S. J H. FAGEL, [L. s.]
No. 19. Treaty between Great Britain and the Netherlands. Signed at
the Hague. May 4th, 1818.
In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, animated with a mu-
tual desire to adopt the most effectual measures for putting a stop to the
carrying on of the Slave Trade by their respective subjects, and for preven-
ting their respective flags from being made use of as a protection to this
nefarious traffic, by the people of other countries who may engage the re-
in, their said Majesties have accordingly resolved to proceed to the ar-
rangement of a Convention for the attainment of their objects, and have
therefore named as Plenipotentiaries. ad hoc.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, the Right Honorable Richard Earl of Clancarty, Viscount Dunlo, &c.
&c. &c. Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of His said Majesty
to His Majesty the King of the Netherlands. Grand Duke of Luxembourg;
and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands. Anne William Charles Ba-
ron de Nagell d’Ampsen, Member of the Body of Nobles of the Province of
May 4, 1818.] NETHERLANDS—st, AVE TRADE. J 69
Guelderland, &c. &c &c. who, having exchanged their full Powers, found
in good and due form, have agreed on the following Articles:
I. The laws of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland ren-
dering it already highly penal for the subjects of His Britannic Majºsty to
carry on, or to be in any way engaged in trade in Slaves. His Maj-sty the
King of the Netherlands, referring to the 8th Article of the Convention en-
tered into with His Britannic Majesty on the 13th August 1814, engages in
pursuance thereof, and within eight months from the ratification of these
presents, or sooner if possible, to prohibit all His subjects, in the most effec-
tual manner, and especially by penal law the most formal, to take any part
whatever in the Trade of Slaves; and in the event of the measures already
taken by the British Government, and to be taken by that of the Netherlands,
be found ineffectual or insufficient, the high Contracting Parties mutually
engage to adopt such further measures, whether by legal provision or other-
wise, as may from time to time appear to be best calculated, in the most ef-
fectual manner, to prevent all their respective subjects from taking any
share whatever in the nefarious traffic.
II. The two high Contracting Parties, for the more complete attáinment
of the object of preventing all traffic in Slaves, on the part of their respec-
tive subjects, mutually consent that the ships of their Royal Navies, which
shall be provided with special instructions for this purpose, as hereinafter
mentioned, may visit such merchant vessels of the two nations, as may be
suspected, upon reasonable grounds, of having Slaves on board for an illicit
traffic; and in the event only of their finding such Slaves on board, may de-
tain and bring away snch vessels, in order that they may be brought to trial
before the tribunals established for this purpose, as shall hereinafter be spe-
cified :
III. In the intention of explaining the mode of execution of the preced-
ing Article it is agreed:
1st. That such reciprocal right of visit and detention shall not be exer-
cised within the Mediterranean Sea, or within the Seas in Europe lying
without the Straits of Gibraltar, and which lie to the northward of the thirty-
seventh parallel of north latitude, and also within, and to the eastward
of the meridian of longitude twenty degrees west of Gree wich.
2d. That the naems of the several vessels furnished with such Instruc-
tions, the force of each, and the names of their several Commanders shall
be, from time to time, immediately upon their issue, communicated by the
Power issuing the same to the other high Contracting Party.
3d. That the number of ships of each of the Royal Navies authorized to
make such visit as aforesaid, shall not exceed the number of twelve, belong-
ing to either of the high Contracting Parties, without the special conse, it of
the other high Contracting Party being first had and obtained
4th. That if at any time it should be deemed expeuient that any ship of the
ſº
22
170 NETHERLANDS—SLAVE TRADE. [May 4, 1818.
Royal Navy of either of the two high Contracting Parties, authorized to
make such visit as aforesaid, should proceed to visit any merchant ship or
ships under the flag, and proceeding under the convoy of any vessel or ves-
sels of the Royal Navy of the high Contracting Party, and the Commanding
Officer of the ship duly authorized and instructed to make such visit. shall
proceed to effect the same in communication with the Cominanding Officer of
the convoy, who, it is hereby agreed, shall give every facility to such visit,
and to the eventual detainer of the merchant ship or ships so visited, and in
all things assist to the utmost of his power in the due execution of the pre-
sent Convention. according to the true intent and meaning thereof.
5th. It is further mutually agreed, that the Commanders of the ships of
the two Royal Navies, who shall be employed on this service, shall adhere
strictly to the exact tenor of the Instructions which they shall receive for
this purpose.
IV. As the two preceding Articles are entirely reciprocal, the two high
Contracting Parties engage mutually to make good any losses which their
respective subjects may incur unjustly, by the arbitrary and illegal deten-
tion of their vessels; it being understood that this indemnity shall invariably
be borne by the Government whose cruisers shall have been guilty of the
arbitrary detention; and that the visit and detention of ships specified in
this Article shall only be effected by those British or Netherland vessels
which may form part of the two Royal Navies, and by those only of such ves-
sels which are provided with the special Instructions annexed to the present
Treaty, in pursuance of the provisions thereof.
V. No British or Netherland cruizer shall detain any ship whatever not
having Slaves actually on board; and in order to render lawful the detention
of any ship. whether British or Netherland, the Slaves found on board such
vessel must have been brought there for the express purpose of the traffic.
VI. All ships of the Royal Navies of the two nations, which shall here-
after be destined to prevent the traffic in Slaves, shall be furnished by their
respective Governments with a copy of the Instructions annexed to the pre-
sent Treaty, and which shall be considered as an integral part thereof.
These Instructions shall be written in the Dutch and English languages,
and signed for the vessels of each of the two Powers, by the Minister of
their respective marine.
The two high Contracting Parties reserve the faculty of altering the
said instructions, in whole or in part, according to circumstances; it being,
how ever, well understood. that the said alterations cannot take place but
by the common agreement, and by the consent of the two high Contracting
Parties.
VII. In order to bring to adjudication, with the least delay and incon-
venience, the vessels which may be detained for having been engaged in a
traffic of Slaves, according to the tenor of the Fifth Article of this Treaty,
St. Petersb. Feb. 28, 1825..] RUSSIA—PACIFIC OCEAN. 171
there shall be established, within the space of a year at furthest from the
exchange of the ratifications of the treaty, two mixed Courts of Justice,
fo med of an equal number of individuals of the two nations, named for this
purpose by their respective Sovereigns.
These Courts shall reside—one in a possession belonging to His Britan-
nic Majesty, the other within the territories of His Majesty the King of the
Netherlands; and the two Governments, at the period of the exchange of the
ratifications of the present Treaty, shall declare, each for its own domin-
ions, in what places the Court shall respectfully reside. Each of the two
high Contracting Parties reserving to itself the right of changing, at its
pleasure. the place of residence of the Court held within its own dominions;
provided, however, that one of the two Courts shall always be held upon
the coast of Africa, and the other in one of the colonial possessions of His
Majesty the King of the Netherlands.
These Courts shall judge the Causes submitted to them according to the
terms of the present Treaty, without appeal, and according to the Regula-
tions and Instructions annexed to the present Treaty, of which they shall
be considered as an integral part.
VIII. In case the Commanding Officer of any of the ships of the Roy-
al Navies of Great Britain, and the Netherlands, commissioned under the
Second Article of this Treaty, shall deviate in any respect from the disposi-
tions of the said Treaty, and shall not be enabled to justify himself, either
by the tenor of the said treaty, or of the instructions annexed to it; the Go-
vernment which shall conceive itself to be wronged by such conduct, shall
be entitled to demand reparation, and in such case the Government, to
which the captor may belong, binds itself to cause enquiry to be made into
the subject of the complaint, and to inflict upon the captor, if he be found to
deserve it, a punishment proportioned to the transgression which may have
been committed.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and thereunto affixed the seals of their arms.
Done at the Hague, the 4th day of May, in the year our Lord, 1818.
Signed CLANG ARTY, [L. S.] A. W. C. DE NAGELL, IL. S.]
WAN MAANEN, LL. s.]
RUSSIA.
No. 20. Convention between Gt. Britain ind Russia. Signed at St.Petersburg,
February ##, 1825. [Navigation, &c. on the Pacific Ocean | TRANSLATION.
In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, being desirous of
drawing still closer the ties of good understanding and friendship which
unite them, by means of an agreement which may settle, upon the basis of
reciprocal convenience, different points connected with the commerce, navi-
gation, and fisheries, of their subjects on the Pacific ocean, as well as the
4-
172 RUSSIA—PACIFIC OCEAN. [St. Petersburg,
limits of their respective possessions on the north-west coast of America,
have aaned Plenipotentiaries to conclude a Corvention for this purpose,
that is to say:—His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Bri-
tain and Ireland, the Right Honorable Stratford Canning, a Member of His
said M jesty’s Most Honorable Privy Council, &c. and His Majesty the Em-
peror of all the Russias, the Sieur Charles Robert Count de Nesselrode. His
Imperial Maj -t,” Privy Councillor, a Member of the Council of the Em-
pire. Secretary of State for the Department of Foreign Affairs, &c. and the
Sieur Pierre de Poletica, His Imperial Majesty’s Councillor of State. &c.—
Who, after having communicated to each other their respective full powers,
found in good and due form, have agreed upon and signed the following Ar-
ticles:
A Rt. I. It is agreed that the respective subjects of the High Contracting
Parties shall not be troubled or molested. in any part of the ocean, common-
ly calied the Pa iic ocean, either in navigatiºs the same, in fishing therein, or
in land, ng at such parts of the coast as shall not have been already occupied,
in order to trade with the natives, under the restrictions and conditions spe-
cified in the following Articles:
II. In order to prevent the right of navigating and fishing, exercised
upon the ocean by the subjects of the High Contracting Parties. from becom-
ing the pretext for an illicit commerce, it is agreed that the subjects of His
Britannic Majesty shall not land at any place where there may be a Russian
establishment, without the permission of the Governor or Commandant; and,
on the other hand, that Russian subjects shall not land, without permission,
at any British establishment, on the north-west coast.
III. The line of demarcation between the possessions of the High Con-
tracting Parties, upon the coast of the Continent, and the islands of America
to the north west shall be drawn in the manner following:—
Commencing from the southernmost point of the island called Prince of
Wales island, which point lies in the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes,
north latitude, and between the 131st and the 133d degree of west longitude
(meridian of Greenwich,) the said line shall ascend to the north along the
channel called Portland Channel, as far as the point of the continent where
it strikes the 56th degree of north latitude; from this last mentioned point,
the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated
parallel to the coast as far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of
west longitude (of the same meridian :) and, finally, from the said point of
intersection, the said meridian line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation
as far as the Frozen ocean. shall form the limit between the Russian and
British possessions on the continent of America to the north west.
IV. With reference to the line of demarcation laid down in the preced-
ing Article it is understood:
1st. That the island called Prince of Wales Island shall belong wholly
to Russia.
Feb. 28, 1825.1 RUSSIA—PACIFIC OCEAN. I73
2d. That whenever the summit of the mountains which extend in a di-
rection parallel to the coast, from the 56th degree of north latitude to the
point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude shall prove to be
at the distance of more than 10 marine leagues from the ocean, the limit be-
tween the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Rus-
sia, as abovementioned, shall be formed by a line parallel to the windings of
the Coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of 10 marine leagues
therefroun.
V. It is moreover agreed, that no establishment shall be formed by
either of the two parties within the limits assigned by the two preceding Ar-
ticles to the possessions of the other; consequently, British subjects shall
not form any establishment either upon the coast, or upon the border of the
continent comprised within the limits of the Russian possessions, as designa-.
ted in the two preceding Articles; and, in like manner, no establishment
shali be formed by Russian subjects beyond the said limits.
VI It is understood that the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, from
whatever quarter they may arrive, whether from the ocean, or from the in-
terior of the continent, shall for ever enjoy the right of navigating freely,
and without any hindrance whatever, all the rivers and streams which, in
their course towards the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation
upon the line of coast described in Article III. of the present Convention.
VII. It is also understood, that, for the space of 10 years from the signa-
ture of the present Convention, the vessels of the two Powers, or those be-
longing to their respective subjects, shall mutually be at liberty to frequent,
without any hindrance whatever, all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens, and
creeks on the coast mentioned in Article III. for the purposes of fishing and
of trading with the natives.
VIII. The port of Sitka, or Novo Archangelsk, shall be open to the
commerce and vessels of British subjects for the space of 10 years from the
date of the exchange of the ratifications of the present Convention. In the
event of an extension of this term of 10 years being granted to any other
Power, the like extensien shall be granted also to Great Britain.
IX. The abovementioned liberty of commerce shall not apply to the
trade in spirituous liquors, in fire arms, or other arms, gunpowder or other
warlike stores; the High Contracting Parties reciprocally engaging not to
permit the abovementioned articles to be sold or delivered, in any manner
whatever, to the natives of the country.
X. Every British or Russian Vessel navigating the Pacific Ocean, which
may be compelled by storms or by accident, to take shelter in the ports of
the respective Parties, shall be at liberty to refit therein, to provide itself
with all necessary stores, and to put to sea again, without paying any other
than port and light-house dues, which shall be the same as those paid by na-
tional vessels. In case, however, the master of such vessel should be un-
der the necessity of disposing of a part of his merchandize in order to de-
ſº
[74 RUSSIA AND TURKEY. [Akerman, Oct 25, 1826.
fray his expences, he shall conform himself to the regulations and tariffs of
the place where he may have landed.
Xi. In every case of complaint on account of an infraction ºf the Arti-
cles of the present Convention, the civil and military authorities of The
High Contracting Parties, without previously acting or taking any forcible
measure, shali make an exact and circumstantial report of the matter to
their respective Courts, who engage to settle the same, in a friendly man-
ner, and according to the principles of justice.
XII. The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged at London, within the space of 6 weeks, or sooner if possible.
In witness whereof, the respective Pienipotentiaries have signed the
same, and have affixed thereto the seal of their arms. e
Done at St. Petersburgh, the #th day of February, in the year of our
Lord, 1825.
[L. S.] STRATFoRD CANNING. ſ. L. S. CoMTE DE N Essel Rod E.
[L s ] PIERRE DE Pol, ET ICA.
No 21. 'reaty between Russia and Turkey. Convention explan-
atory of the Treaty of Bucharest Signed at Akerman, Oct. 25, 1826.
ExTRACT.
ART. 7. The reparation of damages caused to the subjects and mer-
chants of the Imperial Court of Russia, by the corsairs of the regencies of
Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli; and the full and entire execution of the stip-
ulations of the treaty of commerce and of the 7th article of the treaty of Jas-
sy, being strictly obligatory upon the Sublime Porte, in virtue of the ex-
press clauses of the 12th article of the treaty of Bucharest, which, conjoint-
ly with the 3d article, renew and confirm all the anterior transactions—the
Sublime Porte solemnly reiterates the promise to fulfil hereafter, with the
most scrupulous fidelity, all its engagements in that respect. In conse-
quence :
1st. The Sublime Porte will use all its endeavours to prevent the cor-
sairs of the Regencies of Barbary, under any pretext whatever, from dis-
turbing the commerce and navigation of Russia ; and in case of depredations
on their part, of which the Porte shall have been informed, it engages to
cause restitution to be made without delay, of all the prizes made by the
said corsairs, to indemnify the Russian subjects for the losses they may
have sustained; to address for that purpose a rigorous firman to the Regen-
cies of Barbary, in a manner that will not render it necessary to repeat it a
second time; and in case the said firman should not have been executed, to pay
the amount of the indemnity from the Imperial treasure, within the term of
two months, as specified in the 7th article of the Treaty of Jassy, from the
day of the reclamation which shall have been made of the property, by the
Russian Minister, with the verification which shall have been taken.
2d. The Sublime Porte promises to observe rigorously, all the condi-
tions of the said Treaty of Commerce, to remove all the prohibitions con-
ſº
London, July 6, 1827.] SETTLEMENT OF GREE {E. | 75
trary to the express tenor of its stipulations, to place no other shackles
upon the free navigation of vessels under the Russian flag, in all the seas
and waters of the Ottoman Empire, without any exception. In a word, to
permit the merchants, captains, and all the subjects of Russia in general,
to enjoy the advantages and prerogatives, as well as the entire liberty of
commerce, which are formerly stipulated by the treaties existing between
the two Empires. *
3d. Conformably to the 1st article of the Treaty of Commerce, which
stipulates in favour of all the subjects of Russia in general, the liberty of
navigation and commerce in all the States of the Sublime Porte, either by
land or sea, and above all, where navigation and commerce may be convenient
to Russian subjects; and in virtue of the clauses of the 31st and 35th arti-
cles of the said treaty, which assure the free passage, by the canal of Con-
stantinople, of Russian merchant ships, loaded with provisions and other
merchandises and productions of Russia, or of other countries not subject
to the Ottoman Empire, as well as the free disposition of their provisions,
merchandises and productions, the Sublime Porte promises to oppose no ob-
stacle nor prevention to Russian vessels, laden with wheat or other provi-
sions, at their arrival in the canal of Constantinople, where they may re-
ship their cargoes into other vessels whether Russian, or those of other fo-
reign nations, to be transported out of the States of the Sublime Porte.
4th The Sublime Porte accepts the good offices of the Imperial Court
of Russia for the purpose of according, after former examples, the entry of
the Black Sea to the vessels of Powers friendly to the Ottoman Govern-
ment, who have not yet obtained that privilege, in such a manner that the
Russian commerce of importation may not, by the means of those vessels,
and their exportation of Russian products, suffer any injury.
No. 22. Treaty for the Settlement of Greece. Signed at London, July 6, 1827.
In the Name of the Most Holy Undivided Trinity.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, his Majesty the King of France and Navarre, and his Majesty the Em-
peror of all the Russias, penetrated with the necessity of putting an end to
the sanguinary contest which by delivering up the Greek provinces and the
isles of the Archipelago to all the disorders of anarchy, produces daily fresh
impediments to the commerce of the Furopean States, and gives occasion to
piracies which not only expose the subjects of the high contracting parties
to considerable losses, but besides render necessary burdensome measures of
protection and repression; his Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland, and his Majesty the King of France and Navarre,
having besides received, on the part of the Greeks, a pressing request to in-
terpose their mediation with the Ottoman Porte, and being, as well as his
Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, animated by the desire of stopping
the effusion of blood, and of arresting the evils of all kinds which might arise
176 SETTLEMENT OF GREECE. [London, July6, 1829
|
\
* * *
from the continuance of such a state of things, have resolved to unite their
efforts, and to regulate the operations thereof by a formal Treaty. with a
view of re-establishing peace between the contentling parties by means of an
arrangement which is called for as much by humanity as by the interest of
the repose of Europe. •
Wherefore they have nominated their Plenipotentiaries to discuss, agree
upon, and sign the said Treaty—
_Who, after having communicated their full powers, and ſound the same
in good and due form, agreed upon the following articles:—
ART. 1. The contracting powers will offer to the Ottoman Porte their
mediation, with the view of bringing about a reconciliation between it and
the Greeks.
This offer of mediation shall be made to this power immediately after
the ratification of the treaty, by means of a collective declaration signed
by the Plenipotentiaries of the allied Courts at Constantinople ; and there
shall be made at the same time, to the two contending parties, a demand of
an immediate artnistice between them, as a preliminary condition indispen-
sible to the opening of any negotiation.
ART. 2. The arrangement to be proposed to the Ottoman Porte, shall
rest on the following bases:–The Greeks shall hold of the Sultan as of
a * superior lord ; and in consequence of this superiority, they shall pay to
the Ottoman Empire an annual tribute (relief.) the amount of which shall
be fixed once for all, by a common agreement. They shall be governed
by the authorities whom they shall themselves choose and nominate, but in
the nominatiºn of whom the Porte shall have a determined voice.
To bring about a complete separation between the individual- of the two
nations, and to prevent the collisions which are the inevitable consequence
of so long a struggle, the Greeks shall enter upon the possession of the
Turkish property situated either on the continent or in the isles of Greece,
on the condition of indemnifying the former proprietors, either by the pay-
ment of an annual sum, to be added to the tribute which is to be paid to
the Porte, or by some other transaction of the same nature.
ART. 3. The details of this arrangement, as well as the limits of the terri-
ritory on the continent, and the designation of the islands of the Archipelago
to which it shall be applicable, shall be settled in a subsequent negotiation
between the high powers and the two contending parties.
ART. 4. The contracting powers engage to follow up the salutary work
of the pacification of Greece on the bases laid down in the preceding articles,
and to furnish without the least delay their representatives at Constantinople
with all the instructions which are necessary for the execution of the treaty
now signed.
ART. 5. The contracting powers will not seek in these arrangements
any augmentation of territory, any exclusive influence, any commercial
* Suzerain is the term used, it belongs to the feudal law, and signifies Lord Paramount.
London, July 6, 1827.] SETTLEMENT OF GREECE. 177
advantage for their subjects, which the subjects of any other nation may
not equally obtain.
AR r. 6. The arrangements of reconciliation and peace, which shall be
definitively agreed upon between the contending parties, shall be guaranteed
by such of the signing powers as shall judge it useful or possible to contract
the obligation: the mode of the effects of this guarantee shall become the
object of subsequent stipulations between the high powers.
ART. 7. The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged in two months, or sooner if possible.
In faith whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed, and sealed
it with their arms.
Done at London, July, 6, 1827. DUDLEY.
Po LIGNAc,
LIEVEN.
AD DITIONAL AND SECRET ARTICLE,
In case that the Ottoman Porte does not accept, within the space of one
Klonth, the mediation which shall be proposed, the high contracting parties
agree upon the following measure:—
1. It shall be declared, by their representatives at Constantinople to
the Porte, that the inconveniences and evils pointed out in the public treaty
as inseparable from the state of things subsisting in the East for the last six
years, and the termination of which, through the means at the disposal of
the Sublime Porte, appears still remote, impose upon the high contracting
parties the necessity of taking immediate measures for an approximation
with the Greeks.
It is to be understood that this approximation shall be brought about by
establishing commercial relations with the Greeks, by sending to them for
that purpose and receiving from them, Consular agents, so long as there
shall exist among them authorities capable of maintaining such relations.
2. If within the said term of one month, the Porte do not accept the
armistice proposed in the first article of the public treaty, or if the Greeks
refuse to execute it, the high contracting powers shall declare to that one
of the two contending parties which shall wish to continue hostilities, or to
both if such become necessary, that the said high contracting powers intend
to exert all the means which circumstances may suggest to their prudence
to obtain the immediate effects of the armistice, the execution of which they
desire, by preventing, in as far as may be in their power, all collision
between the contending parties, and, in fact, immediately after the afore-
said declaration, the high contracting powers will conjointly employ all their
means in the accomplishment of the object thereof, without, however, taking
any part in the hostilities between the two contending parties.
In consequence, the high contracting powers will, immediately after the
signature of the present additional and secret article, transmit eventual
23
178 HOLY ALLIANCE, [Sept. 26, 1825.
instructions conformable to the provisions above set forth, to the admirals
commanding their squadron in the seas of the Levant.
3. Finally, if, contrary to all expectation, these measures do not yet
suffice to induce the adoption by the Ottoman Porte of the propositions made
by the high contracting powers, or if, on the other hand, the Greeks re-
nounce the conditions stipulated in their favour in the treaty of this day,
the high contracting powers will, nevertheless, continue to prosecute the
work of pacification on the bases agreed upon between them; and, in conse-
quence they authorize from this time forward their representatives in Lon-
don to discuss and determinate the ulterior measures to which it may become
necessary to resort. *
The present additional and secret article shall have the same force and
value as if it had been inserted, word for word, in the treaty of this day.
It shall be ratified, and the ratifications thereof shall be exchanged, at the
same time as those of the said Treat v.
In faith whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed it, and
have thereto affixed the seals of their arms.
Done at London, this 6th day of July, in the year of Grace 1827.
DUDLEY.
- Polign AC.
g-º-º- LIEven.
No. 23. TREATY OF THE HOLY ALLIANCE.
In the name of the Holy and Indivisible Trinity.
Their Majesties the Fmperor of Austria, the King of Prussia, and the Emperor of Russia,
in consequence of the great events, which have distinguished in Europe the course of the three
last years, and esp. cially of the blessings, which it has pleased Divine Providence to shed upon
those states, whose governments have placed their confidence and their hope in it alone, having
acquired the thorough conviction, that it is necessary for insuring their continuance, that the
several powers, in their mutual relations, adopt the sublime truths which are pointed out to us
by the eternal religion of our Saviour God—
Declare solemnly, That the present act has no other object than to show, in the face of the
universe their unwavering determination to adopt for the only rule of their conduct, both in the
administration of their respective states, and in their political relations with every other govern-
ment, the precepts of their holy religion, the precepts of justice, of charity, and of peace,
which, far from being solely applicable to private life, ought, on the contrary, directly to influ-
ence the resolutions of princes, and to guide all their undertakings, as being the only means of
giving stability to human institutions, and of remedying their imperfections—their majesties
have, therefore, agreed to the following articles:
A Rt. 1. In conformity to the words of the Holy Scriptures, which command all men to regard
one another as brethern the three contracting monarchs will remain united, by the bonds of a
true and indissoluble fraternity; and, considering each other as compatriots, they will lend one
another, on ev. ry occasion, and in every place, assistance, aid, and support; and, regarding the
Subjects and armies, as the fathers of their families, they will govern them in the spirit of fra-
termity with which they are animated, for the protection of religion, peace, and justice.
ART. 2. Therefore, the only governing principle between the abovementioned governments
and their subjects, shall be that of rendering reciprocal services; of testifying, by an unalterable
beneficence, the mutual affection with which they ought to be animated; of considering all as
only the members of one christian nation, the three allied powers looking upon themselves as
delegated by providence, to govern three branches of the same family, to wit: Austria, Prussia,
rerona, Nov. 22, 1822) secret TREATY of veroNA. 179
and Russia, confessing, likewise, that the christian nation, of which they and their people form
a part, have really no other sovereign than to him to whom alone power belongs of right, be-
cause in him alone are found all the treasures of love, of science and of wisdom, that is to say,
God, our divine Saviour, Jesus Christ, the word of the most high, the word of life.
Their Majesty’s, therefore, recommend, with the most tentier solicitude, to their people, as
the only means of enjoying that peace which springs from a good conscience, and which alone is
durable, to fortify themselves every day more and more in the principles and exercise of the
duties which the divine Saviour has pointed out to us.
A lit. 3. All powers which wish solemnly to profess the sacred principles which have dele-
gated this act, and who shall acknowleg how important it is to the happiness of nations, too
long disturbed, that these truths shall hencefºrth exercise upon human destinies, all the influ-
ence which belongs to them, shall be received with as much readiness as affection, into this
holy alliance.
Made, triplicate, and signed at Paris, in the year of our Lord 1815, on the 14th (26) September.
Fit A.Ncis. FREDERick WILLIAM. ALEXANDER.
A true copy of the original: ALEXAND Eit.
St. Petersburg, the day of the birth of our Saviour, the 25th of Dec. i 815.
No. 24. SE, CRET TRE-1TY OF VER O.W.A.
The undersigned, specially authorized to make some additions to The Treaty of the Holy
•Alliance, after having exchanged their respective credentials, have agreed as follows:
A.T. 1. The high contracting powers being convinced that the system of representative
government is equally as incompatible with the monarchical principles as the maxim of the
sovereignty of the people with the divine right, engag mutually, in the most solemn manner,
to use all their efforts to put an end to the system of representative governments, in whatever
country it may exist in Europe, and to prevent its being int oduced in those countries where it
is not yet known.
* ART. 2. As it cannot be doubted that the liberty of the press is the most powerful means
used by the pretended supporters of the rights of nations, to the detriment of those of Princes,
the high contracting parties promise reciprocally to adopt all proper measures to suppress it,
not only in their own states, but also in the rest of Europe.
Ant. 3. Convinced that the principles of religion contribute most powerfully to keep nations
in the state of passive obedience which they owe to their Princes, the high contracting parties
declare it to be their intention to sustain, in their respective states, those measures which the
elergy may adopt, with the aim of anoeliorating their own interests, so intimately connected with
the preservation of the authority of Princes; and the contracting powers join in offering their
thanks to the Pope, for what he has already done for them, and solicit his constant co-operation
in their views of submitting the nations.
Ant, 4. The situation of Spain and Portugal unite unhappily all the circumstances to which
this treaty has particularly reference. The high contracting parties, in confiding to France the
care of putting an end to them, engage to assist her in the manner which may the least com-
promit them with their own people and the people of France, by means of a subsidy on the part
of the two empires, of twenty millions of francs every year, from the date of the signature of
this treaty to the end of the war.
ART. 5. In order to establish in the Peninsula the order of things which existed before the
revolution of Cadiz, and to insure the entire execution of the articles of the present treaty, the
high contracting parties give to each other the reciprocal assurance, that as long as their views
are not fulfilled, rejecting all other ideas of utility, or other measures to be taken, they will
address themselves with the shortest possible delay, to all the authorities existing in their states,
and to all their agents in foreign countries, with the view to establish connections tending towards
the accomplishment of the objects proposed by this treaty.
ART. 6. This treaty shall be renewed with such changes as new circumstances may give
occasion for, cither at a new Congress, or at the Court of one of the contracting parties, as soon
as the war with Spain shall be terminated.
ARt. 7. The present treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications exchanged at Paris within
the space of six months.
Made at Verona, the 22d Nov. 1822.
(Signed) For Austria, METTERNICH; for France, CHATEAUBRIAND; for Prussia, BERNSTET;
- or Russia, NESSELRODE,
180 - SLAVE TRADE. [Vienna, Feb. 8, 1815.
No. 25. Declaration of the Powers, on the Abolition of the Slave Trade,
of the 8th February, 1815.
The Plenipotentiaries of the Powers who signed the Treaty of Paris of
the 30th May, 1814, assembled in conference:
Having taking into consideration that the commerce known by the name
of “ the Slave Trade,” has been considered by just and enlightened men
of all ages, as repugnant to the principles of humanity and universal mor-
ality; that the particular circumstances from which this commerce has
originated, and the difficulty of abruptly a resting its progress, may have
concealed to a certain extent what was odious in its continuance; but that
at length the public voice, in all civilized countries, calls aioud for its
proupt suppression; that since the character and the details of this traffic
have been better known, and the evils of every kind which attend it,
completely developed, several European Gover nu ents have virtually, come
to the resolution of putting a stop to it, and that, successively, all the
powers possessing Colonies in different parts of the world have acknow-
legged, either by Legislative Acts, or by Treaties, or other ſo nal en-
gagements, the duty and necessity of abolishing it:
That by a separate Article of the late Treaty of Paris, Great Britain
and France engaged to unite their efforts at the Congress of Vienna, to
induce all the Powers of Christendom to proclaim the universal and defini-
tive Abolition of the Slave Trade:
That the Plenipotentiaries assembled at this Congress cannot do greater
credit to their mission, better fulfil their duty, and manifest the principles
which actuate their august Sovereigns, that, by endeavouring to carry this
engagement into effect, and by proclaiming, in the name of their Sove-
reigns their wish of putting an end to a scourge, which has so long tieso-
lated Africa, degraded Europe, and afflicted humanity:
The said Plenipotentiaries have agreed to open their deliberations, on
the means of accomplishing so Salutary an object, by a solemn declaration
of the principles which have governed them in this undertaking: accord-
ingly, being duly authorized for this purpose, by the unanimous accession
of their respective Courts to the principle laid down in the said separate
Article of the Treaty of Paris; they declare, in the face of Europe, that,
considering the universal abolition of the Slave Trade as a measure particu-
larly worthy of their attention, conformable to the spirit of the times, and
to the generous principles of their august Sovereigns, they are animated with
the sincere desire of concurring in the most prompt and effectual execution
of this measure, by all the means at their disposal, and of acting in the
employment of these means, with all the zeal and perseverance which
is due to so great and noble a cause.
Too well acquainted, however with the sentiments of their Sovereigns,
not to perceive, that, however honorable may be their views, they cannot
Pienna. June 9, 1815] NAVIGATION OF RIVERS. 181
be attained without due regard to the interests, the habits, and even the
prejudices of their subjects; the said Plenipotentiaries at the same time
acknowledge that this general Declaration cannot prejudge the period
that each particular Power may consider as most advisable for the defini-
tive abolition of the Slave Trade. Consequently, the determining the pe-
riod when this trade is to cease universally, must be a subject of negocia-
tion between the Powers; it being understood, however, that no proper
means of securing its attainment, and of accelerating its progress; are to
be neglected ; and that the engagement, reciprocally contracted in the pre-
sent Declaration, between the Sovereigns who are parties to it, cannot be
considered as completely fulfilled, until the period when complete success
shall have crowned their united efforts.
In communicating this Declaration to the knowledge of Europe, and of
all civilized countries, the said Plenipotentiaries hope to prevail on every
other Government, and particularly on those, which, in abolishing the
Slave Trade, have already manifested the same sentiments, to give them
their support in a cause, the final triumph of which will be one of the no-
blest monuments of the age which embraced it, and which shall have
brought it to a glorious termination.
Vienna, the 8th of February 1815.
(Signed) CASTLEREAGH. N ESSELR ope. PALMELLA. HuM BoldT.
STEwART. Lieut. Gen. C. Low EN HIELM. SALDANHA. M. ETTERN ch.
W ELLINGTON. GoMEz LABRADoR. LoBo. TALLEY RAND.
No. 26. General Treaty. Signed in Congress at Pienna, 9 June, 1815*.
ExtRAct. (Translation as laid before Parliament.)
XCVI. The general principles adopted by the Congress at Vienna, for
the navigation of rivers, shall be applicable to that of the Po.
Commissioners shall be named by the states bordering on rivers, within
three months at latest after the termination of the Congress to regulate all
that concerns the execution of the present article.
CVIII. The Powers whose states are separated, or crossed by the same
navigable river, engage to regulate, by common consent, all that regards
its navigation. For this purpose they will name Commissioners, who shall
assemble, at latest within, six months after the termination of the Congress,
and who shall adopt, as the basis of their proceedings, the principles estab-
lished by the following Articles:
CIX. The navigation of the rivers, along their course, referred to in the
preceding article, from the point where each of them becomes navigable, to
its mouth, shall be entirely free, and shall not, in respect to commerce, be
prohibited to any one; it being understood that the regulations established
with regard to the police of this navigation shall be respected; as they will
be framed alike for all, and as favourable as possible to the commerce of all
ymat 10n S
* Since acceded to by all the other Powers of Europe,
:
182 NAVIGATION OF RIVERS. [Vienna, June 9, 1815.
CX. The system that shall be established, both for the collection of the
duties and for the maintenance of the police, shall be, as nearly as possible,
the same along the whole course of the river; and shall also extend, unless
particular circumstances prevent it, to those of its branches and junctions,
which, in their navigable course, separate or traverse different states.
CXI. The duties on navigation shall be regulated in an uniform and
settled manner, and with as little reference as possible to the different
quality of the merchandize, in order that a minute examination of the cargo
may be rendered unnecessary, except with a view to prevent fraud and
evasion. The amount of the duties, which shall in no case exceed those
now paid, shall be deterinined by local circumstances, which scarcely allow
of a general rule in this respect. The tariff shall, however, be prepared in
such a manner as to encourage comunerce by facilitating navigation: for
which purpose the duties established upon the Rhine, and now in force on
that river, may serve as an approximating rule fºr its construction.
The tariff once settled, no increase shall take place therein, except by
the common consent of the states bordering on the rivers; nor shall the
navigation be burthened with any other duties than those fixed in the regula-
tion.
CXII. The offices for the collection of duties, the number of which shall
be reduced as much as possible, shall be determined upon in the above
regulation, and no change shall afterwards be made, but by common con-
sent, unless any of the States bordering on the Rivers should wish to
diminish the number of those which exclusively belong to the same.
CXIII. Each State bordering on the Rivers is to be at the expense of
keeping in good repair the towing paths which pass through its territory,
and of maintaining the necessary works through the same extent in the
channels of the river, in order that no obstacle may be experienced to the
navigation.
The intended regulation shall determine the manner in which the
States bordering on the Rivers are to participate in these latter works,
where the opposite banks belong to different governments.
CXIV. There shall no where be established store-house, port or forced
harbour duties. Those already existing shall be preserved for such time
only as the States bordering on Rivers (without regard to the local interest
of the place or the country where they are established) shall find them neces-
sary or useful to navigation and commerce in general.
CXV. The custom-houses belonging to the States bordering on Rivers
shall not interfere in the duties of navigation. Regulations shall be estab-
lished to prevent officers of the customs, in the exercise of their functions,
throwing obstacles in the way of the navigation; but care shall be taken, by
means of a strict police on the bank, to preclude every attempt of the inhabi-
tants to smuggle goods, through the medium of boatmen.
Wienna, June 9, 1815.j NAVIGATION OF RIVERS. 183
CXVI. Every thing expressed in the preceding Articles shall be settled
by a general arrangement, in which there shall also be comprized whatever
may need an ulterior determination.
The arrangement once settled” shall not be changed, but by and with
the consent of all the States bordering on Rivers, and they shall take care
to provide for its execution with due regard to circumstances and locality.
CXVII. The particular regulations relative to the navigation of the
Rhine, the Neckar, the Maine, the Moselle, the Meuse, and the Scheldt,
such as they are annexed to the present Act, shall have the same force and
validity as if they were textually inserted herein.
CXVIII. These Treaties, Conventions, Declarations, Rugulations, and
other particular Acts which are annexed to the present Act, viz.
15. The Declaration of the Powers on the Abolition of the Slave
Trade, of the 8th of February, 1815;
16. The Regulations respecting the navigation of Rivers; shall be
considered as integral parts of the arrangements of the Congress, and shall
have, throughout, the same force and validity as if they were inserted,
word for word, in the General Treaty.
Done at Vienna, the 9th of June, in the year of our Lord 1815.
(The Signatures follow in the alphabetical order of the Courts.)
JAustria, L. s.] The Prince de METTERNich.
L. s.] The Baron de WEssex BERG.
France, L. s.] The Prince de TALLEYRAND.
L. s.) The Duke de D’ALBERG.
L. s. The Count ALExis de NoAILLEs.
Great Britain, i L. S.T. CLAN CARTY.
L : CA thic ART.
L s.j STEwART. L. G.
Portugal, L. s." The Comté de PALMELLA.
[L. : ANToNio de SALDANAH da GAMA.
L. S D. JoAquim da SILVEIRA.
Prussia, L. s." The Prince de HARDENBERG.
L. s.l. The Baron de HUMBoldT.
Russia, L. s.l. The Prince de RAsou Moffsky.
L. s ] The Count de STAcKELBERG.
[L. s. The Count de NEsseldore.
Spain,
Sweden, [1... s.] The Count CHARLEs-AxEL de Lowen HIELM
No. 27. Treaty between Great Britain and Austria, (and Russia and
Prussia) signed at Paris, 5th November, 1815.f
In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia,
His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, and His Majesty the King of
Prussia, animated by the desire of prosecuting the negotiations adjourned
at the Congress of Vienna, in order to fix the destiny of the seven Ionian
* This arrangement has since been settled aecording to the above regulations.
tSince acceded to by all the other Powers of Europe.
º
184 IONIAN ISLANDS. [Paris, Wov. 5, 1815
Islands. and to insure the independence, liberty, and haºpiness of the
inhabitants of those Islands, by placing them and their constitution under
the immediate protection of one of the great Powers of Europe, have agreed
to settle definitivel», by a special Act, whatever elates to this object, which,
grounded upon the rights resulting from the Treaty of Paris of the 30th
Mav. 1814. and likewise upon the British declarations at the period when
the British arms liberated Cerigo, Zante, Cephalonia. Santa Maura, Ithaca,
and Paxo, shall be considered as forming part of the General Treaty con-
cluded at Vienna on the 9th June. of the present year 1815, on the termina-
tion of the Congress; and in order to settle and sign the said Act, the High
Contracting Powers have nominated Plenipotentiaries: that is to say.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, the Right Honourable Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh. K.
G. &c. &c. &c and the Most Illustrious and Most Noble Lord, Arthur,
Duke. Marquess, and Earl of Wellington. Marquess of Douro Viscount
Wellington, of Talavera and of Wellington, and Baron Douro, of Wellesley,
K. G. &c. &c. &c.
And His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohe-
mia, the Sieur Clement Wenceslas Lothaire, Prince of Metternich-Winne-
bourg-Ochsenhausen, &c. &c. &c. and the Sieur John Philip Baron Wessen-
berg, &c. &c. &c. who, after having exchanged their full powers, found to
be in good and due form, have agreed upon the following Articles:
I. The Islands of Corfu, Cephalonia, Zante, Santa Maura, Ithaca. Cerigo,
and Paxo, with their dependencies, such as they are described in the Treaty
between His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias and the Ottoman Porte,
of the 21st of March, 1800,” shall form a single, free, and independent
State, under the denomination of the United States of the Ionian Islands.
II. This State shall be placed under the immediate and exclusive protec-
tion of His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and
Ireland. his heirs and successors. The other Contracting Powers do conse-
quently renounce every right or particular pretension which they might have
formed in respect to them, and formally guarantee all the dispositions of the
present Treaty.
III. The United States of the Ionian Islands shall, with the approbation
of the Protecting Powers, regulate their internal organization; and, in order
to give to all the parts of this organization the necessary consistency and
action, His Britannic Majesty will employ a particular solicitude with re-
gard to the legislation and the general administration of those States. His
Majesty will, therefore, appoint a Lord High Commissioner to reside there,
invested with all the necessary power and authorities for this purpose.
* “The Islands of Corfu, Zante, Cephalonia, Santa Maura, Ithaca, Paxo, Cerigo, and all
the large and small islands, inhabited and uninhabited, which are situated opposit to the coasts
of the Morea and Albania, which were detached from Venice, and have recently been con-
quered.”—(Art, 2.)
Paris Wov. 5, 1815.] IONIAN ISLANDs. 185
IV. In order to carry into execution, without delay, the stipulations
mentioned in the articles preceding, and to ground the political re organiza-
tion of the United Ionian States upon that organization which is actually in
force, the Lord High Commissioner of the Protecting Power shall regulate
the forms of convocation of a Legislative Assembly. of which he shall direct
the proceedings, in order to draw up a new Constitutional Charter for the
States, which His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Bri-
tain and Ireland shall be requested to ratify.
Until such Constitutional Charter shall have been so drawn up, and
duly ratified, the existing Constitutions shall remain in force in the different
islands, and no alteration shall be made in them, except by His Britannic
Majesty in Council.
V. In order to ensure, without restriction, to the inhabitants of the United
States of the Ionian Islands, the advantages resulting from the high protec-
tion under which these States are placed, as well as for the exercise of the
rights, inherent in the said protection. His Britannic Majesty shall have the
right to occupy the fortresses and places of those States, and to maintain
garrisons in the same. The military force of the said United States shall
also be under the orders of the Commander-in-Chief of the troops of His
Britannic Majesty. -
VI. His Britannic Majesty consents, that a particular Convention with
the Government of the said United States shall regulate. according to the
revenues of those States, every thing which may relate to the maintenance
of the fortresses already existing, as well as to the subsistence and payment
of the British garrisons, and to the number of men of which they shall be
eomposed in time of peace.
The same Convention shall likewise fix the relations which are to exist
between the said armed force and the Ionian Government.
VII. The trading flag of the United States of the Ionian Islands shall be
acknowledged by all the Contracting Parties as the flag of a free and inde-
pendent State. It shall carry with the colours, and above the armorial
bearings thereon displayed before the year 1807, such other as His Bri-
tannic Majesty may think proper to grant, as a mark of the protection under
which the said United Ionian States are placed; and for the more effectual
furtherance of this protection, all the ports and harbours of the said States
are hereby declared to be, with respect to honorary and military rights,
within British jurisdiction. The commerce between the United Ionian
States and the dominions of His Imperial and Royal Apostolic Majesty shall
enjoy the same advantages and facilities as that of Great Britain with the
said United States. None but commercial agents, or consuls, charged solely
with the carrying on commercial relations, and subject to the regulations to
which commercial agents or consuls are subject in other independent States,
shall be accredited to the United States of the Ionian Islands. *
* See extract from the Constitutional Chart which follows this Treaty.
24
186 IONIAN ISLANDS—Constitutional Chart. [May 2, 1817.
VIII. All the Powers which signed the Treaty of Paris of the 30th of
May, 1814, and the Act of the Congress of Vienna of the 9th of June. 1815;
and also His Majesty the King of the Two Sicilies, and the Ottoman Porte,
shall be invited to accede to the present Convention.
XI. The present Act shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be
exchanged in two months, or sooner, if possible.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed it, and
have affixed thereunto the seals of their Arms.
Done at Paris, the 5th day of November, in the year of our Lord one
thousand eight hundred and fifteen.
Signed [L. s.] CAstle R.E.A.G.H.
[L. s. J W ELLING to N.
L º M ETTER N1ch.
E. s.] W Essen BERG.
No. 28. Documents refering to the Seventh Article of the preceding Treaty.
Constitutional Chart of the United States of the Ionian Islands, as agreed on and passed unant-
mously by the Legislative Assembly, on the 2d of JMay, 1817. ExtEACT. (T. an slation as
laid before Parliament.) Chapter VII. JMiscellaneous.
Section IV. Of Foreign Relations.
I. Whereas in the latter part of the seventh Article of the Treaty of Paris; it is agreed, “that
no person, from any Power whatsoever, shall be admitted within these States, possessing or
pretending to possess, any powers beyond those which are defined in the aforestid article;” it
is hereby declared, that any person who shall assume to himself any authority as an agent for
a foreign Power, except as therein directed, shall be amenable to be tried before the Supreme
Council of Justice, and be liable, if found guilty, to punishment, as in cases of high treason
against the State.
II. No native, or subject of the United States of the Ionian Islands shall be held competent
to act as Consul or Vice-Consul for any foreign Power within the same.
III. The British Consuls, in all ports whatsoever, shall be considered to be the Consuls and
Vice-Consuls of the United States of the Ionian Islands, and the subjects of the same shall be
entitled to their fullest protection.
IV. All applications necessary to be made by these States to any foreign Power, shall be
transmitted by the Senate to His Excellency the Lord High Commissioner of the Protecting
Sove eign, who shall forward the same to the ambassador or minister of the Protecting Sover-
eign, resident at the Court of the said foreign Power, for the purpose of submitting them in due
form to the said Power.
V. The approval of the appointments of all foreign agents, or Consuls, in the United States
of the Ionian Islands, shall be by the Senate, through the medium of His Highness the Presi-
dent thereof, with the concurrence of His Excellency the Lord High Commissioner of the
Protecting Sovereign.
VI. With a view to ensure the most perfect protection to the commerce of these islands,
every vessel, navigating under the Ionian flag, shall be bound, before leaving the port of the
Ionian States to which she belongs, to provide herself with a pass signed by His Excellency the
Lord High Commissioner of the Protecting Sovereign, and no vessel sailing without such pass,
shall be considered as navigating according to law. But it is reserved to His Majesty, the
Protecting Sovereign, to decide how far it may be necessary, that, independent of such pass,
they should further be bound to supply themselves with Mediterranean passes.
SEction V. Of the Sanita.
I. Whereas the protecting and protected State have an equal right and interest in the great
object of the preservation of the public health; it is hereby declared, the controul of the Sanita
j/erona, Nov. 28, 1822.] SLAVE TRADE—Resolutions. 187
throughout the United States of the Ionian Islands, shall be vested in the hands of His Excel-
lency the Lord High Commissioner of the Protecting Sovereign, who shall regulate, according
to the rules of Sanita, the relative quarantines to be performed in all instances, giving due notice
of the same; shall fix the number of officers to be employed, and name, in each island, the
heads of the office of Sanita, being either British or Ionian subjects; but all other appointments
made upon this head shall be subject to the approbation of the Senate, and, as far as relates to
numbers and amount of salary, to the consideration of the Legislative Assembly, as herein
before stated in regard to the civil list.
II: The post-office in each island shall, hereafter, be considered as an integral part of the
Sanita.
Section VI. Of the JVational Colours and JArmorial Bearings.
I. The National Commercial Flag of the United States of the Ionian Islands, as directed by
the seventh Article of the Treaty of Paris, shall be the original flag of these States, with the
addition of the British Union, to be placed in the upper corner, next to the flag-staff.
II. On usual days, the British colours shall be hoisted on all the forts within the United
States of the Ionian Islands; but a standard shall be made, to be hoisled on days of public
rejoicing and festivity, according to the model of the armorial bearings of the said States
III. I'he arms, or armorial bearings of the United States of the Ionian Islands shall hereafter
consist of the British arms in the centre, surrounded by the arms of each of the islands compo-
sing the said States.
IV. The armorial bearings of each of the Islands shall consist of the individual arms of the
island, and such emblem, denoting the Sovereign Protection, as may be deemed advisable.
Sectio N VII General Clauses.
III. In the instance of all maritime transactions, and the collection of the customs, it shall be
competent for the proper authorities to employ either British or lonian subjects.
V. A specific law shall settle the terms, time and mode for the naturalization of foreign
subjects in these States; but the subjects of the protecting Power shall, in all instances, be
entitled to naturalization in half the time that is required for those of any foreign Power;
and a subject of the protecting Power, or of any othel Power, may be at once naturalized by a
bill to that effect, without reference to any fixed time of residence in these States, which shall be
laid down in the law itself.
No. 29 Resolutions respecting the dbolition of the Slave Trade, adopted
in the Conference of the 28th November, 1822. TRANSLATIon.
The Plenipotentiaries of Austria, of France, of Great Britain, of Prussia,
and of Russia, assembled in Congress at Verona ; considering—that their
August Sovereigns have taken part in the Declaration of the 8th of Febru-
ary, 1815*, by which the Powers assembled at the Congress of Vienna, have
proclaimed in the face of Europe, their invariable resolution to put a stop to
the Commerce known by the name of the African Slave Trade:
Considering, moreover, that, notwithstanding this declaration, and in
spite of the legislative measures which have in consequences been adopted
in various countries, and of the several Treaties concluded since that period
between the Maritime Powers, this Commerce, solemnly proscribed, has con-
tinued to this very day, that it has gained in activity what it may have lost
in extent; that it has even taken a still more odious character, and more
dreadful from the nature of the means to which those who carry it on are
compelled to have recourse: -
That the causes of so revolting an abuse are chiefly to be found in the
fraudulent practices, by means of which, the persons engaged in these nefa-
*See page 180.
188 G. BRITAIN AND PORTUGAL. [Lisbon, May 16, 1703.
rious speculations. elude the laws of their country and the vigilance, of the
cruizers stationed to put a stop to their iniquities, and veil those criminal
operations, of which thousands of human beings annually become their in-
nocent Vict) in S :
That the Powers of Europe are called upon, by their previous engagements,
as well as by a sacred duty, to seek the most effectual means, of preventing
a traffic.., which the laws of almost every civilized country have already
declared to be culpable and illegal, and of punishing with severity those
who persist in carrying it on, in manifest violation of those laws;
Acknowledge the necessity of devoting their most serious attention to
an object of such importance to the honor and welfare of humanity; and in
consequence declare, in the name of their August Sovereigns :-
That they continue firm in the principles and sentinents manifested by
those Sovereigns in the Declaration of the 8th of February, 1815;—that they
have never ceased, and never wili cease, to consider the Slave Trade as—
“a scou ge which has too long desolated Africa, degraded Europe, and af.
flicted humanity ;” and that they are ready to concur in every thing that
may secure and accelerate the complete and final Abolition of that traffick.
That in older to give effect to this renewed Declaration, their respective
Cabi, ets will eagerly enter into the examination of any measure, compati-
ble with their rights and the interests of their subjects. to produce a result
that may prove to the World the sincerity of their wishes, and of their ef-
forts in favor of a cause worthy of their common solicitude.
Verona, 28th November, 1822.
M ETTERN1c H. CHATEAUBRIAND. FERR on Ay E.
LEBZELTERN. CA R A MAN.
LIEVEN. TATIsch EFF.
HATzFELDT.
WELLINGTon. N Ess ELRod E.
No. 30. Treaty between Great Britain and Portugal (and the States
General) Signed at Lisbon, 16th May, i703. *
ExTRAct. (Translation from the Latin.
I. All former Treaties between the abovesaid Powers are hereby appro-
ved, confirmed, and ratified, and are ordered to be exactly and faithfully
observed, except in so far as by the present Treaty is otherwise provided
and established ; so that there shall be between the said Kingdoms and
States, their people and subjects, a sincere friendship and perfect amity:
they shall all of them mutually assist one another; and each of the said
Powers shall promote the interest and advantage of the rest, as if it were
his own.
XV. The personal privileges and freedom of trade which the subjects of
Great Britain and the States of the United Provinces, at present enjoy in
Portugal, the Portugueze shall, in their turn, enjoy in the Dominions of
Great Britain and th: States of the United Provinces,
* Renewed by Article XXVI. of the Treaty of 1816.
Zisbon, Dec. 27, 1703.] G. BRITAIN AND PORTUGAL. | S9
XViſi. Piratical ships, of whatever nation, shall not only not be permitted
or received into the ports which their Portugueze and Britannie Majesties,
and the States General of the United Provinces, possess in the East Indies,
but shall be deemed the common enemies of the Portugueze, the English,
and the Dutch.
XaX. in time of Peace, there shall be admitted into the greater ports of
the Kingdom of Portugal, six ships of war of each of the nations of Great
Britatu aud the United Provinces, besides other six ships, which were per-
mitted by virtue of former Treaties; so that in the whole twelve ships may
be admitted, and all in the same manner as the former six were permitted.
And into the lesser ports there shall be admitted such a number of ships as
they can conveniently receive.
Lisbon, May 16, 1703.
Signed PAUL METHUEN, [L. s.]
SchoNEMBERG, L. s ]
No. 31. Treaty between Great Bruuin and Portugal. Signed at Lisbon,
27th ſ/ecember, 1703.”
(Translation from the Latin.)
Whereas the league and strict friendship which is between the Most
Serene and Most Potent Princess Anne, Queen of Great Britain, and Most
Potent Peter, King of Portugal, requires that the Commerce of both the
British and the Pol tugal nations should be promoted as much as possible;
and Her Sacred Royal Majesty of Great Britain hata signified to His Sacred
Royal Majesty of Portugal, by the Most Excellent John Methuen, E-q.
Meuber of the English Parliament, and Ambassador Extraordinary in
Por ugal, that it would be very acceptable to Her, if the woollen cloths,
and the rest of the woollen manufactures of Britain, might be admitted into
Portugal, the prohibition of them being taken off; that this matter may be
treated and transacted, they have given their full powers and commands;
that is to say, Her Sacred Majesty of Great Britain, to the above said Most
Excellent John Methuen, and His Sacred Majesty of Portugal, to the Most
Excellent Don Emanuel Telles Sivius, Marquis of Alegrete, Conde de
Villa Majore, in the Society of the Knights of Christ, Commendador of St.
John d’Alegrete, and of de Soure, and also in the College of
Commendador of St. John d'Moura, and of St Mary de Albuveira,
one of the three Directors of the Treasury, and of the first Gentlemen of the
Bed chamber, and Councillor of State to His Sacred Royal Portugueze
Majesty; who, by virtue of the full Powers to them respectively granted,
having maturely and diligently considered the matter, have agreed upon the
following Articles:
I. His Sacred Royal Majesty of Portugal promises, both in His own
name and that of His successors, to admit, for ever hereafter into Portugal,
3}}ºved by Article XXVI, of the Treaty of 1810; also the several Treaties of 1642, 1654,
190 G. BRITAIN AND PRUSSIA. [London, Jp. 2, 1824,
the woollen cloths, and the rest of the woollen manufactures of the Britons,
as was accustomed till they were prohibited by the laws: nevertheless, upon
this condition:
II. That is to say, that Her Sacred Royal Majesty of Great Britain
shall, in Her own name and that of Her successors, be obliged for ever
hereafter to admit the wines of the growth of Portugal into Britain; so that
at no time, whether there shall be peace or war between the Kingdoms of
Britain and France any thing more shall be demanded for these wines, by
the name of custom or duty; or by whatsoever other title, directly or in-
directly, whether they shall be imported into Great Britain in pipes or hogs-
heads, or other casks, than what shall be demanded from the like quality
or measure of French wine, deducting or abating a third part of the custom
or duty: but if at any time this deduction or abatement of customs, which
is to be made as aforesaid, shall in any manner be attempted and prejudiced,
it shall be just and lawful for His Sacred Royal Majesty of Portugal again
to prohibit the woollen cloths, and the rest of the British woollen manu-
factures.
III. The most excellent Lords the Plenipotentiaries promise, and take
upon themselves, that their above-named mastels shall ratify this Treaty,
and that within the space of two months the ratifications shall be exchanged.
For the faith and testimony of all which things, I, the Plenipotentiary
of Her Sacred Royal Majesty of Great Britain, have confirmed this Treaty,
by the subscription of my hand, and by the seal of my coat of arms. And
the most excellent Lord the Plenipotentiary of His Sacred Royal Majesty
of Portugal, for avoiding the controversy about precedence between the two
Crowns of Britain and Portugal, hath subscribed another instrument of the
same tenor, changing only what ought to be changed for that reason.
Given at Lisbon, the 27th of December, 1703.
Signed John METHUEN, [L. s.1 MARCHIs ALEGRETENSIs, [L. S.]
No. 32. Convention of Commerce between Great Britain and Prussia.
Signed at London. April 2, 1824
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, and His Majesty the King of Prussia, being equally desirous of
extending and increasing the commercial intercourse between their respec-
tive States, and of affording every facility and encouragement to their sub-
jects engaged in such intercourse; and being of opinion that nothing will
more contribute to the attainment of their mutual wishes in this respect,
than a reciprocal abrogation of all discriminating and countervailing duties,
which are now demanded and levied upon the ships or productions of either
nation in the ports of the other, have appointed their Plenipotentiaries to
conclude a Convention for that purpose, that is to say:-
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, the Right Honourable George Canning, a Member of His said
London, Ap. 2, 1824.] G. BRITAIN AND PRUSSIA. 191
Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council, a Member of Parliament, and
His Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs;–and the
Right Honourable William Huskisson, a Member of His said Majesty's
Most Honourable Privy Council, a Member of Parliament, President of the
the Committee of Privy Council for Affairs of Trade and Foreign Planta-
tions, and Treasurer of His said Majesty’s Navy:
And His Majesty the King of Prussia, the Baron de Werther, His said
Majesty’s Chamberlain, and His Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Pleni-
potentiary at the Court of His Britannic Majesty:-who, after having com-
municated to each other their respective full powers found to be in due and
proper form, have agreed upon and concluded the following Articles:
ART. I. From and after the 1st day of May next, Prussian vessels
entering or departing from the ports of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, and British vessels entering or departing from the
ports of His Prussian Majesty’s dominions, shall not be subject to any
other or higher duties or charges whatever, than are or shall be levied on
national vessels entering or departing from such ports respectively.
II. All articles of the growth, produce, or manufacture of any of the
dominions of either of the High Contracting Parties, which are or shall be:
permitted to be imported into, or exported from the ports of the United
Kingdom and of Prussia respectively, in vessels of the one country, shall
in like manner be permitted to be imported into and exported from those:
ports in vessels of the other.
III. All articles not of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the
dominions of His Britannic Majesty, which can legally be imported from 1
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, into the ports of Prussia,
in British ships, shall be subject only to the same duties as are payable uport
the like articles, if imported in Prussian ships: and the same reciprocity'
shall be observed in the ports of the United Kingdom, in respect to all
articles not the growth, produce, or manufacture of the dominions of His
Prussian Majesty, which can legally be imported into the ports of the
United Kingdom in Prussian ships.
IV. All goods, wares, and merchandize which can legally be imported
into the ports of either country, shall be admitted at the same rate of duty,
whether imported in vessels of the other country, or in national vessels ;
and all goods, wares, or merchandize which can be legally exported from
the ports of either country, shall be entitled to the same bounties, draw -
backs, and allowances, whether exported in vessels of the other country, or
in national vessels.
V. No priority or preference shall be given, directly or indirectly, by
the Government of either country, or by any company, corporation, or
agent, acting on its behalf, or under its authority, in the purchase of any
article the growth, produce, or manufacture of either country imported into
192 G. BRITAIN AND SPAIN. [London, July 14, 1786.
the other, on account of, or in reference to the character of the vessel in
which such article was imported; it being the true intent and meaning of
the High Contracting Parties, that no distinction or difference whatever
shall be made in this respect.
VI. The present Convention shall be in force for the term of 10 years
from the date hereof: and further, until the end of 12 months after either
of the High Contracting Parties shall have given notice to the other of its
intention to terminate the same; each of the High Contracting Parties
reserving to itself the right of giving such notice to the other at the end of
the said term of 10 years; and it is hereby agreed between them, that at the
expiration of 12 months after such notice shall have been received by either
party from the other, this Convention, and all the provisions thereof, shall
altogether cease and determine.
VII. The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged at London, within one month from the date hereof, or sooner
if possible.
In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the
same, and have affixed there to the seals of their arms.
Done at London, the 2d day of April, in the year of our Lord, 1824.
[L s.l. GEORGE CANNING. [L. S. J W ERTHER.
[L. s.] W. Huskisson.
**
No. 33. Convention between Greaf Britain and Spain. Signed at London,
the 14th of July. 1786.
(Translation as laid before Parliament.)
The Kings of England and of Spain, animated with the same desire of
sonsolidating, by every means in their power, the friendship so happily
subsisting between Them and Their Kiºgdoms, and wishing, with one ac-
cord, to prevent even the shadow of misunderstanding which might be oc-
casioned by doubts, misconceptions, or other causes of dispute between
the subjects on the frontiers of the two Monarchies, especially in distant
countries, as are those in America, have thought proper to settle, with all
possible good faith, by a new Convention, the points which might one day
or other be productive of such inconveniencies, as the experience of former
times has very often shewn: To this end, the King of Great Britain has
named the most Noble and most FXcellent Lord, Francis Baron Osborne,
of Kiveton, Marquis of Carmarthen, His Britannic Majesty’s Privy Coun-
cillor, and Principal Secretary of State for the Department of Foreign Af-
fairs, &c. &c. &c and the Catholic King has likewise authorized Don Ber-
nardo del Campo. Knight of the Noble Order of Charles the Third, Secre-
tary of the same Order, Secretary of the Supreme Council of State, and
This Minister Plenipotentiary to the King of Great Britain: who having
communicated to each other their respective full Powers, prepared in due
form, have agreed upon the following Articles:
rondon, July 14, 1786.] G. BRITAIN AND SPAIN. 193
1. His Britannic Majesty’s subjects, and the other colonists who have
hitherto enjoyed the protection of England, shall evacuate the country of
the Mosquitos, as well as the continent in general, and the Islands adja-
cent, without exception, situated beyond the line hereinafter described, as
what ought to be the frontier of the extent of territory granted by His Cath-
olic Majesty to the English, for the uses specified in the 3d Article of the
present Convention, and in addition to the country already granted to
them in virtue of the stipulations agreed upon by the Commissaries of the
two Crowns, in 1783.
II. The Catholic King, to prove, on His side, to the King of Great Bri-
tain the sincerity of His sentiments of friendship towards His said Majesty
and the British nation, will grant to the English more extensive Himits than
those specified in the last Treaty of Peace: and the said limits of the lands
added by the present Convention shall for the future be understood in
the manner following:
The English line, beginning from the sea, shall take the centre of the
river Sibun or Jabon, and continue up to the source of the said river, from
thence it shall cross in a straight line the intermediate land, till it inter-
sects the river Wallis; and by the centre of the same river, the said line
shall descend to the point where it will meet the line, already settled and
marked out by the Commissaries of the two Crowns in i783: which limits,
following the continuation of the said line, shall be observed as formerly
stipulated by the Definitive Treaty.
III. Although no other advantages have hitherto been in question, ex-
eept that of cutting wood for dying, yet His Catholic Majesty, as a greater
proof of His disposition to oblige the King of Great Britain, will grant to
the English the liberty of cutting all other wood, without even excepting
mahogany, as well as gathering all the fruits, or produce of the earth, pure-
ly natural and uncultivated, which may besides being carried away in their
natural state, become an object of utility or of commerce, whether for food
or for manufactures; but it is expressly agreed, that this stipulation is never
to be used as a pretext for establishing in that country any plantation of su-
gar, coffee, cocoa, or other like articles; or any fabric or manufacture by
means of mills or other machines whatsoever, (this restriction however
does not regard the use of saw mills, for cutting or otherwise preparing the
wood) since all the lands in question being indisputably acknowledged to
belong of right to the Crown of Spain, no settlements of that kind, or the
population which would follow, could be allowed.
The English shall be permitted to transport and convey all such wood,
and other produce of the place, in its natural and uncultivated state, down
the rivers to the sea, but without ever going beyond the limits which are
prescribed to them by the stipulations above granted, and without thereby
taking an opportunity of ascending the said rivers, beyond their bounds,
into the countries belonging to Spain,
25
194 G. BRITAIN AND SPAIN. | London,
IV. The English shall be permitted to occupy the small Island, known
by the names of Casina, St. George’s Key, or Cayo Casina, in considera-
tion of the circumstance of that part of the coast opposite to the said Island
being looked upon as subject to dangerous disorders; but this permission is
only to be made use of for purposes of real utility: and as great abuses, no
less contrary to the intentions of the British Government, than to the essen-
tial interests of Spain, might arise from this permission, it is here stipulated,
as an indispensable condition. that no fortification, or work of defence what-
ever, shall at any time be erected there, nor any body of troops posted,
nor any piece of artillery kept there; and in order to verify with good faith
the accomplishment of this condition sine quá non (which might be infring-
ed by individuals, without the knowledge of the British Government) a
Spanish officer or Commissary, accompanied by an English Commissary or
officer, duly authorized, shall be admitted, twice a year, to examine into
the real situation of things.
V. The English nation shall enjoy the liberty of refitting their merchant
ships in the southern triangle included between the point of Cayo Casina,
and the cluster of small islands which are situated opposite that part of the
coast occupied by the cutters, at the distance of eight I 'agues from the river
Wallis, seven from Cayo Casina, and three from the river Sibun, a place
which has always been found well adapted to that purpose. For which
end, the edifices and storehouses, absolutely necessary for that service,
shall be allowed to be built; but in this concession is also included the ex-
press condition of not erecting fortifications there at any time, or station-
ing troops, or constructing any military works; and in like manner it shall
not be permitted to station any ships of war there, or to construct an arse-
nal or other building, the object of which might be the formation of a naval
establishment.
VI. It is also stipulated, that the English may freely and peaceably
catch fish on the coast of the country assigned to them by the last Treaty
of Peace, as also of that which is added to them by the present Convention:
but without going beyond their boundaries, and confining themselves with-
in the distance specified in the preceding Article.
VII. All the restrictions specified in the last Treaty of 1783, for the
entire preservation of the right of the Spanish Sovereignty over the coun-
try, in which is granted to the English only the privilege of making use of
the wood of the different kinds, the fruits and other produce, in their na-
tural state, are here confirmed; and the same restrictions shall also be ob-
served with respect to the new grant. In consequence, the inhabitants of
those countries shall employ themselves simply in the cutting and trans-
porting of the said wood, and in the gathering and transporting of the
fruits, without meditating any more extensive settlements, or the formation
of any system of government, either military or civil, further than such re-
July 14, 1786.j G. BRITAIN AND SPAIN. 195
gulations as Their Britannic and Catholic Majesties may hereafter judge
proper to establish, for maintaining peace and good order amongst Their re-
spective subjects.
VIII. As it is generally allowed that the woods and forests are pre-
served, and even multiply, by regular and methodical cuttings, the English
shall observe this inaxim, as far as possible; but if, not withstanding all their
precautions, it should happen in course of time that they were in want of
dying-wood, or mahogany, with which the Spanish Possessions might be
provided, the Spanish Government shall make no difficulty to furnish a
supply to the English, at a fair and reasonable price.
IX. Every possible precaution shall be observed to prevent smuggling;
and the English shall take care to conform to the regulations which the
Spanish Government shall think proper to establish aunongst their own sub-
jects, in all communications which they may have with the latter; on condi-
tion nevertheless that the English shall be left in the peaceable enjoyment
of the several advantages inserted in their favor in the last Treaty stipulated
by the present Convention.
X. The Spanish Governors shall be ordered to give to the said English,
dispersed, all possible facilities for their removal to the settlements agreed
upon by the present Convention, according to the stipulations of the 6th
Article of the Definitive Treaty of 1783, with respect to the country allot-
ted for their use by the said Article.
XI. Their Britannic and Catholic Majesties, in order to remove every
kind of doubt with regard to the true construction of the present Convention,
think it necessary to declare that the conditions of the said Convention ought
to be observed according to their sincere intention to ensure and improve
the harmony and good understanding, which so happily subsist at present
between Their said Majesties.
In this view, His Britannic Majesty engages to give the most positive
orders for the evacuation of the countries above-mentioned, by all His sub-
jects of whatever denomination; but if, contrary to such declaration, there
should still remain any persons so daring as to presume, by retiring into
the interior country, to endeavor to obstruct the entire evacuation already
agreed upon, His Britannic Majesty, so far from affording them the least
succour, or even protection, will disavow them in the most solemn manner,
as He will equally do those who may hereafter attempt to settle upon the
territory belonging to the Spanish Dominion.
XII. The evacuation agreed upon shall be completely effected within the
space of six months, after the exchange of the ratifications of this Conven-
tion, or sooner if it can be done.
XIII. It is agreed that the new grants described in the preceding Arti-
cles, in favor of the English nation, are to take place as soon as the afore-
said evacuation shall be entirely accomplished,
i06 G. BRITAIN AND SPAIN. [Aug. 28, 1814.
XIV. His Catholic Majesty, prompted solely by motives of humanity,
promises to the King of England, that he will not exercise any act of severity
against the Mo-quitos, inhabiting in part the countries which are to be
evacuated, by virtue of the present Convention, on account of the connec-
tions which may have subsisted between the said Indians and the English;
and liis Britannic Majesty, on His part will strictly prohibit all His sub-
jects from furnishing arms, or warlike stores, to the Indians in general,
situated upon the frontiers of the Spanish possessions.
XV. The two Courts shall mutually transmit to each other duplicates of the
orders which they are to dispatch to their respective governors and com-
manders in America, for the accomplishment of the present Convention;
and a frigate, or proper ship of war, shall be appointed, on each side, to
observe in conjunction that all things are performed in the best order possible,
and with that cordiality and good faith of which the two Sovereigns have
been pleased to set the example.
XVI. The present Convention shall be ratified by Their Britannic and
Catholic Majesties, and the ratifications exchanged within the space of six
weeks or sooner if it can be done.
In witness whereof, we, the undersigned Ministers Plenipotentiary of
Their Britannic and Catholic Majesties, in virtue of our respective full
Powers, have signed the present Convention, and have affixed thereto the
seals of our arms.
i)one at London, this 14th day of July, 1786.
Signed CARMARTHEN, LL. S. LE CHEv. DEL CAMPO, [L. S.]
ADDIT10NAL Antticles. Signed at JMudrid, Jugust 28, 1814.
I. It is agreed that, peuding the negociation of a new Treaty of Commerce, Great Britain
shall be admitted to trade with Spain upon the same conditions as those which existed previously
to the year 1796. All the Treaties of Commerce which at that period subsisted between the
two nations, being hereby ratified and confirmed.
li. His Catholic Majesty, concurring in the fullest manner, in the sentiments of His Britannic
Majesty with respect to the injustice and inhumanity of the traffie in slaves, will take into con-
sideration, with the deliberation which the state of His possessions in America demands, the
means of acting in conformity with those sentiments. His Catholic Majesty promises, moreover,
to prohibit His subjects from engaging in the slave trade, for the purpose of supplying any
islands or possessions excepting those appertaining to Spain, and to prevent likewise, by effectual
measures and regulau \ns, the protection of the Spanish flag being given to foreigners who may
engage in this traffic, whether subjects of His Britannic Majesty or of any other State or Power.
111. His Britanilic Majesty being anxi us that the troubles and disturbances which unfortuz
mately prevail in the Dominions of His Catholic Majesty in America should entirely cease, and
the subjects of those provinces should return to their obedience to their lawful Sovereign,
engages to take the most effectual measures for preventing His subjects from furnishing arms,
ammunition, or any other warlike articles to the revolted in America.
The present Additional Articles shall form an integral part of the Treaty of Friendship and
Alliance signed on the 5th day of July, and shall have the same force and validity as if they
were inserted word for word, and shall be ratified within forty days, or sooner if possible.
Done at Madrid, this 28th day of August, 1814.
Signed H. WELLESLEY, [L. S.]
M. E.L Duque DE SAN CARLos, L.L. s."
Oct. 1, 1800.) SECRET TREATY OF ST. ILDEFONSO. I97
No. 34. Preliminary and Secret Treaty between the French Republic and his C. J.M. the King of
Spain, relating to the aggrandizement of H. ſt. H. the Infant Duke of Parma in Italy, and
to the recession of Louisiana.
His Catholick Majesty having always manifested the most anxious desire to procure for his
R. H. the Duke of Parma an aggrandizement, which might place him on a footing correspond-
ing with his dignity; and the French Republic having long since given to H. C. M. the King of
Spain to understand the desire which they felt to recover possession of the colony of Louisiana;
both governments having interchanged their views upon these two subjects of common interest,
and circumstances permitting them to enter into engagements in this particular, which as far as
it depends on thein, may assure reciprocal satisfaction, have authorized for this purpose, that is
to say: the French Republic, the citizen Alexander Berthier, general in chief; and his C. M.
don Mariano Luis de Urquijo, Chevalier of the Order of Charles III, and of St. John of Jerusa-
lem, Counsellor of State, his Envoy Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary near the Batavian Re-
public, and his provisional first Secretary of State; who, after having exchanged their powers,
have agreed, saving the ratification, upon the following articles:
AR r. 1. The French Republic engages to procure for II. R. H. the Infant Duke of Parma an
augmentation of territory which shall raise the population of his estates to one million of inhab-
itants with the title of King, and all the rights annexed to the royal dignity; and to this effect the
French Republic engages to obtain the consent of H. M. the Emperor and King, and of the
other states interested, so that H. R. H. the Infant Duke of Parma may without opposition en-
ter into possession of the said territories, at the time of the confirmation of peace between the
French Republic and his limperial Viajesty.
A tºt. II. The augmentation to be given to H. R. H the Duke of Parma may consist of Tus-
cany, in case the present negotiations of the French government with H. I. Majesty shall per-
mit then to dispose of that country, or of the three Roman ecclesiastical provinces, or any other
continental provinces of Italy, that may form a rounded estate.
A RT. III. H. C. M. promises and engages on his part to recede to the French Republic,
six months after the full and entire execution of the conditions and stipulations herein express-
ed, relative to H. R. H. the Duke of Parma, the colony or province of Louisiana, with the
same extent that it now has in the hands of Spain, and had while in the possession of France,
and such as it ought to be in conformity with the treaties subsequently concluded between Spain
and other states.
A Rt. IV. H. C. M. will give the necessary orders for the occupation of Louisiana by France,
the moment the estates designed for his aggrandizement shall be placed in the hands of H. R.
H. the Duke of Parma. The French may, according to its convenience, defer the taking pos-
session; and when this is to be done, the states directly or indirectly interested shall agree upon
the ulterior conditions which their common interests and that of their inhabitants may demand.
AirT. W. H. C. M. engages to deliver to the French Republic in the ports of Spain in Eu-
rope, one month after the execution of the stipulation with regard to the Duke of Parma, six
ships of war in good condition, of seventy-four guns, armed and equipped, and in a state to receive
the French crews and supplies.
ART. VI. The stipulations of the present treaty having no prejudicial object; but on the
contrary preserving untouched the rights of every one, it is not to be presumed, they can excite
the suspicions of any power. But if the contrary should happen, and the result of their execu-
tion should be that the two states are attacked or threatened, both powers engage to make a
common cause, as well to repel aggression, as also to take those conciliatory measures proper
to maintain peace with all their neighbors. i.e.
AR P. VII. The obligations contained in the present treaty, in nothing annul those which
are expressed in the treaty of alliance signed at St. Ildefonso, on the 2d Fructidor, year 4,
(19th of August, 1796;) on the contrary they unite with new ties the interests of the two powers,
and confirm the stipulations of the treaty of alliance in all the cases to which they can be applied.
A:T VIII. The ratifications of the present preliminary articles shall be completed and ex-
changed in the period of one month, or sooner if possible, counting from the date of the signing
of the present treaty.
In faith of which, we, the undersigned, ministers plenipotentiary of the French Re-
public, and of H. C. M. by virtue of our respective powers, have signed the pre-
sent preliminary articles, and have affixed our seals,
Done at St. I defonso, the 9th Vendimiaire, 9th year of the French Republic, (1st Oc-
tober, 1800.) (Signed) ALEXANDER BE |&T HIER.
(Signed) MARIANO LUIS BE URQUIJO.
198 G. BRITAIN AND THE TWO SICILIES. [London,
No. 35. Treaty between Great Britain, and the Two Sicilies. Signed at
Dondon, September 26, 1816. (Translation, as laid before Parliament.)
In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.
His Majesty the King of the Two Sicilies having represented to His
Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the
inconveniences which result to His finances, and to the navigation and com-
merce of His subjects. from the continuance of the privileges and exemp-
tions which British subjects and those of some other Powers have enjoyed
with His Dominions, and His desire to abolish them by common consent;
and His Britannic Majesty having testified to His Sicilian Majesty His
perfect readiness to consent thereto, by the establishment of a state of
things, which may at the same time remedy the inconveniences of which
His Siciliati Majesty has complained, and provide also for the security and
advantage of the subjects and of the commerce of Great Britain in the
Dominions of His Sicilian Majesty; Their Britannic and Sicilian Majesties,
ever animated by the sentiments of the most intimate friendship, in order
to obtain this double purpose, have named fºr their Plenipotentiaries, viz:
i Here follow the names and titles of the different plenipotentiaries on both sides.]
Who, after having communicated their full Powers, found to be in due
and proper form, nave agreed upon the following Articles:
I. His Britannic M jesty consents that all the privileges and exemp-
tions which His subjects, their commerce and shipping have enjoyed, and
do enjoy, in the Dominions, Ports and Domains of his Sicilian Majesty, in
virtue of the Treaty of Peace and Commerce concluded at Madrid the #g
of May, 1667, between Great Britain and Spain; of the Treaties of com-
merce between the same Powers, signed at Utrecht the 9th of December,
1713, and at Madrid the 13th of December, 1715; and of the Convention
concluded at Utrecht, the *... 1712 13, between Great Britain and
the Kingdom of Sicily, shall be abolished; and it is agreed upon, in conse-
qu, nce, between Their said Britannic and Sicilian Majesties, Their heirs
and successors, that the said privileges and exemptions, whether of persons
or flag and shipping, are and shall continue for ever abolished.
II. His Sicilian Majesty engages not to continue, nor hereafter to grant
to the subjects of any other Power whatever, the privileges and exemptions
abolished by the present Convention.
III. His Sicilian Majesty promises that the subjects of His Britannic
Majesty shall not be subjected within His Dominions to a more rigorous
system of examination and search by the officers of customs, than that to
which the subjects of His said Sicilian Majesty are liable.
IV. His Majesty the King of the two Sicilies promises that British
Commerce in general, and the British subjects who carry it on, shall be
treated throughout His Douminions upon the same footing as the most
favoured natiens, net only with respect to the persons and property of the
Sept. 26, 1816. 6. BRITAIN AND THE TWO SIerLIES. 199
said British subjects, but also with regard to every species of article in
which they may traffic, and the taxes or other charges payable on the said
articles, or on the shipping in which the importations shall be made.
V. With respect to the personal privileges to be enjoyed by the subjects
of His Britannic Majesty in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, His Sicilian
Majesty promises that they shall have a free and undoubted right to travel,
and to reside in the Territories and Dominions of His said Majesty, subject
to the same precautions of police, which are practised towards the most
favoured nations. They shall be entitled to occupy dwellings and ware-
houses, and to dispose of their personal property of every kind and descrip-
tion, by sale, gift, exchange, or will, and in any other way whatever, with-
out the smallest loss or hindrance being given them on that head. They
shall not be obliged to pay, under any pretence whatever, other taxes or
rates than those which are paid, or that hereafter may be paid, by the most
favoured nations in the Dominions of His said Sicilian Majesty. They
shall be exempt from all military service, whether by land or sea; their
dwellings, warehouses, and every thing belonging or appertaining thereto
for objects of commerce or residence, shall be respected. They shall not
be subjected to any vexatious search or visits. No arbitrary examination or
inspection of their books, papers, or accounts, shall be made under the pre-
tence of the Supreme Authority of the State, but these shall alone be executed
by the legal sentence of the competent tribunals. His Sicilian Majesty
engages on all these occasions to guarantee to the subjects of His Britannic
Majesty who shall reside in His States and Dominions, the preservation
of their property and personal security, in the same manner as those are
guaranteed to His subjects, and to all foreigners belonging to the most
favoured and most highly privileged nations.
VI. According to the tenor of the Articles I. and II. of this Treaty,
His Sicilian Majesty engages not to declare null and void the privileges
and exemptiºns which actually exist in favour of British Commerce within
His Dominions; till the same day, and except by the same Act, by which
the privileges and exemptions, whatsoever they are, of all other nations,
shall be declared null and void within the same.
VII His Sicilian Majesty promises, from the date when the general
abolition of the privileges according to the Articles I. II. and VI. shall
take place—to make a reduction of ten per cent. upon the amount of the
duties, payable according to the tariff in force the 1st of January, 1816,
upon the total of the merchandize or productions of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland, her Colonies, Possessions, and Dependencies,
imported into the States of His said Sicilian Majesty, according to the tenor
of Article IV. of the present Convention—it being understood that nothing
in this Article shall be construed to prevent the King of the Two Sicilies
from granting, if he shall think proper, the same reduction of duty to other
foreign nations.
200 G. BRITAIN AND SARDINIA. [Vienna. May20,1815,
VIII. The subjects of the Ionian Islands shall, in consequence of their
being actually under the immediate protection of His Britannic Majesty,
enjoy all the advantages which are granted to the Commerce, and to the
subjects of Great Britain by the present Treaty—it being well understood
that, to prevent all abuses, and to prove its identity, every Ionian vessel
shall be furnished with a patent, signed by the Lord High Commissioner
or his representative.
IX. The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications thereof
exchanged in London, within the space of six months, or sooner, if possible.
In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed it, and
thereunto affixed the seal of their arms.
Done at London, the 26th of September, 1816.
Signed -
CASTLEREAGH, [L. s.] CASTELGICALA, [L. s.]
SEPARATE AND AIDDITIONAL ARTICLE.
In order to avoid all doubt respecting the reduction upon the duties in favour of British
Commerce, which His Sicilian Majesty has promised in the 7th Article of the Convention,
signed this day between His Britannic Majesty and His Sicilian Majesty, it is declared, by this
present Separate and Additional Article, that by the concession of ten per cent. of diminution,
it is understood, that in case the amount of the duty should be twenty per cent. upon the value
of the merchandize, the effect of the reduction of ten per cent. is to reduce the duty from twenty
to eighteen, and so for other cases in proportion. And that for the a ticles which are not taxed
ad valorem in the tariff, the reduction of the duty shall be pro portionate; that is to say, a de-
duction of a tenth part upon the amount of the sum payable shall be granted
The present Separate and Additional Article shall have the same force and validity as if it
had been inserted, word for word, in the Convention of this day —it shall be ratified, and the ra-
tifications thereof shall be exchanged at the same time.
In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed it, and have thereunto
affixed the seal of their arms,
Done at London, the 26th of September, 1816.
Signed
CASTLEREAGH, [L. s.] CASTELCICALA, [L. S.]
No. 36. Treaty between Great Britain and Sardinia. Signed at Vienna,
- 20th AMay, 1815.
ExtRACT. (Translation, as laid before Parliament.)
I. The borders of the former States of Genoa. and of the countries*call-
ed Imperial Fiefs, united to the States of His Majesty the King of Sardinia,
according to the following Articles, shall be the same as those which, on the
1st of January, 1792, separated those countries from the States of Parma
and Placentia, and from those of Tuscany and Massa.
The Island of Capraja, having belonged to the ancient Republic of Ge-
noa, is included in the cession of the States of Genoa to His Majesty the
King of Sardinia.
II. The States which constituted the former Republic of Genoa are unit-
ed in perpetuity to those of His Majesty the King of Sardinia; to be, like
the latter, possessed by Him in full Sovereignty and hereditary property,
rondon, Sept.29,1825..] G. B. & HANSEATIC REPUBLICS. 201
and to descend, in the male line, in the order of primogeniture. to the two
branches of His House, viz. the Royal Branch, and the Branch of Savoy
Carignan.
IV. The Genoese shall enjoy all the rights and privileges specified in
the Act, intituled “A. A. Conditions which are to serve as the bases of the
union of the Genoese States to those of His Sardinian Majesty.” and the
said Act shall be considered as an integral part of the present Treaty, and
shall have the same force and validity as if it were textually inserted in the
present Article.
V. The countries called Imperial Fiefs, formerly united to the ancient
Ligurian Republic, are definitively united to the States of His Majesty the
King of Sardinia, in the same manner as the rest of the Genoese States; and
the inhabitants of those countries shall enjoy the same rights and privileges
as those of the States of Genoa, specified in the preceding Article.
Done at Vienna, the 20th May, 1815.
(Signed) CLANCARTY, [L. s.l The Marquis de St. MARSAN, [L. s.]
The Count Rossi, [L. s ]
J. A. Conditions which are to serve as the bases of the Union of the Genoese States to those of
His Sardinian JMajesty.
Extn Act. Translation, as laid befºre Parliament.
IV. The free port of Genoa shall be re-established, with the regulations which existed under
the ancient Government of Genoa. Every facility shall be given by the King to the transit,
through His States, of merchandize proceeding from that free port, under such restrictions as
His Majesty shall judge expedient for preventing the said merchandize being illicitly sold or
eonsumed in the interior. It shall be subject only to the usual moderate duty
XV. The King shall preserve to Genoa a Tribunal and a Chamber of Commerce, with the
powers actually belonging to those two establishments.
No. 37. Convention of Commerce and Navigation, between Great Britain
and the Free Hanseatic Republics of Lubeck, Bremen and Hamburgh.
Signed at London, September 29, 1825.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, on the one part. and the Senate of the Free Hanseatic City of Lubeck,
the Senate of the Free Hanseatic City of Bremen, and the Senate of the Free
Hanseatic City of Hamburg, (each State for itself separately) on the other
part, being equally desirous of affording every facility and encouragement to
their subjects and citizens engaged in commercial intercourse with each other,
and being of opinion that nothing will more contribute to the attainment of
this desirable object, than a reciprocal abrogation of all discriminating and
countervailing duties levied upon the ships of the High Contracting parties,
or upon the cargoes of such ships, in the ports of either, have appointed their
Plenipotentiaries to conclude a Convention for that purpose, that is to say:—
[Here follow the names and titles of the plenipotentiaries on both sides.]
Who, after having communicated to each other their respective full pow-
ers, found to be in due and proper form, have agreed upon and concluded the
following Articles:—
26
202 c. B. & HANSEATIC REPUBLICs. [London, Sept.29,1825.
ART. I. From and after the date hereof, British vessels entering or
departing from the ports of the Free Hanseatic Republics of Lubeck, Bremen,
or Hamburgh, –and Lubeck. Bremen, or Hamburgh vessels entering or depar-
ting from the ports of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. shall
not be subject to any other or higher ship duties or charges, than are or shall
be levied on national vessels entering or departing from such ports respectively.
II. All goods, wares, and merchandize, whether the production of the
territories of the Free Hanseatic Republics of Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh,
or of any other country, which may be legally imported from any of the ports
of the said Republics into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
in British vessels, shall, in like manner, be permitted to be imported in Lubeck,
Bremen, or Hamburgh vessels:—and all goods, wares, and merchandize,
whether the production of any of the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, or
of any other country, which may be legally exported from the ports of the
United Kingdom in British vessels, shall, in like manner, be permitted to be
exported from the said ports in Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh vessels. And
all goods. wares, and merchandize, which may be legally imported into or
exported from the ports of Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh, in national vessels,
shall, in like manner, be permitted to be imported into or exported from the
ports of Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh, in British vessels.
III. All goods, wares, and merchandize, which can be legally imported
into the ports of the United Kingdom directly from the ports of Lubeck, Bre-
men, or Hamburgh, or either of them, shall be admitted at the same rate of
duty. whether imported in British vessels, or in vessels belonging to either of
the said Republics: —an all goods, wares, and merchandize, which can be
legally exported from the United Kingdom. shall be entitled to the same boun-
ties, drawbacks, and allowances, whether exported in iritish or Hanseatic
vessels. And the like reciprocity shall be observed, in the ports of the said
Republics, in respect to all goods, wares, and merchandize which can be legally
imported into or exported from any or either of the said ports, in vessels
belonging to the United Kingdom.
IV. No priority or preference shall be given, directly or indirectly, by
any or either of the Contracting Parties. nor by any company, corporation, or
agent, acting on their behalf, or under their authority, in the purchase of any
article, the growth, produce or manufacture of their States, respectively,
imported into the other, on account of or in reference to the character of the
vessel in which such article was importel; it being the true intent and mean-
ing of the High Contracting Parties, that no distinction or difference what-
ever shall be made in this respect.
V. In consideration of the limited extent of the territories belonging to
the Republics of Lubeck, Bremen, and Hamburgh, and the intimate connec-
tion of trade and navigation subsisting between the Republics, it is hereby
stipulated and agreed, that any vessel which shall have been built in any of
either of the ports of the said Republics, and which shall be owned exclusively
3.ondon, Sept. 29, 1825..] G. B. & HANSEATIe REPUBLICs. 203
by a citizen or citizens of any or either of them, and of which the master shall
also be a citizen of either of them, and provided three-fourths of the crew
shall be subjects or citizens of any or either of the said Republics, or of any
or either of the States comprised in the Germanic Confederation, as descri- ?
bed and enumerated in the LIIId and LVIth Articles of the General Treaty
of Congress signed at Vienna on the 9th of June 1815,” such vessel, so built,
owned, and navigated, shall for all the purposes of this Convention, be taken
to be and considered as a vessel belonging to Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh.
VI. Any vessel, together with her cargo, beionging to either of the three
Free Hanseatic Republics of Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh, and coming
from either of the said ports to the United Kingdom, shall, for all the purposes
of tilis Convention, be deemed to come from the country to which such vessel
belongs; and any British vessel and her cargo trading to the ports of Lubeck,
Bremen, or Hamburgh, directly or in succession, shall, for the like purposes, be
on the footing of a Hanseatic vessel and her cargo making the same voyage.
Vil. It is further mutually agreed, that no higher or other duties shall be
levied, it any or either of the States of the High Contracting Parties, upon any
personal property of the subjects and citizens of each, respectively, on the
removal of the same from the dominions or territory of such States, (either
upon inheritance of such property, or otherwise,) than are or shall be payable,
in each State, upon the like property, when removed by a subject or citizen of
such State respectively. -
VIII. The High Contracting Parties reserve to themselves to enter upon
additional stipulations for the purpose of facilitating and extending, even
beyond what is comprehended in the Convention of this date, the commercial
relations of their respective subjects and dominions, citizens, and territories,
upon the principle cither of reciprocal or equivalent advantages, as the case
may be; and, in the event of any Article or Articles being concluded between
the said High Contracting Parties, for giving effect to such stipulations, it is
hereby agreed that the Article or Articles which unay hereafter be so conclud-
ed, shall be considered as forming part of the present Convention.
* ART. 53. The Sovereign Princes and Free Towns of Germany, under which denomina-
tion for the present purpose, are comprehended their JMuj sties the Emperor of Austria, the Rºngs
of Prussia, Denmark, and The JWetherlands; that is to say, the Emperor ºf .dustria and the
King of Prussia for all their possessions which anciently belonged to the German Epº, the
Kºng of Denmark for the Duchy of Holstein, and The King of the Wetherlands for the Grand
Jouëhy of Luxembourg, establish among themselves a perpetual Confederation, which shall be
called “The Germanic Confederation ” - • . * -
56. The affairs of the Confederation shall be conſided to a Federative Diet, in which all the
members shall vote by their Plenipotentiaries either individually or collectively, in the following
manner, without prejudice to their rank: e
1. Jiustria. 2. fºrussia. 3. Bavaria. 4. Saxony. 5. Hanover. 6: Wirtemberg:..7. Baden.
8. Eſectoral flesse. 9. Grand Duchy of Hesse 10, Denmark, fºr Holstein. 11:. The Wºther.
lands, for Luxembourg. 12. Grand Ducal and Ducal Houses ºf Saroºſ, 13. Brunswick and
.N'assuu. 14. JMecklenburg-Schwerin and Strelitz. 15. Holstein Oldenbur £2 Jinhalt, and
Schwartzburg. 16. Hohenzollern. Litchenstein, Reuss, Schaumburg-Lippe, 'pºº und. Wal-
deck. 17. The Free Towns of Lubeck, Frankfort, Bremen, and Hamburgh, Total Seven-
teen Wales. w -
204 G. BRITAIN AND MUSCAT. [Muscat, Sept. 10, 1822.
ix. The present Convention shall be in force for the term of 10 years
from the late hereof; and further, u til the end of 12 months after the King
* of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on the one part of the
Governments of the Free Hanseatic Republics of Lubeck. Bremen, or Ham-
burgh. or either of them, on the other part, shall have given notice of their
intention to terminate the same; each of the said High Contracting Parties
reserving to itself the right of giving such notice to the other, at the end of
the said term of 10 years; and it is hereby agreed between them, that, at the
expiration of 12 months after such notice shall have been received by either of
the parties from the other, ihis Convention, and all the provisions thereof,
shall altogether cease and determine, as far as regards th: States giving and
receiving such notice; it being always understood and agreed, that if one or
more of the Hanseatic Republics aforesaid shall, at the expiation of 10 years
from the date hereof, give or receive notice of the proposed termination of this
Convention, such Convention shall, nevertheless, remain in full force and
operation, as far as regards the remaining Hanseatic Republics or Republic,
which may not have given or received such notice.
X. The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged at London within one month from the date hereof, or sooner if
possible. -
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
Done at London the 29th day of September, in the year of our Lord, 1825.
[L. s.] GEORGE CANNING.
[L. s.l. JAMES Colquhou N.
[L. s.] W. HUSKisson.
No. 38. Treaty between Great Britain and Muscat. Concluded at Muscat,
the 10th of September, 1822.
Statement of the Requisitions made to His Translation of answers in Arabic, under the
Highness the Imaum of Muscat, by Cap
Moresby of His Majesty’s Ship JMenai,
Commissioner, wested with full powers by
His Excellency Sir Robert T. Farquhar,
Baronet, Governor of the island of Mauri-
tius, &c. &c. &c.
1stly. The lunaum to abolish the foreign
slave trade, for ever, in his dominions.
hand and seal of His Highness the Imaum
of Muscat, to the requisitions made by
Captain Moresby of His Majesty's ship
•Menal, Columissioner, &c. &c. &c.
1st. I did write last season to all my
officers, positively prohibiting the sale of slaves
to any christian nation, and I will repeat those
Orders.
2dly. The Imaum to order the seizure of 2d. I will send orders to all the officers
all such vessels, attempting the foreign slave throughout my dominions, that if they find (the
traffic, and to seize and punish the captain and owners of) any Arab vessels buying slaves for
Crew as Pirates. sale in christian countries, they must take pos-
session of all such vessels and inflict punish-
ment on the commanders, (owners) thereof,
even though they be bound for Madagascar.
Muscat, Sept.16, 1822.] G. BRITAIN AND MUSCAT.
205
3.11y. The Imaum to punish all persons ser-
ving on board simps dealing in slaves, who do
not give Information to the Lima, um, or his Go-
vernors, that they have been slave dealing.
Athly. His Highness to appoint, at such
places as His M. Jesty the King of Great Bri-
tain may wish, habitations for the residence of
consuls, agents or others, charged with the
suppression of the slave trade by English sub-
jects; such consuls, agents or others, are to
receive the assistance, on application, of His
Highness the Imaum or his Lieutenant Go-
vernor or others, for the apprehension and
detention of any English subjects who may
attempt the traffic.
5thly. The Imaum to authorize British
cruizers to seize all Arab vessels that may be
found loaded with slaves, after the expiration
of four months from the present date if bound
to any port out of His Highness’s dominions.
6thly. The lmaum, or his Governors to
provide all Arab vessels with passes (port
clearances.) Any vessels found with slaves on
board, who have not such port clearances, to
be seized according to the 5th requisition, by
any British cruizers that may meet them.
FAIRFAx MoRESBY, Captain H.M.S. JMenai.
JAdditional Rºquisition by Captain JMoresby to
th Imaum of JMuscat.
That it may be understool in the most com-
rehensive manner, where Arab ships are lia-
ble to seizure by His Majesty the King of
England’s cruizers, after the expiration of 4
months, the luma'am to authorize that the King
of England’s cruizers, finding Arab ships with
slaves on bºard to the eastward of a line drawn
frºm Cape Delgado, passing 60 miles east of
Sog tra, on to Du Head, forming the western
point of the Gulf of Jambay (unless driven by
stress of weather,) shall be seized and treated
by His Majesty’s cruizers in the same manner
as if they were under the English flag.
F. MoRESBY, Captain H. M. S. JMenai.
3d I will instruct my officers, and publish
generally such instructions throughout my
dominions, that the crews of any vessel carry-
ing slaves for sale, in christian countries, be
enjoined, on their return to the Arab port, to
give information to the authority at such port,
that he may punish the commanders, and that
if they coine to be detected in concealing such
information, they (the crews) shall themselves
suffer punishment.
4th. The authority you require, permitting
the settlement of an agent on your part in Zan-
zibar, and the neighbouring paris, for the pur-
pose of having intelligence, and watching the
traffic in slaves with chris; la's nations, is grant-
ed, and I now give it to Captain Moresby.
5th. The authority you have required,
permitting to you after the expºration oi iour
months, the seizure of all vessels latien with
slaves bound for christian countries, is hereby
granted to captain Moresby.
6th. I will write to my G ºvernors, regard-
ing the statenient to be given in writing to
all ships departing on a voyage, certifying from
what port they have come and whither they are
bound, and you may seize every vessel you
may fall in with beyond Madagascar, an’ſ in
the sea of Mauritius, after 4 months from the
date of the perinission contained in the answer
to the 5th requisition above acceded to, and
you may carry into me, for my disposal, any
ship you may meet even on this side the isle
of France, provided she have not the writing
statement required from the Governor of the
port whence she sailed.
Signature of the Imaum. {L. s.l
Reply.
I have permitted Captains of ships of the
Government of English State (“Surkar il doi-
vent il mgly seed”) to seize all Arab vessels
loaled with slaves for the foreign market, that
shall be found to the eastward of the prescribed
line, after the expiration of 4 months from the
date of the 5th requisition already agreed to;
but ships driven by stress of weather without
the said line, must suffer no molestation.
$ignature of the Imaum.
[L. S.]
Tumatave, Oct. 25,1817.
206 G. B. AND PERSIA—MADAGASCAR. $º 25, 1814.
No. 39. Definitive Treaty of Friendship between Great Britain and Persia.
Signed at Zehran, 25th Vovember, 1814. Exta Act. (Preamble.)
What relates to Commerce, Trade, and other Affairs, will be drawn up
and concluded in a separate Commercial Treaty.
Signed at Tehran, 25th November, 1814.
Signed Signed
JAMEs MoRIER, IL. S.] M1 Hz A HAHAMMED SHEFFF.
HEN It X ELLIS, L. s.] M 1 liza BUz, lik CA1 M 4 AM.
MiltzA ADUL WAHAB.
No. 40. Treaty between Great Britain and Madagascar. Signed at I'amatave,
23d October, 1817.
Robert Townsend Farquhar, Esq. Governor and Commander in Chief, Captain General,
Vice-Admiral of the Island of Mauritius and its dependencies:
By His Commissioners, Captain Stanfell of the Royal Navy, commanding His Majesty’s
ship Phaeton and T. R. Pye, Esq., Assistant-Agent for H is Excellency’s Government at Mada-
gascar, who are vested with full Powers, and Radama, King of Madagascar and its dependen-
gies, by His Commissioners lèatzalika, ivampoole Ramanou and l&aclahato—represenung the
said Hadama, and with full Powers from His Majesty—
Have agreed upon the following Articles and Conditions:
I. It is agreed by the Partles to these presents, respectively, that the mutual confidence,
friendship, and brotherhood, which are hereby acknowledged to subsist between the Contract-
ing Parties, shall be maintained and perpetuated for ever.
II. It is agreed, and the two Contracting Parties hereby covenant and agree that, from the
date of this Treaty, uhere shall be an entire cessation and exuinction through all the Dominions
of King Radanna, and wherever his influence can extend, of the sale or transfer of slaves, or
other persons whatever; to be removed from off Jhe soil of Madagascar into any country,
island, or dominion of any other Prince, Poteutate, or Power whatever; and titat it...dama,
King of Madagascar, will make a proclamation and a law prohibiting all his subjects, or per-
sons depending on him or his dominions, to sell any slave to be transported from Madagascar,
or to aid or abet, or assist, in any such sale, under penalty that any person so offending shall be
reduced to slavery himself.
Ill. And in consideration of this concession on the part of Iładama, the King of Madagascar
and l is nauon, and in full satisfaction for the sanie, and for the loss of revenue thereby incur-
red by Radana, King of Madagascar, the Commissioners on the part of His Excellency the Go-
vernor of Mauritius, do engage to pay Radama, yearly, the following articles:
One thousand dollars in gold. Four hundred pair of shoes.
One ulıousand dollars in silver. Four hundred soldiers’ caps.
One hundred bls. of t'owder of 100 lbs. each. Four hundred stocks.
One hundred English muskets, complete, with Twelve serjeants’ swords, regulation, with belts.
accouli'e the 11tS. Four hundred pieces of white cloth. & India
Ten thousand flints Two inundred pieces of blue cloth. “.
Four hundred red jackets. A full-dress coat, hat, and boots, all complete,
Four hundred shirts. for King Ratlama;-aud
Four hundred pair of trowsers. Two horses.
upon a certificate being received, that the said laws nil regulations and proclamations have been
enforced the preceding quarter; which certificate shall be signed by Radama, and countersigned
by the agent of His Excellency Governor Farquhar, resident at the Court of Radama.
IV. And further, it is agreed by the Contracting Parties mutually to protect the faithful
friend and Ally of England, the King of Johanna, from the predatory attacks to which he has
been for many years annually exposed from some of the smaller States of the sea-coast of Mada-
gascar; and to use every means in their power, by their subjects, allies, and dependents, to put
a final end to this system of piracy; and for this purpose, proclamations shall be made by Rada-
ma and the Governor of Mauritius, prohibiting all persons whatever from engaging in this pira-
cy ; and these proclamations shall be particularly distributed in the ports and on the sea-coast.
of Madagascar.
Dardanelles, Jan.5, 1809.] 6. BRITAIN AND TURKEY. 207
AIDDITIONAL ARTICLE.
The Contracting Parties agree in considering this Treaty as provisional, until ratified and
confirmed by His Majesty’s Ministers on the part of the King of Great Britain;–which Ratifi-
eation will be forwarded, without loss of time, to the King of Madagascar (Radama) by His Am-
bassador to that Court. This formality, however, is not to prevent the stipulations of the Treaty
from being carried into full and complete effect from the date hereof.
Done at Tamatave, Island of Madagascar, October 23, 1817.
Signed
Fu ANcis StANFELL, RAtzALIKA for RADAMA.
Captain H. M. S. Phaeton, RAM Poo LE RAMANo U.
Senior Naval Officer and RACIAHATo.
Commissioner. RAMALAZA, as Witness.
THos. R. Pyr, Agent of the British Government and Commissioner.
No. 41. Treaty between Great Britain and the Sublime Porte. Concluded at
the Dardanelles, the 5th of January, 1809.
In the Name of the Most Merciful God.
The object of this faithful and authentic Instrument is as follows:—
Notwithstanding the appearances of a misunderstanding between the Court
of Great Britain and the Sublime Ottoman Porte. consequent upon the occur-
rences of the moment, the two Powers, equally animated with a sincere desire
of re-establishing the ancient friendship which subsisted between them, have
named their Plenipotentiaries for that purpose, that is to say, His Most Au-
gust and Most Honored Majesty George the Third, King of the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Ireland, has named for His Plenipotentiary, Robert
Adair, Esq. one of the Members of the Royal Parliament of Great Britain;
and His Majesty the Most Noble, Most Powerful, and Most Magnificent
Sultan Mahomet Han II. Emperor of the Ottomans has named for His Pleni-
potentiary, Seyde, Mehmed-Emin Vahid Effendi, Director and Inspector of
the department called “Mercoufat:” and invested with the rank of “Nicham-
gi,” of the Imperial Divan; who, having reciprocally communicated to each
other their full Powers, after several conferences and discussions, have con-
cluded the peace equally desired by both Powers, and have agreed upon the
following Articles:
I. From the moment of signing the present Treaty, every act of hostility
between England and Turkey shall cease; and in furtherance of this happy
peace, the prisoners on both sides shall be exchanged without distinction, in
thirty-one days from the signature of this Treaty, or sooner if possible.
II. Should any fortresses belonging to the Sublime Porte be in the posses-
sion of Great Britain, they shall be restored to the Sublime Porte, and given
up, with all the cannons, warlike stores, and other effects, in the condition in
which they were found at the time of their being occupied by England, and
this restitution shall be made in the space of thirty-one days from the signa-
ture of the present Treaty.
III. Should there be any effects and property belonging to English mer-
chants under sequestration, within the jurisdiction of the Sublime Porte, the
208 G. BRITAIN AND TURKEY. [Dardanelles.Jan.5, 1809.
same shall be entirely given up, and restored to the proprietors; and in like
manner should there be any effects, property, and vessels, belonging to mer-
chants, subjects of the Sublime Porte, under sequestration at Malta, or in any
other islands and possessions of His Britannic Majesty, they also shall be en-
tirely given up and restored to their proprietors.
IV The Treaty of Capitulations agreed upon in the Turkish year 1086, .
(A. D. 1675) in the middle of the month Gemmaziel Akir, as also the Act re-
la:::::: to the Commerce of the Black Sea,” and the other privileges (Imtiazat)
equally established by Acts at subsequent periods, shall continue to be ob-
served and maintained as if they had suffered no interruption.
V. In return for the indulgence and good treatment afforded by the Sub-
lime Porte to English merchants, with respect to their goods and property, as
well as in all matters tending to facilitate their commerce, England shall re-
ciprocally extend every indulgence and friendly treatment to the flag, sub-
jects, and merchants of the Sublime Porte, which may hereafter frequent the
Dominions of His Britannic Majesty for the purposes of commerce.
VI. The last custom-house tariff established at Constantinople, at the an-
cient rate of 3 per cent. and particularly the Article relating to the interior
commerce shall continue to be observed, as they are at present regulated and
to which England promises to conform.
VII. Ambassadors from His Majesty the King of Great Britain shall enjoy
all the honors enjoyed by Ambassadors to the Sublime Porte from other na-
tions; and Ambassadors from the Sublime Porte at the Court of London shall
reciprocally enjoy all the honors granted to the Ambassadors from Great Britain.
VIII. Consuls (Shahbenders) may be appointed at Malta, and in the Do-
minions of His Britannic Majesty where it shall be necessary to manage and
superintend the affairs and interests of merchants of the Sublime Porte, and
similar privileges and immunities to those granted to English Consuls resident
in the Ottoman Dominions, shall be duly afforded to the “ Shahbenders” of
the Sublime Porte.
IX. English Ambassadors and Consuls may supply themselves, according
to custom, with such Dragomen as they shall stand in need of, but as it has
already been nutually agreed upon, that the Sublime Porte shall not giant
the “Barat” of Dragoman in favor of individuals who do not execute that du-
ty in the place of their destination, it is settled, in conformity with this prin-
ciple, that in future, the “Barat” shall not be granted to any person of the
class of tradesmen or banker, nor to any shopkeeper or manufacturer in the
public markets, or to one who is engaged in any matters of this description:
nor shall English Consuls be named from among the subjects of the Sublime
Porte.
X. English patents of protection shall not be granted to dependants, or mer-
chants who are subjects of the Sublime Porte, nor shall any passport be de-
... "...Permission granting the Navigation of the Black Sea, by English merchant vessels, enter-
ing through the Straights of Constantinople.
Jarianople, Sept. 14.1829] RUSSIA AND TURKEY. 209
liverel to such persons on the part of Ambassadors or Consuls, without per-
mission previously obtained from the sublime Porte.
XI. As ships of war have at all times been prohibited from entering the
canal of Constantinople, viz. in the straits of the Dardanelles and of the Black
Sea; and as this ancient regulation of the Ottoman Empire is in future to be ob-
served by every Power in time of Peace, the Court of Great Britain pro-
mises on its part to conform to this principle.
XII. The ratifications of the present Treaty of Peace between the high
Contracting Parties shall be exchanged at Constantinople in the space of
ninety-one days from the date of this Treaty, or sooner if possible. In faith
of which and in order that the ratification of the twelve Articles of this Treaty
(which has been happily concluded, by the assistance of God. and in the sin-
cerity and good faith of the Two Parties) may be exchanged. I, Plenipoten-
tiary of the Sublime Porte, have, in virtue of my full Powers, signed and seal-
ed this Instrument, which I have delivered to the Plenipotentiary of His
Britannic Majesty, in exchange for another Instrument exactly conformable
thereto, written in the French language, with a translation thereof, which has
been delivered to me on his part, agreeably to his full powers.
Done near the Castles of the Dardanelles, the 5th of January, 1809,
which corresponds with the year of the Hegira 1223, the 19th day of the
Moon Zilkaade. Signed SEY D \l Eh EMMED EMIN VAHID EFFEND1, [.. s.]
Signed Rob ERT A D AIR, L.L. s ]
No. 42. Treaty of Peace between Russia and Turkey. Signed at Adrianople,
September 14, 1829.
In the name of God Almighty.
His imperial majesty, the most high and most mighty emperor and autocrat
of all the Russias, and his highness the most high and most mighty empe or of
the Ottomans, animated with an equal desire to put an end to the caiamities
of war, and to establish, on a solid and immutable basis, peace, friendship. and
good harmony between their empires, have resolved, with a common accord, to
intrust this salutary work to, &c.
{Here follow the names and titles of the different plenipotentiaries on both sides.]
ART. 1. All enmity and all differences which have subsisted hitherto
between the two empires shall cease from this day, as well on land as on sea,
and there shall be in perpetuity peace, friendship, and good intelligence,
between his majesty the emperor and padishah of all the Russias, and his
highness the padishah of the Ottomans, their heirs and successors to the throne,
as well as between their respective empires. The two high contracting par-
ties will devote their particular attention to prevent all that might cause
misunderstandings to revive between their respective subjects. They will
scrupulously fulfil all the conditions of the present treaty of peace, and will
watch, at the same time, lest it should be infringed in any manner, directly or
indirectly. *
97.
3 ſ
210 RUSSIA AND TURKEY. [.ádrianople,
ART. II. His majesty the emperor and padishah of all the Russias, wishing
to give to his highness the emperor and padishah of the Ottomans a pledge of
the sincerity of his friendly disposition, restores to the Sublime Porte the
principality of Moldavia, with all the boundaries which it had before the com-
mencement of the war to which this present treaty has put an end.
His Imperial majesty also restores the principality of Wallachia, the
Banat of Crayova, Bulgaria, and the country of Dobridge, from the Danube as
far as the sea, together with Silistria, Hirsova, Matzia, Isakiya. Toulza, Baba-
dag, Bazardjik, Varna, Pravedy, and the other towns, burghs, and villages,
which it contains, the whole extent of the Balkan, from Emine Bouroun as far
as Kazan, and all the country from the Balkans as far as the sea with Silimi-
nea. Jomboli, Aidos, Karnabat, Missanovica, Akhioly, Bourgas. Sizopolis,
Kirkkilissi, the city of Adrianople, Lule Bourgas, and all the towns, burghs,
and villages, and in general all places which the Russian troops have occupied
in Roumelia.
ART. III. The Pruth shall continue to form the limit of the two empires,
from the point where the rivers touches the territory of Moldavia to its junc-
tion with the Danube; from that spot the frontier line will follow the course
of the Danube as far as the mouth of St. George’s” so that leaving all the islands
formed by the different arms of that river, in possession of Russia, the right
bank shall remain, as formerly, in the possession of the Ottoman Porte. Never-
theless it is agreed that this right bank shall remain uninhabited from the
point where the arm of St. George separates itself from that of Souline, to a
distance of two hours from the river, and that no establishment of any kind
shall be formed there, any more than on the islands which shall remain in
possession of the court of Russia, where, with the exception of the quarantines
which may be established there, it shall not be allowed to make any other es-
tablishment or fortification. The merchant-vessels of the powers shall have
the liberty of navigating the Danube in all its course; and those which bear
the Ottoman flag shall have free entrance into the mouth of Keli and Souline,
that of Saint George remaining comunon to the ships of war and merchant
vessels of the two contracting powers. But the Russian ships of war, when
ascending the Danube, shall not go beyond the point of its junction with the
Pruth.
A RT IV. Georgia, Imeritia, Mingrelia, and several other provinces of
the Caucasus, having been for many years and in perpetuity united to the em-
pire of Russia, and that empire having besides, by the treaty concluded with
Persia, at Tourkmantchai, on the 10th of February, 1828, acquired the Kha-
nats of Erivan and of Naktohivan, the two high contracting powers have re-
cognised the necessity of establishing between their respective states, on the
whole of that line, a well determined frontier, capable of preventing all future
discussion. They have equally taken into consideration the proper means to
to oppose insurmountable obstacles to the incursions and depredations which
Sept. 14, 1829.] RUSSIA AND TURKEY. 21 1
the neighboring tribes hitherto committed, and which have so often compromis-
ed the relations of friendship and good feeling between the two empires; con-
sequently, it has been agreed upon, to consider, henceforward, as the frontiers
between the territories of the imperial court of Russia, and those of the Sub-
lime Ottoman Porte in Asia. the line which, following the present limit of the
Gouriel from the Black Sea, ascends as far as the border of Imeritia, and from
thence, in the straightest direction, as far as the point where the frontiers of
the Pochaliks of Akhaltzik and of Kars meet those of Georgia, leaving in this
manner to the north of, and within that line, the town of Akhaltzik and the
fort of Khallmalick, at a distance of not less than two hours.
All the countries situate to the south and west of this line of demarka-
tion towards the Pachaliks of Kars and Trebisond, together with the major
part of the Pachalik of Akhaltzik shall remain in perpetuity under the do-
mination of the Sublime Porte, whilst those which are situated to the north
and east of the said line towards Georgia, Imeritia, and the Gouriel, as well
as all the littoral of the Black Sea, from the mouth of the Kouben, as far as
the port of St. Nicholas inclusively under the domination of the emperor of
Russia. In consequence, the imperial court of Russia gives up and restores
to the Subliune Porte the remainder of the Pachalik of Akhaltzik, the town and
the Pachalik of Kars, the town and Pachalik of Bayazid, the town and Pacha-
lik of Erzeroum, as well as all the places occupied by the Russian troops, and
which may be out of the above mentioned line.
ART. V. The principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia having, by a capi-
tulation, placed themselves under the suzerainete of the Sublime Porte, and
Russia having guarantied their prosperity, it is understood that they shall pre-
serve all the privileges and immunities granted to them in virtue of their capi-
tulation, whether by the treaties concluded between the imperial courts, or by
the Hatti Sheriffs issued at different times. In consequence, they shall enjoy
the free exercise of their religion, perfect security, a national and independ-
ent administration, and the full liberty of trade. The additional clauses to
antecedent stipulations, considered necessary to secure to these two provinces
the enjoyment of their rights, shall be inscribed in the next separate act,
which is and shall be considered as forming an integral part of the present
treaty.
ART. VI. The circumstances which have occurred since the conclusion of
the convention of Akerman not having permitte the Sublime Porte to under-
take immediately the execution of the clauses of the separate act relative to
Servia, and annexed to the 5th article of the said convention, the Sublime Porte
engages in the most solemn manner to fulfil them without the least delay, and
with the most scrupulous exactness; and to proceed in particular, to the imme-
diate restitution of the six districts detached from Servia, so as to insure
orever the tranquility and the welfare of that faithful and obedient nation.
The firman, confirmed by the Hatti Sheriff, which shall order the execution of
212 RUSSIA AND TURKEY. | Adrianople,
the aforesaid clauses, shall be delivered and communicated to the imperial
court ol Russia, within the period of a mouth within the date of the signature
of the treaty of peace.
As T. V. i. Bussian subjects shall enjoy, throughout the whole extent of
the Ottoman empire, as well by laud as by sea, the full and entire liberty of
commerce secuted to them by the former treaties concluded between the two
high contracting powers No infringement of that liberty of commerce shall
be committed, neither shall it be permitted to be checked. in any case or under
any pretence, by a prohibition or any restriction whatever, nor in consequence
or any regulation or uneasure, whether it be one of intel nal administration or
of internal iegislation. Russian subjects, vessels and merchandise, shall be
secure against all violence and all clucanery. The former shall live utider
the exclusive jurisdiction and police of the ministers and consuls of Russia.
The 1&ussian vessels shall not be subjected to any visit on board whatever, on
the part of the O tonian authorities, neither out at sea, nor in any of the ports
or roadsteads beioinglng to the dominions of the Sublilae Porte. And all mer-
chang Ze and commodities beionging to a Russian subject, after having paid
the cus, on house duties required by the tariffs, shall be freely conveyed,
deposited on land, in the warehouses of the proprietor or of his consignee, or
else tr isferred to the vessels of any other nation whatever, without the
Russian suijects being required to give notice to the local authorities, and still
less to ask their permission. It is expressly agreed upon, that all grain pro-
ceeding from Russia Shail enjoy the same privileges, and that its free transit
shall never experience, under any preteuce, any difficulty or impediment.
The Sublime Porte engages besides, to watch carefully that the commerce and
navigation of the Black Sea shall not experience the slightest obstruction of
any nature whatever. For this purpose the Sublime Porte recognises and
declares that the passage of the canal of Constantinople, and the strait of the
Daruanelles, entirely tree a.d open to Russian ships under merchant flags,
laden or in ballast, whether they come from the Black Sea to go into the
Mediterranean, or whether, returning from the Mediterranean, they wish to
re-enter the Black Sea. These vessels, provided they be merchantmen, of
whatever size or tonnage they may be, shall not be exposed to any impediment
or vexation whatever, as it has been stipulated above. The two courts shall
come to an understanding with respect to the best means for preventing all
delay in the delivery of the necessary clearances. In virtue of the same prin-
ciple, the passage of the canal of Constantinople and of the strait of the Dar-
dant Iles is declared free and open for all the merchant vessels of the powers
at peace with the Sublime Porte, whether bound to the Russian ports of the
Black Sea, or returning from them—whether laden or in ballast—upon the
same conditions as those stipulated for the vessels under the Russian flag.
In fine. the Suoline Porte, acknowledging the right of the Imperial Court of
Russia to obtain guaranty of this full liberty of commerce and navigation in
Sept. 14, 1829.] RUSSIA AND TURKEY. 213
the Black Sea. solemnly declares that she will never, under any pretence
whatever, throw the least obstacle in its way. She promises, above all, never
to permit herself in future to stop or detain vessels, laden or in ballast, wheth-
er Russian or belonging to nations with which the Ottoman empire shall not
be in a state of declared war, passing through the strait of Constantinople and
the strait of the Dardanelles, to repair from the Black Sea into the Mediter-
ranean, or from the Mediterranean to the Russian ports of the Black Sea.—
And if, which God forbid! any of the stipulations contained in the present ar-
ticle should be infringed, and the reclamation of the Russian minister on that
subject should not obtain a full and prompt satisfaction, the Sublime Porte re-
cognises, beforehand, the right in the Imperial Court of Russia to consider
such an infraction an act of hostility, and immediately to retaliate on the Ot-
toman empire.
ART. WIll. The arrangements formerly stipulated by the 6th Article of
the Convention of Akerman, for the purpose of regulating and liquidating
the claims of the respective subjects and merchants of both empires, relating
to the indemnity for the losses experienced, at different periods, since the war
of 1806, not having been yet carried into effect, and Russian commerce having,
since the conclusion of the aforesaid convention, suffered new and considera-
ble injury in consequence of the measures adopted respecting the navigation
of the B sphorus, it is agreed and determined that the Sublime Porte, as a re-
paration for that injury and those losses, shall pay to the Imperial Court of
Russia, in the course of eighteen month, at periods which shall be settled here-
after, the sum of one million five hundred thousand ducats of Holland; so that
the payment of this sum shall put and end to all claim or reciprocal preten-
sions on the part of the two contracting Powers, on the subject of the afore-
said circumstances.
ART. IX. The prolongation of the war, to which the present treaty of
peace happily puts an end, having occasioned, to the Imperial court of Russia,
considerable expenses, the Sublime Porte recognises the necessity of offering
it an adequate indemnity. For this purpose, independently of the cession of
a small portion of territory in Asia, stipulated by the fourth article, which the
court of Russia consents to receive on account of the said indemnity, the Sub-
lime Porte engages to pay to the said court, a sum of money, the amount of
which shall be regulated by mutual accord.
ART. X. The Sublime Porte, whilst declaring its entire adhesion to the
stipulations of the treaty concluded in London on the 24th of June, (the 6th of
July) 1827, between Russia. Great Britain, and France, accedes, equally, to
the act drawn up on the 10th of March, (22d) 1829, by mutual consent, be-
tween these same powers on the basis of the said treaty, and containing the
arrangement of detail, relative to its definitive execution. Immediately after
the exchange of the ratification of the present treaty of peace, the Sublime
Porte shall appoint plenipotentiaries to settle with those of the Imperial Court
214 RUSSIA AND TURKEY. [..?drianople,
of Russia, and of the courts of England and France, the execution of the said
stipulation, and arrangements.
ART. XI. Immediately after the signature of the present treaty of peace
between the two empires, and the exchange of the ratification of the two sove-
reigns, the Sublime Porte shall take the necessary measures for the prompt
and scrupulous execution of the stipulations which it contains, and particularly
of the third and fourth articles, relative to the limits which are to separate the
two empires, as well in Europe as in Asia; and of the fifth and sixth articles,
respecting the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia, as well as Servia;
and from the moment when these stipulations can be considered as having been
fulfilled, the Imperial Court of Russia will proceed to the evacuation of the
territory of the Ottoman empire, conformable to the basis established by a
separate act, which forms an integral part of the present treaty of peace.
Until the complete evacuation of the territories occupied by the Russian
troops, the administration and the order of things there establiahed at the pre-
sent time, under the influence of the Imperial Court of Russia, shall be main-
tained, and the Sublime Ottoman Porte shall not interfere with them in any
Iſla [ll] e I’.
ART. XII. Immediately after the signature of the present treaty of peace,
orders shall be given to the commanders of the respective troops, as well by
land as by sea, to cease hostilities. Those committed after the signature of
the present treaty shall be considered as not having taken place, and shall oc-
casion no change in the stipulations which it contains. In the same manner
any thing which in that interval shall have been conquered by the troops of
either one or the other of the high contracting powers, shall be restored with-
out the least delay.
ART. XIII. The high contracting powers, while re-establishing between
themselves the relations of sincere amity, grant general pardon, and a full and
entire amnesty, to all those of their subjects, of whatever condition they may
be, who during the course of the war happily terminated this day, shall have
taken part in military operations, or manifested, either by their conduct or
their opinions, their attachment to one or the other of the two contracting pow-
ers. In consequence, not one of these individuals shall be molested or prose-
cuted, either in his person or goods, on account of his past conduct; and every
one of them, recovering the property which be possessed before, shall enjoy it
peaceably under the protection of the laws, or shall be at liberty to transport
himself, with his family, his goods, his furniture, &c. into any country which
he may please to choose, without experiencing any vexations or impediments
whatever.
There shall be granted besides to the respective subjects of the two pow-
e's established in the territories restored to the Sublime Porte, or ceded to the
imperial court of Russia, the same tern of 18 months, to cominence from the
exchange of the ratification of the present treaty of peace, to dispose, if they
Sept. 14, 1829.] RUSSIA AND TURKEY. 215
think proper, of their property acquired either before or since the war, and to
retire, with their capital, their goods, furniture, &c., from the states of one of
the contracting powers into those of the other, and reciprocally.
ART. XIV. All prisoners of war, of whatever nation, condition, or sex
they may be, which are in the two empires, must immediately, after the ex-
change of the ratifications of the present treaty of peace, be set free, and re-
stored without the least ransom or payment; with the exception of the Chris-
tians who, of their own free will, have embraced the Mahomedan religion in
the states of the Sublime Porte, or the Mahomedans who, who, also of their
own free will, have embraced the Christian religion in the territories of the
Russian empire.
The same conduct shall be adopted towards the Russian subjects, who,
after the signature of the present of peace, may in any manner whatever have
fallen into captivity, and be found in the states of the Sublime Porte.
The imperial court of Russia promises on its part to act in the same way to-
wards the subjects of the Sublime Porte. No repayment shall be required
for the sums which have been applied by the two high contracting parties to
the support of prisoners. Each of them shall provide the prisoners with all
that may be necessary for their journey as far as the frontiers; where they
shall be exchanged by commissioners appointed on both sides.
ART. XV. All the treaties, conventions, and stipulations, settled and
concluded at different periods between the imperial court of Russia and the
Ottoman Porte, with the exception of those which have been annuiled by the
present treaty of peace, are confirmed in all their force and effect, and the two
high contracting parties engage to observe them religiously and inviolably.
ART. XVI. The present treaty of peace shall be ratified by the two high
contracting courts, and the exchange of the ratifications between the respective
plenipotentiaries shall take place within the space of six weeks, or earlier, if
possible. In faith of which, [Signed] Count ALEx Is ORLIF.
Jount J. PAHLEN.
In virtue, &c. [Signed] DIEBITschi ZABALRANSKy.
SEPARATE Act, relating to the principalities of Jīoldavia and Wallachta.
In the name of Almighty God.
The two high contracting powers, at the same time that they confirm all the stipulations of
the separate act of Akerman, relative to the forms to be observed on the election of the hospo-
dars of Moldavia and Wallachia, have recognised the necessity of giving to the administration
of those provinces a more durable basis, and one more in harmony with their true interests. With
this view, it has been, and is definitively resolved, that the reign of the hospodars shall not, as
formerly, be limited to seven years, but they shall be invested with the dignity ſor life, except in
the case of a free and unconstrained abdication, or of an expulsion in consequence of crimes com-
mitted as detailed in the said separate act.
The hospodars are to administer the internal government of their provinces, with the assis-
tance of their divan, according to their own pleasure; but without permitting themselves any
infraction of the rights guarantied to the two countries by treaties or hatti sherifs, nor shall their
administration be disturbed by any command tending to the violation of those rights.
The S Porte obliges itself conscientiously to keep watch that the privileges granted to Moldavia
and Wallachia shall in no way be violated by the neighbouring governors, and that these shall in
21 6 RUSSIA AND TURKEY. [Adrianople, Sept.14, 1829
no way be allowed to interfere in the affairs of those two provinces; also to prevent the inh bitants
of the right bank of the Danube from making excursions upon the territory of Mºldavia and
Wallachia. All isles situated nearest to the left bank of the Danube, are to be considered as part
of the territory of those provinces; and from the point where it enters the Ottoman territory, to
the point of its confluence with the Pruth, the channel of the Danube is to fºrm the boundaries of
the two principalities.
To provide the more securely for the more inviolability of the Moldavian and Wallachian
territory, the Sublime Porte engages to retain no fortified point upon the left bank of the Danube,
nor to permit any settlement there of its Mahometan subjects. It is accordingly irrevocably fixed
that no Mahometan shall ever be allowed to have his residence in Moldavia or Wallachia, and
that only merchants, provided with firmans, shall be ad mitted for the purpose of buying, on their
account, such articles as may be required for the consumption of Constantinople.
The Turkish cities, situated on the left bank of the Danube, are to be restored to Wallachia,
to remain incorporated with that principality; and the fortifications previously existing on that
bank, are never to be repaired. Mahometans possessing landed property, either in those cities,
or upon any point left of the Danube, provided they have not unfairly become possessed thereof,
(non usurpes sur des particuliers) shall be bound to sell such property to natives within eighteen
months.
The government of the principalities being entitled to all the privileges of independence in
their internal administration, it shall be lawful for the same to draw sanatary condons, and to
establish quarantine stations along the line of the Danube, and wherever else it may seem necessary;
nor shall any strangers, be they Christians or Mahometans, have a right to consider themselves
above an exact compliance with such quarantine regulations. For the execution of the quarantine
duty, the protection of the frontiers, the maintenance of order in the cities and in the open country,
and for the purpose of obedience to their decrees, the government of each principality shall be
permitted to maintain a sufficient military force. The numerical force of these troops is to be
determined by the hospodars and their respective divans, upon the basis of former examples.
The Sublime Porte, animated by an earnest wish to secure to the two principalities every
spieces of prosperity which they are capable of enjoving, and being aware of the abuses and op-
pression oceasioned by the contributions for the supply of Constantinople, and the victualling of
of the fortresses of the Danube, renounces, in the most complete and unconditional manner, its
rights in this respect. Moldavia and Wallachia are accordingly for ever relieved of all those con-
tributions of corn, provisions, cattle, and timber, which they were formerly bound to furnish. —
Nor shall, in any case, labourers be demanded from those provinces for any forced service (corvee.)
In order, however, in some degree to indemnify the grand seignorial treasury for the losses which
may be sustained by this renunciation of rights, Moldavia and Wallachia are bound, independent-
ly of the yearly tribute paid under the denomination of Kharadsh Idiye, and Rakiabiye, by virtue
of the hatti sherif of 1822, to pay the Sublime Porte yearly, a pecuniary indemnity, the amount of
which is hereafter to be determined. Moreover, upon every fresh nomination of a hospodar, in
cousequence of death, resignation, or deposition, the principality where that event occurs, shall
be bound to pay to the Sublime Porte, a sum equal to the yearly tribute of the province. With
the exception of these sums, no tribute or present of any kind shall, under any pretext whatever,
be demanded from the hospodars.
In consequence of the abolition of the above special contributions, the inhabitants of the prin-
cipalities are to enjoy an unlimited freedom of trade for all the productions of their soil and indus-
try, as stipulated by the separate act of the treaty of Akerman, the same not to be liable to
any other restraint, except such as the hospodars, with the consent of their divans, may consider
necessary to the due provisioning of the country; they shall be allowed to navigate the Danube
with their own vessels, being provided with passports from their own governments; and it shall be
lawful for them to proceed, for the purpose of trade, to the other harbours and ports of the Sub-
lime Porte, without suffering any persecution from the collectors of the Kharadsh, and without
being exposed to any other act of oppression whatever.
Duly considering, moreover, all the burdens which it has been necessary for Moldavia and
London, May 7, 1832.] SOVEREIGNTY OF GREECE. 217
Wallachia to support the Sublime Porte, animated by a proper feeling of humanity, consents to
release the inhabitants from the yearly tribute payable to the treasury for the space of two years,
to be reckoned from the day of the total evacuation of the principalities by the Russian troops.
Finally, the Sublime Porte, animated by the wish to secure, in every possible way, the future
prosperity of the two principalities, binds itself to confirm every administrative measure which,
during their occupation by the Russian army, may have been decreed, in conformity to a wish
expressed in the assemblies of the principal inhabitants of the country, such decrees serving thence-
forward as the basis of the internal administ ation of those provinces: provided always, that such
decrees do not, in any way infringe upon the rights of sovereignty vested in the Sublime Porte.
On this account, we, the undersigned plenipotentiaries of his majesty, the emperor and
padishah of all the Russias, have, conjointly with the plenipotentieries of the Sublime Ottoman
Porto regulated and fixed the points respecting Moldavia and Wallachia, the same being a continua-
tion of article 5 of the treaty of peace concluded at Adrianople, between us and the Ottoman
plenipotentiaries.
Done at Adrianople, 2d (14th) September, 1829.
(Signed) Count ALExis O'H Loff, Count F. V. PAHLEN.
Confirmed in the original copy by Count Di EBITsch ZABALKANSKY, Commander-in-chief of
the second army.
No. 43. Convention relative to the Sovereignty of Greece, between His Majesty
the King of Great Britain. His Majesty the King of the French, and the
Emperor of all the Russias, on the one part, and the King of Bavaria,
on the other. Signed at London. May 7, 1832.
The Courts of Great Britain, France, and Russia, exercising the power
conveyed to them by the Greek nation, to make choice of a Sovereign for Greece,
raised to the rank of an Independent State, and being desirous of giving to
that country a fresh proof of their friendly disposition, by the election of a
Prince descended from a Royal House, the friendship and alliance of which
cannot fail to be of essential service to Greece, and which has already acquired
claims to her esteem and gratitude, have resolved to offer the Crown of the new
Greek State to the Prince Frederick Otho of Bavaria, second son of His Ma-
jesty the King of Bavaria.
His Majesty the King of Bavaria, on his part, acting in the character of
guardian of the said Prince Otho during his minority, participating in the
views of the three Courts, and duly appreciating the motives which have in-
duced them to fix their choice upon a Prince of his House. has determined to
accept the Crown of Greece for his second son, the Prince Frederick Otho of
Bavaria.
In consequence of such acceptance, and for the purpose of agreeing upon
the arrangements which it has rendered necessary, their Majesties the King
of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the King of the French,
and the Emperor of all the Russias, on the one part, and his Majesty the King
of Bavaria, on the other, have named as their Plenipotentiaries, viz:
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, the Right Honourable Henry John Wiscount Palmerston, Baron Tem-
ple, &c. &c. &c.
His Majesty the King of the French, the Sieur Charles Maurice de Tal-
leyanºgºrd, Prince-Duke de Talleyrand, &c. &c. &c.
218 SOWEREIGNTY OF GREECE. [London,
His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the Sieur Christopher Prince
of Lieven, General of Infantry in his Armies, &c. &c. &c. And the Sieur
Adam, Count Matuszewic, Privy Councillor of his said Majesty, &c. &c. &c.
And his Majesty the King of Bavaria, the Sieur Augustus, Baron de
Cetto, his Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to his Britannic
Majesty:-
Who, after having exchanged their full powers, found to be in good and
due form, have agreed upon and signed the following Articles:—
A Rt. I. The Courts of Great Britain, France, and Russia, duly author-
ised for this purpose by the Greek nation, offer the hereditary Sovereignty of
Greece to the Prince Frederick Otho of Bavaria, second son of his Majesty the
King of Bavaria.
ART II. His Majesty the King of Bavaria, acting in the name of his said
son, a minor, accepts, on his behalf, the hereditary Sovereignty of Greece, on
the conditions hereinafter settled.
ART. III. The Prince Otho of Bavaria shall bear the title of King of
Greece.
ART IV. Greece, under the sovereignty of the Prince Otho of Bavaria,
and under the guarantee of the three Courts, shall form a Monarchical and in-
dependent State, according to the terms of the Protocol, signed between the
said Courts, on the 3d of February, 1830," and accepted both by Greece and
by the Ottoman Porte.
ART. V. The limits of the Greek State shall be such as shall be defini-
tively settled by the negociations which the Courts of Great Britain, France,
and Russia, have recently opened with the Ottoman Porte, in execution of the
Protocol of the 26th Sept. 1831.
ART. V.1. The three Courts having beforehand determined to convert the
Protocol of the 3d of February, 1830, into a definitive Treaty, as soon as the
negociations relative to the limits of Greece shall have determined, and to
communicate such Treaty to all the States with which they have relations, it
is hereby agreed that they shall fulfil this engagement, and that his Majesty
the King of Greece shall become a contracting party to the treaty in question.
ART. VII. The three Courts shall, from the present moment, use their
influence to procure the recognition of the Prince Otho of Bavaria as King of
Greece, by all the Sovereigns and States with whom they have relations.
ART. VIII. The Royal Crown and dignity shall be hereditary in Greece;
and shall pass to the direct and lawful descendants and heirs of the Prince
Otho of Bavaria, in the order of primogeniture. In the event of the decease
of Prince Otho of Bavaria without direct and lawful issue, the Crown of Greece
shall pass to his younger brother, and to his direct and lawful descendants and
heirs, in the order of primogeniture. In the event of the decease of the last-
mentioned Prince also, without direct and lawful issue, the Crown of Greece
* See page 221.
May 7, 1832.] SOWEREIGNTY OF GREECE. 219
shall pass to his younger brother and to his direct and lawful descendants and
heirs, in the order of primogeniture.
In no case shall the Crown of Greece and the Crown of Bavaria be united
upon the same head. ".
ART. IX. The majority of the Prince Otho of Bavaria, as King of Greece,
is fixed at the period when he shall have completed his 20th year—that is to say,
on the 1st of June, 1835.
ART. X. During the minority of the Prince Otho Bavaria King of Greece,
his rights of Sovereignty shall be exercised in their full extent by a Regency,
composed of three Councillors, who shall be appointed by his Majesty the King
of Bavaria.
ART. XI. The Prince Otho of Bavaria shall retain the full possession of his
appanages in Bavaria. His Majesty the King of Bavaria, moreover engages
to assist, as far as may be in his power, the Prince Otho in his position in
Greece, until a revenue shall have been set apart for the Crown in that State.
ART. XII. In execution of the stipulations of the Protocol of the 3d. of
February, 1830, his Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias engages to guar-
antee, and their Majesties the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland and the King of the French, engage to recommend, the former
to his Parliament, the latter to his Chambers, to enable their Majesties to
guarantee, on, the following conditions, a loan to be contracted by the Prince
Otho of Bavaria, as King of Greece.
1. The principal of the loan to be contracted under the guarantee of the
three Powers shall not exceed a total amount of 60,000,000 of francs.
2. The said loan shall be raised by instalments of 20,000,000 of francs
each.
3. For the present, the first intalment only shall be raised, and the three
Courts shall each become responsibie for the payment of one-third of the
annual amount of the interest and sinking fund of the instalment.
4. The second and the third instalments of the said loan may also be raised
according to the necessities of the Greek State, after previous agreement
between the three Courts and his majesty the King of Greece.
5. In the event of the second and third instalments of the above men-
tioned loan being raised in consequence of such an agreement, the three Courts
shall each become responsible for the payment of one-third of the annual amount
of the interest and sinking fund of these two instalments, as well as of the first.
6. The Sovereign of Greece and the Greek State shall be bound to appro-
priate to the payment of the interest and sinking fund of such instalments of
the loan as may have been raised under the guarantee of the three Courts, the
first revenues of the State, in such manner that the actual receipts of the
Greek Treasury shall be devoted, first of all, to the payment of the said
interest and sinking fund, and shall not be employed for any other purpose, until
those payments on account of the instalments of the loan raised under the
guarantee of the three Courts shall have been completely secured for the
surrent year. -
220 soverFIGNTY OF GREECE. [London, May 7, 1832
The diplomatic represeatatives of the three Courts in Greece shall be
specially charg, d to watch over the fulfilment of the last-mentioned stipulation.
ART.XIII. In case a pecuniary compensationtin favour of the Ottoman Porte
should result from the negotiation which the three Courts have already opened
at Constantinople for the definitive settlement of the limits of Greece, it is un-
derstood that the amount of such compensation shall be defrayed out of the
proceeds of the loan which forms the subject of the preceding Article.
ART. XIV. His M. the King of Bavaria shall lend his assistance to the
Prince Otho in raising in Bavaria a body of troops, not exceeding 3,500 men,
to be employed in his service, as King of Greece, which corps shall be armed,
equipped and paid by the Greek State, and be sent thither as soon as possible,
in order to relieve the troops of the Alliance hitherto stationed in Greece. The
latter shall remain in that country entirely at the disposal of the Government
of his Majesty the King of Greece, until the arrival of the body of troops above-
mentioned. Immediately upon their arrival, the troops of the Alliance already
referred to shall retire and altogether evacuate the Greek territory
ART XV. His M. the King of Bavaria shall also assist the Prince Otho in
obtaining the services of a certain number of Bavarian officers, who shall
organize a national military force in Greece.
ART XV1. As soon as possible after the signature of the present convention
the three Councillors who are to be associated with his Royal Highness the
Prince Otho by his Majesty the King of Bavaria, in order to compose the Re-
gency of Greece, shall repair to Greece, shall enter upon the exercise of the
functions of the said Regency, and shall prepare all the measures necessary for
the reception of the sovereign, who, on his part, will repair to Greece with as
little delay as possible.
ART.XVII. The three courts shall announce to the Greek nation by a joint
declaration, the choice which they have made of his Royal Highness the Prince
Otho of Bavaria as King of Greece, and shall afford the Regency all the support
in their power. *
A Rt. XVIII. The present convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications
shall be exchanged in London in six weeks, or sooner if possible.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
Done at London the 7th day of May, in the year of our Lord, 1832.
[L. s] PALM FRSTON. [L. s. M ATusz Ewic.
[L. S.] TALLEY RAND. [L. S. J. A. DE CETTo,
[L. S.] LIEVEN.
London, Feb. 3, 1830.] GREEK PROTOCOL. 221
No. 44. Greek Protocol February 3, 1830 [referred to in page 218].
Official copy of the Conference held at London, in the Foreign Office.
Present, the Plenipotentiaries of France, Great Britain and Russia.
At the opening of the conference, the Plenipotentiaries of his Britannic Majesty, and of his
most Christian Majesty, expressed to the Plenipotentiary of his Imperial Majesty, their wish to
be informed in what point of view he considered the tenth article of the treaty recently signed at
Adrianople, between Russia and the Ottoman Empire—an article which has respect to the affairs
of Greece. The Plenipotentiary of his imperial Majesty declared that the tenth article of the
treaty in question did not invalidate the rights of the Allies of the Emperor, shackle the delibera-
tions of the Ministers assembled in conference at London, nor place any obstacles in the way of
the arrangements which the three Courts should by common consent adjudge to be most useful,
and best adapted to circumstances. After this declaration, the Plenipotentiary of his Britannic
Majesty produced to the conference a joint despatch, in which the Ambassadors of Great Britain
and France at Constantinople transmitted a declaration of the Porte, dated 9th of September, an-
nouncing that ‘ that the Porte, having already adhered to the Treaty of London, now promises
and engages, in addition, in the presence of the Representative of the Powers—parties to the
treaty aforesaid, to subscribe entirely to all the determinations which the conference at London
may decide on relative to its execution.” The reading of this document caused a unanimous
recognition of the obligation which the Alliance was under, to proceed, in the first place, to the
immediate establishment of an armistice by land and sea, between the Turks and Greeks. It is
resolved, in consequence, that the Plenipotentiaries of the three Courts at Constantinople, their
Residents in Greece, and the Admirals in the Archipelago, shall receive, without delay, an order
to demand and obtain from the contending parties, a prompt and entire cessation of hostilities.
To this effect, instructions were agreed upon, and issued to the aforesaid Penipotentiaries and
Residents, and also to the three Admirals, for the re-establishment of peace between Russia and
the Porte, permitting the Russian Admiral to take part in the operations of his colleagues of England
and France. The first resolutions being agreed upon, the Members of the Conference, finding
that the Ottoman declarations placed them in the position of concerting such measures as to them
should appear preferable to adopt in the actual state of affairs, and being desirous of adding to
the anterior dispositions of the Alliance such ameliorations as might be most conducive to the
assuring new pledges for the stability of the peace about which they were employed, have, by
common consent, issued the following clauses –
First. Greece shall form an independent state, and shall enjoy all the rights, political, ad-
ministrative, and commercial, attached to complete independence.
Second. In consideration of these advantages granted to the new State, and in deference to
the wish expressed by the Porte to obtain a reduction of the frontiers fixed by the Protocol of the
22d March, the line of demarcation of the Grecian boundaries, commencing at the mouth of the
River Aspropotamos, shall run up that river as high as the Lake d’Anghelo Castro, crossing
which, as well as those of Vrachori and Saurovitza, it shall abut to Mount Artolina, whence it
shall follow the crest of Mount Olta, as far as the gulf of Zeitoun, whence it reaches the mouth
of the Sperchio. All the lands and territories situate to the south of this line which the confer-
ence has specially indicated shall belong to Greece; and all the lands and territories to the north
of the same line shall continue to form part of the Ottoman empire. The whole Island of Ne-
gropont and the isles Du Diable shall equally belong to Greece, together with the island of Skyro
and those anciently comprised under the name of the Cyclades, situate between 36 and 39 degrees
of north latitude, and 26 and 29 degrees of longitude from the meridian of Greenwich.
Third. The Government of Greece shall be monarchical and hereditary, by order of primo-
geniture; it shall be confided to a Prince who shall not be selected from the reigning families of
the States subscribing to the Treaty of the 6th July, 1827, and who shall bear the title of Sove-
reign Prince of Greece. The choice of this Prince shall be the subject of ulterior communica-
tions and stipulations,
222 GREEK PROTOCOL. [London, Feb. 3, 1830.
Fourth. As soon as the clauses of the present Protocol shall have been communicated to the
parties interested, peace between the Ottoman Empire and Greece shall be considered as ipso
facto established; and the subjects of the two states shall be reciprocally treated as respects the
rights of commerce and navigation, as those of other States at peace with the Ottoman Empire and
with Greece.
Fifth. Acts of Amnesty, full and entire, shall be immediately published by the Ottoman
Porte and the Greek Government. -
The Act of Amnesty of the Porte shall proclaim that no Greek in the whole extent of its
dominions shall be deprived of his property, or disturbed in consequence of any part he may have
taken in the Greek insurrection.
The Act of Amnesty of the Greek Government shall proclaim the same principle in favor of
all Mussulmans or Christians who shall have taken part against its cause ; and it shall be, more-
over, understood and published, that all Mussulmans who shall wish to continue to inhabit the
territories and islands assigned to Greece, shall, together with their families, enjoy invariably the
most perfect security.
Siacth. The Ottoman Porte shall grant to such of its Greek subjects as shall desire to quit the
Turkish territory the delay of a year, for the purpose of disposing of their property, and free
egress from the country. The greek Government shall afford the same liberty to the inhabitants
of Greece who shall wish to transport themselves into the Turkish territories.
Seventh. All the Grecian forces, both by land and sea, shall evacuate the territories, places
and islands which they may occupy beyond the line assigned as the limits of Greece in the 2d Ar-
ticle, and shall retire within the same line with the least possible delay. All the Turkish troops,
by land and sea, which occupy territories, or places or islands comprised within the limits above-
mentioned, shall evacuate those islands, places and territories, and retire within the limits afore-
said, and equally with the least possible delay.
Eighth. Each of the three Courts shall retain the power assured to it by the 6th Article of
the Treaty of 6th July, 1827, of guarantying, in concert, the preceding clauses. The execution
of carrying into effect these different acts shall become, pursuant to the aforesaid Article, the
subject of ulterior stipulations between the high contracting parties No troops belonging to
either of the high contracting parties shall enter the territory of the new State without the con-
sent of the other two subscribers to the Treaty.
JWinth. In order to avoid the collisions which can hardly fail, under existing circumstances,
to arise from a contact between the Commissioners for the Greek demarcation, when they shall
be engaged in tracing out the Grecian frontiers, it is agreed that this task shall be confided to Bri-
tish, French, and Russian Commissioners, and that each of the three Courts shall nominate one.
These Commissioners, furnished with similar instructions, shall trace out the above-mentioned
frontier, following with all possible accuracy the line indicated in the second article; they shall
mark this line by boundary posts, and shall draw up two papers, signed by themselves, one of
which shall be transmitted to the Ottoman government, the other to that of Greece. They shall
be directed to complete their labors within the space of six months. In case of any difference of
opinion between the Commissioners, the majority of votes shall decide.
Tenth. The provisions of the present Protocol shall be immediately transmitted to the Otto-
man government by the Plenipotentiaries of the three Courts, who shall be furnished with com-
mon and joint instructions to this effect. The Residents in Greece belonging to the three Courts
reserve to themselves the power of inserting the present stipulations in a formal treaty, to be
signed at London, to be considered as carrying into execution that of the 6th July 1827, and to be
communicated to the European Courts, with an invitation to them to accede to it, if they shall
think proper.
In conclusion—Having thus reached the end of a long and difficult negociation, the three
Courts congratulate each other sincerely on the perfect unanimity which has prevailed between
in the midst of circumstances the most delicate and important. The maaintenance of this unan-
imity in such moments presents the best pledge of its durability; and the three Courts flatter
themselves that this union, equally firm and beneficial, will not fail to contribute to the consolidi. “
tion of the peace of the whole world.
zondon, Dec.28, 1826] G. BRITAIN AND MEXICO. 223
No. 45. Treaty of .4mity, Commerce, and Navigation, between Great Britain
and Mearico. Signed at London, December 26, 1826.
In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity.
Bxtensive commercial intercourse having been established, for some time,
between the dominions of His Britannic Majesty and the United States of
Mexico, it seems good for the security, as well as the encouragement of such
commercial intercourse, and for the maintenance of good understan ding
between His said Britannic Majesty and the said States, that the relations
now subsisting between them should be regularly acknowledged and confirmed,
by the signature of a Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation.
For this purpose they have named their respective Plenipotentiaries, that
Så W 3.
iS to fº. Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
the Right Honourable William Huskisson, a Member of His said Majesty's
Most Honourable Privy Council, &c. and James Morier, Esq:—
And His Excellency the President of the United States of Mexico, His
Excellency Señor Sebastian Camacho, His First Minister of State, and for
the Department of Foreign Affairs:
Who, after having communicated to each other their full powers, found
to be in due and proper form, have agreed upon and concluded the following
Articles:—
ART. I. There shall be perpetual amity between the dominions and sub-
jects of His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, and the United States of Mexico, and their citizens.
Art. II. There shall be, between all the territories of His B. Majesty in
Europe and the territories of Mexico, a reciprocal freedom of commerce. The
inhabitants of the two countries, respectively, shall have liberty freely and
securely to come, with their ships and cargoes, to all places, ports and rivers
in the territories aforesaid, saving only such particular ports to which other
foreigners shall not be permitted to come, to enter into the same, and to re-
main and reside in any part of the said territories respectively; also to hire
and occupy houses and warehouses for the purposes of their commerce; and,
generally, the merchants and traders of each nation. respectively, shall enjoy
the most complete protection and security for their commerce.
In like manner, the respective ships of war, and post-office packets of the
two countries, shall have liberty freely and securely to come to all harbours,
rivers and places, saving only such particular ports (if any) to which other
foreign ships of war and packets shall not be permitted to come, to enter into
the same, to anchor, and to remain there and refit; subject always to the laws
and statues of the two countries, respectively.
By the right of entering the places, ports and rivers mentioned in this
Article, the privilege of carrying on the coasting trade is not understood, in
which national vessels only are permitted to engage.
ART.III. His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of G. Britain and
224, G. BRITAIN AND MEXICO. London, Dec. 26, 1826
Ireland engages further, that the inhabitants of Mexico shall have the like
liberty of commerce and navigation stipulated for in the preceding Article,
in all his dominions situated out of Europe, to the full extent in which the
same is permitted at present, or shall be permitted hereafter, to any other na-
tion.
IV. No higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation into
the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, of any article of the growth, pro-
duce, or manufacture of Mexico, and no higher or other duties shall be im-
posed on the importation into the territories of Mexico, of any articles of the
growth, produce or manufacture, of His Britannic Majesty's dominions, than
are or shall be payable on the like articles, being the growth, produce, or man-
ufacture of any other foreign country; nor shall any other or higher duties or
charges be imposed in the territories or dominions of either of the Contracting
Parties, on the exportation of any articles to the territories of the other, than
such as are or may be payable on the exportation of the like articles to any other
foreign country; nor shall any prohibition be imposed upon the exportation of
any articles the growth, produce, or m anufacture of His Britannic Majesty’s
dominions, or of the said territories of Mexico. to or from the said territories
of Mexico, which shall not equally extend to all other nations.
V. No higher or other duties or charges on account of tonnage. light, or
harbour dues, pilotage, salvage in case of damage or shipwreck, or any other
local charges, shall be imposed, in any of the ports of Mexico, on British ves-
sels, than those payable, in the same ports by Mexican vessels; nor in the
ports of His Britannic Mºjesty’s territories, on Mexican vessels, than shall
be payable, in the same ports, o' British vessels.
VI. The same duties shall be paid on the importation into the territories
of Mexico, of any article the growth, produce, or manufacture of His Britannic
Majestv’s dominions, whether such importation shall be in Mexican or in Bri.
tish vessels; and the same duties shall be paid on the importation into the
dominions of His Britannic Majesty, of any article the growth, produce, or
manufacture of Mexico, whether such importation small be in British or in
Mexican vessels. The same duties shall be paid, and the same bounties and
drawbacks allowed, on the exportation to Mexico of any articles of the growth,
produce, or manufacture of His Britannic Majesty’s dominions, whether such
exportation shall be in Mexican or in British vessels; and the same duties
shall be paid, and the same bounties and drawbacks allowed, on the exporta-
tion of any articles, the growth, produce or manufacture of Mexico, to His
Britannic Majesty’s dominions, whether such exportation shall be in British or
in Mexican vessels.
VII. In order to avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the regulations
which may respectively constitute a British or Mexican vessel, it is hereby
agreed that all vessels built in the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, or
vessels which shall have been captured from an enemy by His Britannic
Eondon, Dec. 26, 1826.j G. BRITAIN AND MEXICO. 225
Majesty's ships of war, or by subjects of His said Majesty furnished with let-
ters of tharque by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, and regularly
coudemned in one of His said Majesty's Prize Courts as a lawful prize, or
which shall have been condemned in any competent Court for the brºach of
the laws made for the prevention of the Slave Trade, and owned, navigated,
and registered according to the laws of Great Britain, shall be considered as
British vessels: and that all vessels built in the territories of Mexico, or cap-
tured from the enemy by the ships of Mexico, and condemned under similar
circuumstances, and which shall be owned by any citizen or citizens thereof,
and whereof the master and three fourths of the mariners are citizens of
Mexico, excepting where the laws provide for any extreme cases, shall be
considered as Mexican vessels.
And it is further agreed, that every vessel, qualified to trade as above
described, under the provisions of this Treaty, shall be furnished with a regis-
ter, passport, or sea letter, under the signature of the p oper person authorized
to grant the same, according to the laws of the respective countries, (the form
of which shall be communicated,) certifying the name, occupation, and resi-
dence of the owner or owners, in the dominions of His B. Majesty, or in the
territories of Mexico, as the case may be; and that he, or they, is, or are, the
sole owner or owners, in the proportion to be specified: together with the name
burthen, and description of the vessel. as to built and measurement, and the
several particulars constituting the national character of the vessel, as the
ease may be.
VIII. All merchants, commanders of ships, and others, the subjects of
His Britannic Majesty, shall have full liberty, in all the territories of Mexico,
to manage their own affairs themselves, or to commit them to the management
of whomsoever they please, as broker, factor, agent, or interpreter: nor shall
they be obliged to employ any other persons for those purposes than those
employed by Mexicans, nor to pay them any other salary or remuneration than
such as is paid, in like cases, by Mexican citizens; and absolute freedom small
be allowed, in all cases, to the buyer and seller, to bargain and fix the price of
any goods, wares, or merchandise, imported into, or exported from Mexico, as
they shall see good, observing the laws and established customs of the coun-
try. The same privileges shall be enjoyed in the domitions of His Britannic
Majesty, by the citizens of Mexico, under the same conditions.
The citizens and subjects of the Contracting Parties, in the territories of
each other, shall receive and enjoy full and perfect protection for their per-
sons and property, and shall have free and open access to the Courts of Justice
in the said countries, respectively, for the prosecution and defence of their just
rights; and they shall be at liberty to employ, in all causes, the advocates,
attornies, or agents of whatever description, whom they may thi k proper;
and they shall enjoy, in this respect, the same rights and privileges therein, as
native citizens.
29
226 G. BRITAIN AND MEXICO. [London, Dec.26, 1826,
IX. In whatever relates to the succession to personal estates, by will or
otherwise. and the disposal of personal property of every sort and denomina-
tion, by sale, donation, exchange, or testament, or in any other manner what-
soever, as also the administration of justice, the subjects and citizens of the
two Contracting Parties shall enjoy, in their respective dominions and territo-
ries, the same privileges, liberties, and rights, as native subjects; and shall
not be charged, in any of these respects, with any higher imposts or duties,
than those which are paid, or may be paid, by the native subjects or citizens
of the power in whose dominions or territories they may be resident.
X. In all that relates to the police of the ports, the lading and unlading
of ships, the safety of merchandize, goods, and effects, the subjects of His
Britannic Majesty, and the citizens of Mexico, respectively, shall be subject
to the local laws and regulations of the dominions and territories in which
they may reside. They shall be exempted from all compulsory military ser-
vice, whether by sea or land. No forced loans shall be levied upon them; tıor
shall their property be subject to any other charges, requisitions or taxes, than
such as are paid by the native subjects or citizens of the Contracting Parties,
in their respective dominions.
XI. It shall be free for each of the two Contracting Parties to appoint
Consuls for the protection of trade, to reside in the dominions and territories
of the other party: but, before any Consul shall act as such, he shall, in the
usual form, be approved and admitted by the Government to which he is sent;
and either of the Contracting Parties may except from the residence of Con-
suls such particular places as either of them may judge fit to be excepted.
The Mexican diplomatic Agents and Consuls shall enjoy, in the dominions of
His Britannic Majesty, whatever privileges, exceptions, and immunities are
or shall be granted to Agents of the same rank belonging to the most favoured
nation: and, in like manner, the diplomatic Agents and Consuls of His Bri-
tannic **ajesty in the Mexican territories shall enjoy, according to the stric-
test reciprocity, whatever privileges, exceptions, and immunities are or may
be granted to the Mexican diplomatic Agents and Consuls in the dominions of
His Britannic Majesty.
XII. For the better security of commerce between the subjects of His
Britannic Majesty and the citizens of the Mexican States, it is agreed that if,
at any time, any interruption of friendly intercourse, or any rupture should
unfortunately take place between the two Contracting Parties, the merchants
residing upon the coasts shall be allowed 6 months, and those of the interior a
whole year, to wind up their accounts, and dispose of their property; and that
a safe conduct shall be given them to embark at the port which they shall
themselves select. All those who are established in the respective dominions
and territories of the two Contracting Parties, in the exercise of any trade or
special emplov ment, shall have the privilege of remaining and continu.ng such
trade and employment therein, without any manner of interruption, in full
London, Dec. 26, 1826. G. BRITAIN AND MEXICG. 227
enjoyment of their liberty and property, as long as they behave peaceably, and
commit no offence against the laws; and their goods and effects, of whatever
description they may be, shall not be liable to seizure or sequestration, or to
any other charges or demands than those which may be made upon the like
effects or property, belonging to the native subjects or citizens of the respec-
tive dominions or territories in which such subjects or citizens may reside.
In the same case, debts between individuals, public funds, and the shares of
sompanies, shall never be confiscated, sequestereº, or detained.
XIII. The subjects of His Britannic Majesty, residing in the Mexican
territories, shall enjoy, in their houses, persons and properties, the protection
of the Government; and, continuing in possession of what they now enjoy,
they shall not be disturbed, molested, or annoyed, in any manner, on account,
of their religion, provided they respect that of the nation in which they reside,
as well as the constitution, laws, and customs of the country. They shall
continue to enjoy, to the full, the privilege already granted to them of burying,
in the places already assigned for that purpose, such subjects of His Britannic
Majesty as may die within the Mexican territories; nor shall the funerals and
sepulchres of the dead be disturbed in any way, or upon any account. The
citizens of Mexico shall enjoy in all the dominions of His Britannic Majesty,
the same protection, and shall be allowed the free exercise of their religion, in
public or private, either within their own houses, or in the chapels and places
of worship set apart for that purpose.
XIV. The subjects of His Bitannic Majesty, shall, on no account or pre-
text whatsoever, be disturbed or molested in the peaceable possession and
exercise of whatever rights, privileges, and immunities they have at any time
enjoyed within the limits described and laid down in a Convention, signed
between His said Majesty and the King of Spain, on the 14th of July 1786;*
whether such rights, privileges, and immunities shall be derived from the
stipulations of the said Convention, or from any other concession which may
at any time, have been made by the King of Spain, or his predecessors, to
British subjects and settlers residing and following their lawful occupations
within the limits aforesaid: the two Contracting Parties reserving, however,
for some more fitting opportunity, the further arrangements on this Article.
XV. The Government of Mexico engages to co-operate with His Britannic
Majesty for the total abolition of the Slave Trade, and to prohibit all persons
inhabiting within the territories of Mexico, in the most effectual manner, from
taking any share in such trade. A
XVI. The two Contracting Parties reserve to themselves the right of
treating and agreeing hereafter, from time to time, upon such other Articles
as may appear to them to contribute still further to the improvement of their
mutuai intercourse, and the advancement of the general interests of their
* See Wol, II, Page 192,
223 G. BRITAIN AND MExico. [London, Dec. 26, 1826
respective subjects and citizens; and such Articles as may be so agreed upon,
shall, when July ratified. be regarded as forming a part of the present Treaty,
and shall have the same force as those now contained in it.
XV II. The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be
exchanged at London, within the space of 6 months or sooner if possible.
lu witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and have affixed thereto their respective seals.
Done at London, the 26th ol December, in the year of our Lord 1826.
[L. S.] WILLIAM H Uskisson. [L. s.] SEBASTIAN CAM Acho.
[L. s.j. JAMEs J MoR1ER.
ADDITIONAL ARTICLES .
I. Whereas in the present state of Mexican shipping, it would not be possible for Mexico to
receive the full advantage of the reciprocity established by the Articles V. VI. VII. of the 'I reaty
signed this day, if that part of the Wilth Article which stipulates that, in order to be considered as
a Mexican ship, a ship shall actually have been built in Mexico, should be strictly and literally
observed, and 1 omediately brought into operation,-it is agreed that, for the space of 10 years,
to be reckoned from the date of the exchange of the ratifications of this Treaty, any ships, where-
soever built, being bona fide the property of, and wholly owned by, one or more citizens of
Mexico, and whereof the master and three-fourths of the mariners, at least, are also natural born
citizens of Mexico, or persons domiciliated in Mexico, by act of the Government, as lawful sub-
jects of Mexico, to be certified according to the laws of that country, shall be considered as Mexi-
ca . ships; His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, reserving
to himself the right, at the end of the said term of 10 wears, to claim the principle of reciprocal
restri uon supulated for in the Article VII. above referred to, if the interests of British naviga-
tion shall be found to be prejudiced by the present exception to that reciprocity, in favour of
Mexican shipping.
II. It is further agreed that, for the like term of 10 years, the stipulations contained in Arti-
cles V and VI. of the present Treaty shall be suspended; and, in lieu thereof, it is hereby agreed
that, until the expiration of the said term of 10 years, British ships entering into the ports of
Mexico, from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or any other of His Britannic
Majesty’s dominions, and all articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United King-
dom, or of any of the said dominions, imported in such ships, shall pay no other or higher duties
than are or may hereafter be payable, in the said ports, by the ships, and the like goods, the
growth produce, or manufacture of the most favoured nation: and, reciprocally, it is agreed that
Mexican ships, entering into the ports of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or
any other of His Britannic Majesty's dominions, from any port of the States of Mexico, and all
articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of the said States, imported in such ships, shall pay
no other or higher duties than ºre or may hereafter be payable, in the said ports, by the ships
and the like goods, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the most favoured nation; and that
no higher duties shall be paid, or bounties or drawbacks allowed, on the exportation of any ar-
ticle the growth, produce, or manufacture of the dominions of either country, in the ships of the
other, than upon the exportation of the like articles in the ships of any other foreign country.
it being understood that, at the end of the said term of 10 years, the stipulations of the said
Vth and VIth Articles shall, from thencefoward, be in full force between the two countries.
The present Additional Articles shall have the same force and validity as if they were inser-
ted, word for word, in the Treaty signed this day. They shall be ratified, and the ratifications
shall be exchanged at the same time. -
in witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have affixed
thereto their respective seals.
Done at London, the 26th day of December, in the year of our Lord 1826.
ft. s.) WILLIAM Huskisson, 11... s] JAMEs J. MoRIBB. G. s. SEBASTIAN CAMACH0.
Bogota, 18th.ſp., 1825..] G. BRITAIN AND COLOMBIA. 229
No. 46. Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Vavigation, between Great Britain
and Colombia. Signed at Bogota, 18th Jipril, 1825.
In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity.
Extensive commercial intercourse having been established for a series of
years between the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, and the several Pro-
vinces or Countries of America, which (now united) constitute the State of
Colombia, it seems good for the security as well as encouragement of such com-
mercial intercourse, and or the maintenance of good utiderstanding between
His said Britannic Majesty and the sail State, that the relations now subsis-
ting between them should be regularly acknowledged and confirmed, by the
signature of a Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation. For this purpose
they have named their respective Pienipotentiaries, that is to say;—His Ma-
jesty the King of the United Kingdom of Gi eat Britain and Ireland, John
Potter Hamilton, Esq. and Patrick Campbell. Esq.;-and the Vice President
charged with the Executive Power of the State of Colombia, Pedro Gual,
Secretary of State in the department for Foreign Affairs; and General Pedro
Briceno Alendez:—who, after having communicated to each other, their respec-
tive full powers, found to be in due and proper form, have agreed upon and
concluded the following Articles:—
ART. 1. There shall be perpetual, firi, , and sincere amity between the
dominions and subjects of His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland, His Heirs and Successors, and the State and Peo-
ple of Colombia. *
ART. 2. There shall be, between all the territories of His Britannic Ma-
jesty in Europe, and the territories of Colombia, a reciprocal freedom of com-
merce The subjects and citizens of the two countries, respectively, shall
have liberty, freely and securely to come, with their ships and cargoes, to all
such places, port-, and rivers, in the territories aforesaid, to which other
foreigners are or may be permitted to come, to enter into the same, and to
remain and reside in any part of the said territories, respectively: also to hire
and occupy houses and warehouses for the purposes of their commerce; and,
generally, the merchants and traders of each nation, respectively, shall enjoy
the most complete protection and security for their commerce; subject always
to the laws and statutes of the two countries, respectively.
ART. 3. His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland engages further, that the citizens of Colombia shall have the like
liberty of commerce and navigation stipulated for in the preceding Article, in
all his dominions situated out of Europe, to the full extent in which the same
is permitted at present, or shall be permitted hereafter, to any other nation.
ART. 4. No higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation
into the territories of His Britannic Majesty, of any articles of the growth,
produce, or manufacture of Colombia,—and no higher or other duties shall be
imposed on the importation into the territories of Colombia, of any articles of
230 G. BRITAIN AND COLOMBIA. [Bogota, 18th Ap. 1825.
the growth, produce, or nanufacture of His Britannic Majesty’s dominions,
than are or shall be payable on the like articles. being the growth, produce,
or manufacture of any other foreign country; nor shall any other or higher
duties or charges be imposed, in the territories or dominions of either of the
Contracting Parties, on the exportation of any articles to the territories or
dominions of the other, than such as are or may be payable on the exportation
of the like articles to any other foreign country: nor shall any prohibition be
imposed upon the exportation or importation of any articles the growth, pro-
duce, or manufacture of His Britannic Majesty’s dominions, or of the said
territories of Colombia, to or from the said dominions of His Britannic Ma-
jesty, or to or from the said territories of Colombia, which shall not equally
extend to all other nations.
ART. 5. No higher or other duties or charges on account of tonnage,
light, or harbour dues, pilotage, salvage in case of damage or shipwreck. or
any other local charges, shall be imposed, in any of the ports of Colombia, on
British vessels, than those payable, in the same ports, by Colombian vessels;
nor, in the ports of His Britannic Majesty's territories, on Colombian vessels,
than shall be payable, in the same ports, on British vessels.
ART. 6. The same duties shall be paid on the importation into the terri-
tories of Colombia of any article of the growth, produce, or manufacture of
His Britannic Majesty’s dominions, whether such importation shall be in Co-
lombian or in British vessels; and the same duties shall be paid on the impor-
tation into the dominions of His Britannic Majesty of any article of the growth,
produce, or manufacture of Colombia. whether such importation shall be in
British or Colombian vessels. The same duties shall be paid, and the same
drawbacks and bounties allowed, on the exportation to Colombia of any arti-
cles of the growth, produce, or manufacture of His Britannic Majesty’s domin-
ions, whether such exportation shall be in Colombian or in British vessels; and
the same duties shall be paid, and the same bounties and drawbacks allowed,
on the exportation of any articles the growth, produce or manufacture of Colom-
bia, to His Britannic Majesty’s dominions, whether such exportation shall be in
British or Colombian vessels.
ART. 7. In order to avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the
regulations which may respectively constitute a British or a Colombian vessel,
it is hereby agreed, that all vessels built in the dominions of His Britannic
Majesty, and owned by British subjects, or by any of them, and whereof the
master and three-fourths of the mariners, at least, are British subjects except-
ing where the laws provide for any extreme cases, shall be considered as Bri-
tish vessels; and that all vessels built in the territories of Colombia, and owned
by the citizens thereof, or any of them, and whereof the masters and three-
fourths of the mariners, at least, are Colombian citizens, excepting where the
laws provide for any extreme cases, shall be considered as Colombian vessels.
ART. 8. All merchants, commanders of ships, and others, the subjects of
Bogota, 18th Ap, 1825.] G. BRITAIN AND COLOMBIA. 231
His Britannic Majesty, or citizens of the State of Colombia. shall have full
liberty, in all the territories of both powers, respectively, to manage their own
affairs themselves, or to commit them to the management of whomsoever they
please, as broker, factor, agent, or interpreter; nor shall they be obliged to
employ any other persons for those purposes, nor to pay them any salary or
remuneration unless they shall choose to employ them; and absolute freedom
shall be allowed, in all cases, to buyer and seller, to bargain and fix the price
of any goods, wares, or merchandize imported into, or exported from, the
territories of either of the Contracting Parties, as they shall see good.
ARt. 9. In whatever relates to the lading and unlading of ships, the safety
of merchandize, goods, and effects, the succession to personal estates, and
the disposal of personal property of every sort and denomination, by sale,
donation, exchange, or testament, or in any other manner whatsoever, as also
the administration of justice, the subjects and citizens of the two Contracting
Parties shall enjoy, in their respective dominions and territories, the same
privileges, liberties, and rights as the most favoured nation, aud shall not be
charged, in any of these respects, with any higher imports or duties than those
which are paid, or may be paid, by the native subjects or citizens of the Power
in whose dominions or territories they may be resident.
They shall be exempted from all compulsory military service whatsoever,
whether by sea or land, and from all forced loans, or military exactions and
requisitions; neither shall they be compelled to pay any ordinary taxes, under
any pretext whatsoever, greater than those that are paid by the subjects or
citizens of one or other Power.
ART. 10 It shall be free for each of the two Contracting Parties to ap-
point Consuls for the protection of trade, to reside in the dominions and territo.
ries of the other party; but before any Consul shall act as such, he shall, in
the usual form, be approved and admitted by the Government to which he is
sent, and either of the Contracting Parties may except from the residence of
Consuls, such particular places as either of them may judge fit to be so excep-
ted.
ART, 1 1. For the better security of commerce between the subjects of
His Britannic Majesty, and the citizens of Colombia, it is agreed, that if, at
any time, any interruption of friendly commercial intercourse, or any rupture
should unfortunately take place between the two Contracting Parties, the sub-
jects or citizens of either of the two Contracting Parties residing in the domi-
nions of the other, shall have the privilege of remaining and continuing their
trade therein, without any manner of interruption, so long as they behave
peaceably, and commit no offence against the laws; and their effects and pro-
perty, whether entrusted to individuals or to the State, shall not be liable to
seizure or sequestration, or to any other demands than those which may be
made upon the like effects or property, belonging to the native inhabitants of
the State in which such subjects or citizens may reside.
232 G. BRITAIN AND COLOMBIA. [Bogota, 18th ſp., 1825.
Arºr. 12. The subjects of His Britannic Majesty residing in the territories
of the State of Colombia, shall enjoy the most perfect and entire security of
conscience, without being annoyed, prevented, or dis' urbed on account of their
religious belief. Neither shall they be annoyed, molested, or di turbed in the
proper exercise of their religion, provided that this take place in private houses,
with the decorum due to divine worship, and with due respect to the laws,
usages, and customs of the country. Liberty shall also be granted to bury
the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, who may die in the said territories of
Colombia, in convenient and adequate places, to be appointed and established
by themselves for that purpose, with the knowledge of the local authorities.
Nor shall the funerals or sepulchres of the dead be disturbed in any wise, nor
upon any account. In the like manner, the citizens of Colombia shall enjoy,
within all the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, a perfect and unrestrained
liberty of conscience, and of exercising their religion publicly or privately,
within their own dwelling houses, or in the chapels and places of worship
appointed for that purpose, agreeably to the system of toleration established
in the dominions of His said Majesty.
ART. 13. The Government of Colombia engages to co-operate with His
Britannic Majesty for the total abolition of the Slave Trade, and to prohibit
all persons inhabiting within the territories of Colombia, in the most effectual
manner, fom taking any share in such trade.
ART. 14. And for as much as it would be convenient and useful for the
purpose of facilitating the mutual good understanding between the two Con-
tracting Parties, and for avoiding all difficulties henceforward, that other Arti-
cles should be proposed and added to the present Treaty, which Articles, both
from a want of due time for their consideration, as well as from the pressure
of circumstances, cannot at present be drawn up with required perfection, it
has been and is agreed, on the part of both Powers, that they will. with the
least possible delay, come forward to treat and agree upon such Articles as
may be wanting to this treaty, and deemed mutually beneficial; and which arti-
cles, when they shall be agreed upon and shall be duly ratified, shall form part
of the present Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation.
ART 15. The present Treaty shall be ratified by His Majesty the King
of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and by the President or
Vice-President charged with the Executive Power of the State of Colombia,
with the consent and approbation of the Congress of the said State; and the
ratifications shall be exchanged at London, within the space of 6 months, or
sooner if possible.
In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
Done in the city of Bogota, the 18th day of April, in the year of our Lord
1825. [L. s.] J. Potter HAMILTON. | L. s.] PEDRo GUAL.
[L. S.] PATRIck CAMPRELL. [L. s.J P BRICE no MENDEz.
Sept. 22, 1829.] COLOMBIA AND PERU. 233
A DT) ITION AW. A. RTICLE.
whereas in the present state of the Colombian shipping, it would not be possible for Colom-
bla to take advantage of the reciprocity established by Articles V VI. and VII of the Treaty
signed this day, if that part should be carried into immediate effect, which stipul ites that in order
to be considered as a Colombian ship, a ship shall actually have been built in Colorabia, it is
agreed, that for the space of 7 years, to be reckoned from the date of the ratification of this Treaty,
any ships, wheresoever built, being bona fide the property of any of the citizens of Colombia, and
whereof the master and threefourths of the mariners, at least are also Colombian citize s, excepting
where the laws provide for any extreme cases, shall be considered as Colombian ship. His
Majestv the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland reserving tº himself the
right, at the end of the said term of 7 years, to claim the principle of reciprocal restriction stipula-
ted for in Article VII. above referred to, if the interests of British navigation shall be found to be
prejudiced by the present exception to that reciprocity, in favour of Colombian shipping.
The present Additional Article shall have the same force and validity as if it were inserted,
word for word, in the Treaty signed this day.—It shall be ratified, and the ratifications sh ll be
exchanged at the same time.
In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have affixed
thereto the seals of their arms.
Done in the city of Bogota, the 18th day of April, in the year of our Lord 1825
[1... s ] J. Potten HAMILTON. [L. s. 1 PEntto GUAL.
[L. s.j. PATRICK CAMPBELL. [L. s.) P. BR1c ENo MENDEz.
No. 47. Treaty of Peace between the Republic of Colombia and the Irepublic
of Peru; concluded September 22d, 1829.
In the name of God, the author and legislator of the universe:
The republic of Colombia and the republic of Peru, sincerely desiring to
put an end to the war in which they have seen themselves placed by fatal
circumstances, which have prevented to both the friendly settlement of their
differences, and now finding themselves happily in the condition of being able to
effect it, and to establish at the same time more intimate and cordial relations,
both nations have constituted and named their ministers plenipotentiary, that
is to say: his excellency, the Liberator, president of the republic, has appoint-
ed Pedro Gual, citizen of the same, and his excellency the president of Peru
has appointed, D. Jose Lama y Loerdo, citizen of the said republic, whº, af-
ter having exchanged their full powers, and finding them in good and suffi-
cient form, have agreed on the following articles:
ART, I. There shall be a perpetual and inviolable peace, and constant
and perfect friendship, between the republics of Colombia and Peru, so that
hereafter, it shall not be lawful for either of them to commit or tolerate, di-
rectly or indirectly, the commission of any act of hostility against their peo-
ple, citizens and subjects, respectively.
ART. II. Both contracting parties bind themselves and promise solemnly
to forget all the past, endeavouring to remove every motive of disgust which
the disagreements which have happily terminated, may recall ; to promote
their mutual w ell-being, and to contribute to their security and good name by
every means in their power.
ART, III. Neither of the contracting parties will permit the passage through
their territory, nor lend aid of any kind, to the enemies of the other; but, on the
30
234 COLOMBIA AND PERU. [Sept. 22, 1829.
contrary, will employ their good offices, and even their mediation, if neces-
sary, for the re-establishment of peace whenever hostilities may break out
with one or more powers, not permitting in the meanwhile an entrance in the
ports of either republic to the privateers and prizes which the said enemies
may make from the citizens of Colombia and Peru
ART. IV. The military forces in the department of the south of Colom-
bia and in those of the north of Peru, shall be reduced, upon the ratification
of the present treaty, to the footing of peace, so that, hereafter, it shall not be
permitted to maintain in them more than the garrisons and bodies necessary
and indispensable to preserve the country in security and quiet. All the pri-
soners taken during the present war who are now in the power of the authori-
ties of either of the two republics, shall be sent back en masse to their respec-
tive countries, without the necessity of exchange or ransom.
ART. V. Both parties recognise as the limits of their respective territories
the same that the ancient vice-royalties, New-Grenada and Peru, had before
their independence, with the sole variations that they may think proper to
agree upon between themselves, to effect which they bind themselves from
this time reciprocally to make such cessions of smaller territories as may con-
tribute to fix the dividing line in a manner more natural, exact and proper for
avoiding competition and difference between the inhabitants and authorities
of the frontiers. -
A Rt. VI. In order to obtain this last result as briefly as possible, it has
been agreed, and is here expressly agreed, that a commission composed of two
individuals from each republic shall be appointed by both governments, which
shall examine, rectify and fix the dividing line conformably to the stipulation
in the previous article. This commission shall place, with the consent of its
respective governments, each one in possession of the parts belonging to it, in
proportion as it marks out and recognises the said line, commencing from the
River Tumbes in the Pacific Ocean.
ART. VII. It is also stipulated between the contracting parties, that the
commission of li its shall commence its labours forty days after the ratifica-
tion of the present treaty, and shall terminate them in six months afterward.
If the members of said commission shall disagree in one or more points in the
course of their operations, they shall give to their respective governments a
circumstantial account of every thing, in order that, taking it into considera-
tion, they may resolve amicably upon what may be most advantageous, in the
meantiine, continuing their labours until their conclusion, without interrup-
tion.
ART. VIII. It has been agreed, and is here expressly agreed, that the inhabi-
tants of the small territories who, by virtue of the fifth article, are mutually
to yield the parts agreed on, shall enjoy the prerogatives, privileges, and ex-
emptions which the other inhabitants of the country in which they may defin-
itely fix their residence have or may enjoy. Those who declare before the
Pequisa, July 6, 1828. PERU AND BOLIVIA. 235
local authorities their intention of becoming citizens either of Colombia or
Peru, shall have a year, in order to dispose, as may seem best to them, of all
their moveable and immoveable goods, and to transport themselves with their
families and property to the country of their choice, free from every obliga-
tion and charge whatsoever, without undergoing the least trouble or vexation
whatever.
ART. IX. The navigation and commerce of the rivers and lakes which
flow or may flow through the frontiers of either republic, shall be entirel y free
to the citizens of both, without any distinction; and under no pretext shall
there be imposed upon them incumbrances or impediments of any kind in
their dealings, exchanges, and reciprocal sales of those articles which tuay
belong to lawful and free commerce, and which consist of the natural products
of their respective countries, subject only to the duties, charges or emoluments
to which the natives or denizeus of each of the contracting parties were sub-
ject. -- - * -
ART. X. It is also stipulated, that a commission, composed of two citizens
on each side, shall liquidate, in the city of Lima, within the time designated
in the 7th article, on the subject of boundaries, the debt, which the republic of
Peru contracted with that of Colombia for the assistance lent during the late
war against the common enemy. In case of the disagreement of the members,
either on part of Colombia or Peru, upon one or more parts of the accounts of
which they may have cognizance, they shall make to their respective govern-
mentS an explanation of the motives on which their disagreement was founded,
in order that the said governments may amicably determine what is just, with-
out a cessation, however, on the part of the commission, of continuing the ex-
amination and liquidation of the other parts of the debts, until it is completely
ascertained and satisfied.
No. 48. Treaty of Peace between Peru and Bolivia; concluded July 6th, 1828,
* . " at the Village of Pequisa. -
ART. 1. In the space of fifteen days from the ratification of this treaty by
the commanders-in-chief of the belligerent armies, all persons who are in the
army of the Bolivian republic, and who are Colombians or foreigners, shall
begin to depart from the territory of the republic.
ART. 2. There shall be excepted from the operation of the preceding arti-
cle, subalterns below the grade of captain, inclusive, who may remain in the
republic, renouncing the military service, but the president of the republic
may, after he shall be elected, recall them to the army.
ART. 3. All other officers, who shall, by virtue of the first article, be com-
pelled to quit the republic, may return after the national assembly shall be
installed; and during their absence they shall receive half-pay from the public
treasury, until the president decides whether they shall or not continue in the
military service and receive full pay. The persons comprehended in the
second article shall also enjoy half pay, subject to the same conditions.
236 PERU AND BOLIVIA. [Pequisa, July 6, 1828.
ART. 4. The squadrons of Colombian grenadiers and hussars, who are in
Boivia shall commence their homeward route by the route which shall be
designated, as far as Arica; the commander-in-chief of the Peruvian army
shad furnish them with transports, the republic of Bolivia assuming to pay the
expenses resulting therefrom.
ART. 5. The day after the ratification of the treaty, the commander-in-
chief of the Bolivian army shall issue a decree, convoking for the first of Au-
gust, the constitutional congress, which is now adjourned, and which shall
re-assemble in the city of Chuquisaca, for the purpose. 1st, of receiving and
accepting the resignation of the president of the republic, the grand marshal
of Ayacucho. Antonia Jose de Sucre; 2d, to name a provisional government;
3d, to convoke, with all possible speed, a national assembly, to revise, modify
or maintain the existing constitution. *
A RT. 6. This national assembly shall name and elect a president of the
republic, and shall designate the day when the Peruvian army shall begin to
evacuate the territory of the republic.
ART. 7. The Peruvian army shall occupy the department of Potosi until
the meeting of the constitutional congress. and then it shall commence its
march towards Paz and Oreoco by the department Cochabamba. It shall re-
ceive ail the necessary articles of subsistence on the way.
ART 8. The national assembly, after having carried into effect the sixth
article, shall suspend its sittings, to resume them after the Peruvian army
shall have passed the Desaguadero.
A Rt. 9. The Bolivian army shall occupy the department of Chuquisaca,
Cochabamba, Santa Cruz, and Tarija. as well as that of Potosi, the day after
they shall be evacuated by the Peruvian army. The revenues of the latter
department, so long as it shall be occupied by the Peruvian army and those
of Oreoco and De Paz, while it remains within the Bolivian territory, shall be
appropriated to its use, after deducting the charges of collection.
ART. 10. The governments of the two republics shall agree between
themselves as to the reclamations that they may reciprocally make, after the
Peruvian army shall have passed the Desaguadero.
ART. 11. The two republics shall resume their mutual relations by means
of their diplomatic agents, after the Peruvian army shall have evacuated the
Bolivian territory.
ART. 12. Neither of the two republics shall contract any relations with
the empire of Brazil, until it shall conclude a peace with the Argentine republic
ART. 13. All persons belonging to either republic who are in the armies
of the other, shall be immediately dismissed, it being expressly understood
that the Bolivians may remain in their own country, and that the Peruvians
may return to theirs, leaving them at full liberty so to do. Colombian soldiers
in the two armies are com prized in this article, and neither party shall be at
liberty to reclaim deserters.
B. Ayres, Feb. 2, 1825] G. BRITAIN AND B. AYRES. 237
Aar. 14. No Bolivians shall be accountable to the law, nor responsible,
directly nor indirectly, for having expressed their opinions under existing cir-
cumstances, and those who are in that predicament, shall be treated and re-
garded according to their talents and services.
ART. 15. The contracting parties shall be , esponsible for all hostile acts,
which may take place in either army, after the ratification of this treaty.
ART. 16. Two officers, who shall be designated by the contracting gene-
rals, shall be given as hostages for the fulfilment of this treaty.
Anºr. 17. This treaty shall be ratified or rejected within twenty-four hours,
and in case it shall be disapproved or not ratified, hostilities shall re-commence
in twelve hours.
Signed in duplicate.
MIG UEL. MARIA DE AGUIRRE. JUAN AGUSTINo LIRA.
LE GEN. Jos E 1GUEL DE V E LASCO. JUAN BAPTISTA ARquEd As.
MIG UEL DEL CARP10, Sec’ry. Jos B MARIA Lo Pez, Sec'ry.
No. 49 Treaty of Amity. Commerce, and Navigation, between His Britannie
Majesty and The United Provinces of Rio de la Plata. Signed at Buenos
Jłyres, February 2, 1825.
Extensive commercial intercourse having been established for a series of
years between the Dominions of His Britannick Majesty, and the Territories
of The United Provinces of Rio de la Plata, it seems good for the security as
well as encouragement of such commercial intercourse, and for the mainte-
nance of good understanding between His said Britannick Majesty and the
said United Provinces, that the relations now subsisting between them should
be regularly acknowledged and confirmed by the signature of a Treaty of
Amity, Commerce, and Navigation. -
For this purpose they have named their respective Plenipotentiaries, that
is to say—
His Majesty The King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, Woodbine Parish, Esquire, His said Majesty’s Consul-General in
the Province of Buenos Ayres and it’s Dependencies;–and The United Pro-
vinces of Rio de la Plata, Senor Don Manuel Jose Garcia, Minister Secretary
for the Departments of Government, Finance, and Foreign Affairs, of the
National Executive Power of the said Provinces;
Who, after having communicated to each other their respective full powers,
found to be in due and proper form, have agreed upon and concluded the
following Articles:—
ART. I. There shall be perpetual amity between the dominions and sub-
jects of His Majesty The King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, and The United Provinces of Rio de la Plata, and their inhabitants.
ART. 2. There shall be, between all the territories of His Britannic Ma-
jesty in Europe, and the territories of The United Provinces of Rio de la Plata,
a reciprocal freedom of commerce : The inhabitants of the two countries
238 G. BRITAIN AND B. AYRES.. [B. Ayres, Feb. 2, 1828.
respectively, shall have liberty freely and securely to come, with their ships
and cargoes, to all such places, ports, and rivers, in the territories aforesaid,
to which other foreigners are or may be permitted to come, to enter into the
same, and to remain and reside in any part of the said territories respectively;
also to hire and occupy houses and warehouses for the purposes of their com-
merce; and, generally, the merchants and traders of each nation, respectively,
shall enjoy the most complete protection and security for their commerce;
subject always to the laws and statutes of the two countries respectively.
ART, 3. His Majesty The King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland engages further, that in all his dominions situated out of Europe,
the inhabitants of the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata shall have the like
liberty of commerce and navigation stipulated for in the preceding Article, to
the full extent in which the same is permitted at present, or shall be permitted
hereafter, to any other nation. :
ART.4. No higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation into
the territories of His Britannick Majesty, of any articles of the growth, pro-
duce, or manufacture of The United Provinces of Rio de la Plata, and no
higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation into the said United
Provinces, of any articles of the growth, produce, or manufacture of His Bri-
tannick Majesty’s Dominions, than are or shall be payable on the like articles,
being the growth, produce, or manufacture of any other foreign country; nor
shall any other or higher duties or charges be imposed, in the territories or
dominions of either of the Contracting Parties, on the exportation of any arti-
cles to the territories or dominions of the other, than such as are or may be payā-
ble on the exportation of the like articles to any other foreign country: nor
shall any prohibition be imposed upon the exportation or importation of any
articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of His Britannick Majesty’s
dominions, or of the said United Provinces, which shall not equally extend to
all other nations. • , ,
* ART. 5. No higher or other duties or charges on account of tonnage, light,
or harbour dues, pilotage, salvage in case of damage or shipwreck, or any other
local charges, shall be imposed, in any of the ports of the said United Provinces,
on British vessels of the burthen of above 120 tons, than those payable, in the
same ports, by vessels of the said United Provinces of the same burthen; nor
in the ports of any of His Britannick Majesty’s territories, on the vessels of
the United Provinces of above 120 tons, than shall be payable, in the same ports
on British vessels of the same burthen. -
ART. 6. The same duties shall be paid on the importation into the said
United Provinces of any article the growth, produce, or manufacture of His
Britannick Majesty’s dominions, whether such importation shall be in vessels of
the said United Provinces, or in British vessels; and the same duties shall be
paid on the importation into the douinions of His Britannick Majesty of any
article the growth, produce, or manufacture of the said United Provinces,
whether such importation shall be in British vessels, or in vessels of the said
B. Ayres, Feb. 2, 1828] G. BRITAIN AND B. AYRES. 239
United Provinces: The same duties shall be paid, and the same drawbacks
and bounties allowed, on the exportation of any articles of the growth, produce,
or manufacture of His Britannick Majesty’s dominions to the said United
Provinces, whether such exportation shall be in vessels of the said United
Provinces, or in British vessels; and the same duties shall be paid, and the
same bounties and drawbacks allowed, on the exportation of any articles the
growth, produce, or manufacture of the said United Provinces to His Britan-
nick Majesty’s dominions, whether such exportation shall be in British ves-
sels, or in vessels of the said United Provinces.
ART. 7. In order to avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the regula-
tions which may respectively constitute a British vessel, or a vessel of the
said United Provinces, it is hereby agreed, that all vessels built in the
dominions of His Britannick Majesty, and owned, navigated, and registered
according to the laws of Great Britain, shall be considered as British vessels;
and that all vessels built in the territories of the said United Provinces, pro-
perly registered, and owned by the citizens thereof, or any of them, and whereof
the master and three-fourths of the mariners, at least, are citizens of the said
United Provinces, shall be considered as vessels of the said United Provinces.
ART. 8. All merchants, commanders of ships, and others, the subjects of
His Britannick Majesty, shall have the same liberty, in all the territories of
the said United Provinces, as the natives thereof, to manage their own affairs
themselves. or to commit them to the management of whomsoever they please,
as broker, factor, agent, or interpreter; nor shall they be obliged to employ
any other persons for those purposes, nor to pay them any salary or remunera-
tion, unless they shall chose to employ them, and absolute freedom shall be
allowed, in all cases, to the buyer and seller to bargain and fix the price of any
goods, wares, or merchandize imported into, or exported from, the said United
Provinces, as they shall see good.
ART. 9. In whatever relates to the lading and unlading of ships, the safety
of merchandize, goods, and effects, the disposal of property of every sort and
denomination, by sale, donation, or exchange, or in any other manner what-
soever, as also the administration of justice, the subjects and citizens of the
two Contracting Parties shall enjoy, in their respective dominions, the same
privileges, liberties, and rights, as the most favoured nation, and shall not be
charged, in any of these respects, with any higher duties or imposts than those
which are paid, or may be paid, by the native subjects or citizens of the Power
in whose dominions they may be resident. They shall be exempted from all
compulsory military service whatsoever, whether by sea or land, and from all
forced loans, or military exaction or requisitions; neither shall they be compel-
led to pay any ordinary taxes, under any pretext whatsoever, greater than
those that are paid by native subjects or citizens.
ART. 10. It shall be free for each of the two Contracting Parties to appoint
Consuls for the protection of trade, to reside in the dominions and territories
of the other party; but before any Consul shall act as such, he shall, in the
240 G. BRITAIN AND B. AYRES, EB Ayres, Feb. 2, 1828
usual form, be approved and admitted by the Government to which he is sent;
and either of the Contracting Parties may except from the residence of Consuls,
such particular places as either of them may judge fit to be so excepted.
ART. 11. For the better security of commerce between the subjects of His
Britannick Majesty, and the inhabitants of the United Provinces of Rio de la
Plata, it is agreed, that if at any time any interruption of friendly commercial
intercourse, or any rupture should unfortunately take place between the two
Contracting Parties, the subjects or citizens of either of the two Contracting
Parties residing in the dominions of the other, shall have the privilege of re-
maining and continuing their trade therein, without any manner of interrup-
tion, so long as they behave peaceably, and commit no oftence against the laws;
and their effects and property, whether entrusted to individuals or to the State,
shall not be liable to seizure or sequestration, or to any other demands than
those which may be made upon the like effects or property, belonging to the
native inhabitants of the State in which such subjects or citizens may reside.
ART 12. The subjects of His Britannic Majesty residing in the United
Provinces of Rio de la Plata, shall not be disturbed, persecuted, or annoyed
on account of their religion, but they shall have perfect liberty of conscience
therein, and to celebrate divine service either within their own private houses,
or in their own particular churches or chapels, which they shall be at liberty to
build and maintain in convenient places, approved of by the government of the
said United Provinces: liberty shall also be granted to bury the subjects of His
Britannic Majesty who may die in the territories of the said United Provinces,
in their own burial places, which, in the same manner, they may freely estab-
ish and maintain. In the like manner, the citizens of the said United Pro-
vinces shall enjoy, within all the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, a per-
fect and unrestrained liberty of conscience and of exercising their religion pub-
lickly or privately, within their own dwelling houses, or in the chapels and
places of worship appointed for that purpose, agreeably to the system of tolera-
tion established in the dominions of His said Majesty,
ARt. 13. It shall be free for the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, resi-
ding in the United Provinces of Rio de La Plata, to dispose of their property,
of every description, by will or testament, as they may judge fit; and, in the
event of any British subject dying without such will or testament in the terri-
tories of the said United Provinces, the British Consul-General, or, in his
absence, his representative, shall have the right to nominate curators to take
charge of the property of the deceased, for the benefit of his lawful heirs and
ereditors, without interference, giving convenient notice thereof to the authori-
ties of the country; and reciprocally.
ARt. 14. His Britannic Majesty being extremely desirous of totally
abolishing the Slave Trade, the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata engage to
€o-operate with His Britain nic Majesty for the completion of so beneficent a
work, and to prohibit all persons inhabiting within the said United Provinces, .
#io Janeiro, Aug. 17th, 1827] G. BRITAIN AND BRAZIL. 241
or subject to their jurisdiction, in the most effectual manner. and by the nost
solemn laws, from taking any share in such trade.
ART. 15. The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged in London within four months, or sooner if possible.
In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same,
and have affixed their seals thereunto.
Done at Buenos Ayres, the 2d. day of February, in the year of our
Lord 1825. t
Wood BINE PARISH. [L. s.] MANL. J. GARCIA ſl. s.]
No. 50. Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between his Britannic Majesty,
and his Majesty the Emperor of Brazil. Rio /a, eiro. August 17th, 1827.
In the name of the Holy and Invisible Trinity.
ART. 1. There shall be peace and friendship for ever, between his majesty
the emperor of Brazil, and his majes'y the king of the united kingdoms of Great
Britain and Ireland, their heirs and successors, their subjects, states and coun-
tries, without distinction of person or of place
ART 2. His imperial Majesty, and his Britannic majesty, have agreed,
that each of the high contracting parties shall have the right of naming, and
placing consuls-general, consuls, and vice consuls in all or any of the ports of
the other, as may be judged necessary for the commercial interests and advan-
tage of its subjects. The consuls of each class cannot enter upon their func-
tions, unless named by their respective monarchs, with all the requisite formali-
ties. and confirmed by the monarch upon whose territory they are placed.
The most perfect equality is to exist between the consuls of each class through-
out the territory of each of the high contracting parties. The consuls shall en-
joy the privileges attached to their rank, as generally recognised and granted.
In all civil and criminal affairs, they are to submit like the rest of their f l w-
countrymen, to the laws of the land in which they reside, and to enjoy the
entire protection of those laws during their observance of them.
ART. 3. The consuls, and vice-consuls of the two nations shall. each in
his respective residence take cognizance and decide upon the differences which
may arise between the subjects, the captains, and crews, of the vessels of their
respective nations, without the intervention of the authorities of the countries,
unless the public tranquillity demand it, or unless the parties themselves carry
the affairs before the tribunals of the territory, in which the difference arises.
In like manner. they shall have the right of administering the property of the
abujects of their own nation, dying intestate, for the benefit of the legitimate
heirs of said property, or creditors, conformable to the laws of their respective
©ountries.
ARt. 4. The subjects of each of the high contracting parties are to enjoy,
throughout the territory of the other, the most perfect liberty of conscience in
all matters of religion, conformably to the system of toleration, introduced and
followed in each of their respective countries.
31.
242 G. BRITAIN AND BRAZIL. [Rio Janeiro, Aug. 17th, 183r
ART. 5. The subjects of either sovereign may, at their own pleasure,
dispose of their property by sale, exchange, testament, or in any other manner,
without let or hinderance. Their houses, goods, and effects, shall be protec-
ted and respected, and no authority shall invade them, without the will of their
proprietors. They shall be exempted from all service upon land, and upon
the sea; from all forced loans, and contributions, for war or for the service of
the state; they shall not be required to pay any ordinary tax, under any denomi-
nation whatsoever, at a higher rate than that paid by the subjects of the II) () Il-
arch, whose territory they inhabit. They shall not be subjected to any arbi-
trary domiciliary visits; their books or papers shall not be demanded nor
examined under any pretence. It is agreed that domiciliary and other visits,
and examinations, shall only take place in the presence of the competent
authorities, in cases of high treason, smuggling, and other crimes, provided for
by the laws of the respective nations. In general it is expressly stipulated,
that the subjects of each party shall enjoy, throughout the territory of the other,
as regards their own persons, the same rights, favours and franchises, which
are or may afterwards be granted, to the subjects of the most favoured nations.
A Rt. 6. The constitution of the empire having abolished all separate juris-
dictions, it is agreed that the office of judge advocate (juiz conservador) of
the British nation shall be suppressed, and that in the mean time a sufficient
substitute shall be provided. for the protection of the persons and property of
the subjects of his Britannic majesty. ' Hereby it is understood. that the sub-
jects of his Britannic majesty shall enjoy in Brazil, the same rights and advan-
tages enjoyed by Brazilian subjects, in civil and criminal matters; that they
cannot be arrested without previous inquest. and the orders of the proper
authorities. except in cases where they are taken in flagrante delictu, and that
their persons are to be free from arrest, in all cases in which the law allows
bail. -
ART. 7. If, which Heaven avert, any misunderstanding, breach of friend-
ship, or rupture, should take place between the two crowns, such rupture shall
not be considered as existing, until after the recall or the departure of the
diplomatic agents of the two powers. The subjects of either power remaining
within the territory of the other, shall have the right of regulating their affairs,
or of carrying on their business with the interior, provided they continue to
act peaceably, and do nothing contrary to the laws. Nevertheless, whenever
their conduct gives rise to suspicions, they may be obliged to quit the country,
every possible facility being afforded them, to retire with their property and
effects, and sufficient time being granted them; in no case, however, to exceed
six months.
ART 8. It is also agreed, that neither of the two contracting parties shall
knowingly or designedly take or keep in his service, those subjects of the other,
who may have deserted from the sea or land service, but shall on proper demand,
dismiss all such from his employ. It is moreover declared and agreed, that
every favour which can be granted by one of the powers to the other, relative
Rio Janeiro, Aug. 17th, 182?] G. BRITAIN AND BRAZIL. 243
to deserters from his service, shall be considered as also conceded in the oppo-
site case, as fully as if expressed in the present treaty. It also agreed that
in the case of sailors or marines, deserting from ships belonging to subjects of
either power, during their sojourn in the ports of the other, the authorities are
bound to render all possible assistance, for the arrest of such deserters; in like
manner the necessary reclamations shall be made by the consul-general, the
consul, or his deputies and representatives; and moreover, no religious or civil
corporation shall protect or receive the said deserters.
ART. 9. Salutes in ports, and between flags, shall be made conformably to
the usual existing regulations between maritime states
AR1. 10. Liberty of commerce and navigation shall be reciprocally en-
joyed, by the respective subjects of the two powers, in ships of both nations,
and in all and every port, city, and territory, belonging to the said contracting
powers, excepting those to which entrance is exp' essly forbidden to any foreign
nation. It is agreed, that as soon as a port which has been thus interdicted,
shall be opened to the commerce of any other nation, it shall be, from that
moment, also opened to the subjects of the two high contracting parties. The
subjects of the two high contracting parties may enter with their respective
ships, into all the ports, harbours, bays and anchorages, of the territories
belonging to each of the two parties. unload the whole or a part of their cargoes,
and take in or re-export merchandises. They may remain there, rent houses
and stores, travel, trade, open shops, transport goods, boats or money, and
attend to all their concerns, without being thereby subjected to any surveil-
lance, and transact their business at their pleasure, by means of agents and
clerks. Nevertheless, it is agreed that the coasting trade between ports, with
articles of consumption, either with the interior, or with other nations, shall
be excepted, and that this trade can only be carried on in ships of the country;
the subjects of the two powers are, however, permitted to load such ships with
their property, merchandise and money, on paying the same duties.
ART. 11. The ships of the subjects of each of the two high contracting
powers, shall pay no higher port, tonnage, and the like duties, than those which
are or may hereafter be required of the most favoured nations.
ART. 12. In order to prevent all doubts concerning the nation to which a
ship may belong, the two parties have agreed to consider as English, those ships
which are purchased, registered, and employed in navigation, conformable to
the laws of Great Britain. On the other hand, such are to be considered
Brazilian, as are built upon the Brazilian territory, belong to Brazilian sub-
jects, and whose captain and three fourths of the crew, are Brazilians. All
ships shall likewise be considered as Brazilian, taken from the enemy by ships
of his majesty, the emperor of Brazil, or his subjects, furnished with letters of
marque, if they have been declared lawful prize by the Brazilian prize court;
also those which have been condemned by a competent tribunal, for infraction
of the laws prohibiting the slave-trade, and those bought by Brazilian subjects,
with crews constituted as above mentioned.
214 G. BRITAIN AND BRAZIL. [Rio Janeiro, Aug. 17th. 1827
Act 13. The subjects of each of the two monarchs while on the territory
of the other, shall enjoy ntire liberty of trading in any way with other na-
tion-. H
\ RT 14 Excepting in this respect, all articles and merchandise of which
the crown of Brazil reserves to itself the exclusive monopoly. If, however,
the a le of any one of these articles should alterwards become free, the sub-
jects of his Britannic in jestv shall be permitted to exercise it, with no greater
restrictions than those of his majesty the emperor of Brazil. The duties upon
the import and export of these articles, and merchandises, shall in all cases
be the same, whether consigned to Brazilian, or to English subjects, or exported
by them or belonging entirely to one of them.
ART 15 In order to determine what is to be viewed as contraband in
time of war, it is agreed to include under that head, all arms and munitions
of war, by a d or sea, such as cannon, guns, mortars. petards, bombs, hand
grenades, grape shot, saucissons, gun carriages, musket stocks, bandeliers,
powder, matches, saltpetre, balls, pikes, swords, hemlets, cuirasses, halberts,
la ces. spears, horse furniture, holsters, sword belts, and instruments of war
in general. as well as ship timbers, tar and pitch, sheet copper, sails, canvass,
ropes, and, in general, every thing necessary for fitting out ships of war, ex-
cept unwrought iron, and pine boards.
ART. 16. Packets shall be established, to facilitate the public service of
both courts, and the commercial relations between the subjects of each. They
shall be considered as royal ships. whenever they are under the orders of offi-
cers of the roval navy. This article shall remain in force until an agreement
has been concluded between the powers, for the special arrangement of the
packet establishment -
A Rt. 17. For the more efficacious protection of the commerce and navi-
gation of their respective subjects, the two high contracting parties, agree to
receive no pirates within the ports, bays, or anchorages of their respective
dominions, and to prosecute with all the rigour of the laws. all persons con-
victed of piracy, and all persons domiciliated in the territory, convicted of
understanding or participation with them All ships and cargoes belonging
to the subjects of either of the contracting parties, taken or robbed by pirates,
in the neighbourhood of one of the ports of the other, shall be returned to their
proprietors, or to those whom they may appoint, as soon as the identity of the
property can be established This restitution shall take place, even when the
article claimed has been sold; only, however, in those cases in which the buyer
knew, or ought to have known, that said article had been acquired by piracy.
A Rt. 18 If any ship of war or commerce, belonging to either of the con-
tracting states, should be wrecked in the ports or on the coasts of the other,
the authorities and persons employed by the custom-house of the place, are to
render all possible assistance, to save the persons and property of the ship-
Wrecked; to see that the articles saved or their value be sucured, so that
Rio Janeiro, Aug. 17th, 1827] G. BRITAIN AND BRAZIL. 245
if the ship wrecked be a ship of war, they may be restored to their respective
governments, and iſ a merchant ship, to their proprietor, or to those whom he
may empower, as soon as they are claimed, and the expenses of salvage and
storage have been paid. Articles saved from shipwreck, shall be subject to
no duty, unless carried for consumption into the country.
ART. 19. Every species of merchandise, and articles of every kind, which
are the natural produce or manufacture of the territories of his Britannic
majesty, either in Europe or in his colonies, may be introduced into all or
each of the ports of Brazil, after having once paid a duty, not exceeding fifteen
per cent in specie, or its equivalent, as fixed by the tariff, published in all the
ports of the kingdom, in which custom houses exist.
It it also agreed, that when tariffs are in future made, the maket price
shall be taken each time as the basis, and the consul of his Britannic majesty,
shall have leave to make a representation, whenever any one of the articles
shall be valued too highly upon the existing tariff, so that this circumstance
may be taken into consideration as soon as possible, and without causing any
delay in the shipping of said article.
It has been likewise agreed, that whenever English articles introduced
into the Brazilian custom houses, shall not possess the value assigned them in
the tariff, and they are intended for internal consumption, the importer shall
add a declaration of their value, after which, their transportation shall not be
delayed. In all cases, however, in which the persons employed by the custom-
house, in fixing the duties, shall judge that the articles are rated beneath their
value, it shall be in their power to sequester the article thus valued, to pay the
importer ten per cent, over and above said valuation, within fifteen days from
the time of their sequestration, returning the duties already paid; in all which
the usages of the English custom-houses shall be followed.
ART 20. His majesty the emperor of Brazil, engages not to admit into
any part of his dominions, any article coming from abroad, produced or
manufactured in said country, under duties less than those fixed in the pre-
ceding article, unless the same diminution takes place in English articles,
produced or manufactured in England, excepting only, all articles produced
or manufactured in Portugal, imported thence directly to Brazil, in ships of
one or the other nation. His Britannic majesty has consented to this excep-
tion, in favour of Portugal, on account of the part he has himself taken in the
negotiation which has been so happily terminated by the treaty of reconcilia-
tion and independence of the 29th of August, 1825, and also on account of the
friendly relations, which his Britannic majesty so ardently desires to main-
tain between Brazil and Portugal.
ART. 21. All articles of merchandise, the products of the industry and
manufactures of Brazil, and imported directly for consumption into the terri-
tories and possessions of his Britannic majesty, in Europe, and in his Ameri-
can, Asiatic, and African colonies, open to foreign commerce, shall be subject
246 G. BRITAN AND BRAZIL. [Rio Janeiro, flug. 17th, 1827
to no higher duties, than those paid upon the same articles, imported in the
same manner, from any other foreign country.
ART. 22. As certain articles of Brazilian produce, when imported for
consumption into the United Kingdoms pay heavier duties than are imposed
upon similar products of the English colonies, his Britannic majesty agrees that
such articles may be restored within his dominions until re-exported. under
the necessary regulations, without paying any duties of consumption; and they
shall not be subject to higher storage or re exportation duties, than those im-
posed, or which may hereafter be imposed, upon similar products of the Bri-
tish colonies, when thus stored or re-exported.
In like manner, the products of the English colonies, which are similar to
those of Brazil, can only be admitted for re-exportation into the Brazilian port
under the same favourable conditions to which similar articles are subjected
in the English custom-house.
ART. 23. Every species of article and merchandise, imported from the
English territories into a port of his imperial majesty, must be accompanied by
certificates of its origin, signed by competent custom-house officers of the port
of embarkation; which shall be numbered in order and attached to the declara-
tion by the seal of the English custom-house; the correctness of the declara-
tion shall be confirmed by oath in presence of the Brazilian consul, and the
affidavit presented to the custom-house in the place of importation. The ori-
gin of the articles imported into Brazil from British possessions where here
is no custom-house, shall be proved with the same formalities used in similar
importations into Great Britain.
ART. 24. His Britannic Majesty engages, in his own name and in that of
his successors, to allow the subjects of his imperial majesty to trade with his
own ports, at home and in Asia, upon the footing of the most favoured nations.
ART. 25. In all cases in which bounty or drawback is allowed upon arti-
cles exported from a port, belonging to either of the two powers, such bounty
or drawback shall be the same under all circumstances, whether the re-expor-
tation take place on Brazilian or on English ships.
ART. 26. His imperial majesty engages, in his own name, and in that of
his successors, not to permit any restriction upon the commerce of his Britan-
nic majesty, within his states, or injury to them from the effect of any exclusive
monopoly for buying or selling, or by privileges granted to any commercial
company. The subjects of his Britannic majesty, on the contrary, shall have
full and entire liberty of buying and selling to whom and in what manner they
please, without being obliged to give the preference to any such company, or
to any individual enjoying such exclusive privileges. On his own part, his
Britannic majesty engages to preserve faithfully and reciprocally, the same
principle with regard to the subjects of his imperial majesty. Those articles
of Brazilian produce, which the crown has reserved to itself the exclusive
right of buying and selling, are not comprehend.cd under this provision whilst
such reservation remains in force.
Riojaneiro, Nov. 17, 1827] BRAZIL AND HANSE TOWNS. 247
ART. 27. His imperial majesty has resolved to grant to the subjects of his
Britannic majesty the Saine privilege of credit (assignation) at the custom-
houses, enjoyed by those of his Brazilian majesty. On the other hand. it is
agreed and stipulated, that the Brazilian traders shall enjoy in the British
custom-houses, the same favour, as long as the laws allow it to British subjects
themselves.
ART 28. The high contracting parties have agreed that the stipulations
contained in the present treaty, shall remain in vigour for fifteen years, from
the date of the ratification of the present, and after that until one of the
two parties shall announce its revocation to the other, in which case the pre-
sent treaty shall cease, upon the second year after such annunciation.
ART. 29. The present treaty shall be ratified by the high contracting par-
ties, and the ratifications shall be exchanged, within the space of four months,
or less. if possible.
In testimony whereof, we, the undersigned, plenipotentiaries of his majesty
the emperor Brazil, and of his Britannic majesty, in virtue of our plenary
powers, have signed the present treaty, and affixed to it our seals and arms.
Done at Rio Janeiro, on the 17th of the month of August, in the year of
grace eighteen hundred and twenty-seven.
Signed -
L. s.) THE MARQUIs DE QUELUz. [L S.] THE MARQUIS DE MACEyo.
[.. s.] The VI’ct DE S. Leopoldo. [L. S.] Rob ERT Gorbox.
No. 51. Treaty between Brazil and the Hanse Towns.
In the Name of the Most Holy and Invisible Trinity.
The Senate of the Free and Hanseatic city of Lubeck, the Senate of the
Free and Hanseatic city of Bremen, and the Senate of the Free and Hanseatic
city of Hamburgh, on one part, each of them separately, and his Majesty the
Emperor of Brazil on the other part, desirous of consolidating the relations of
commerce and navigation between their respective states, have named to con-
clude a convention founded on the principles of a fair reciprocity, their Pleni-
potentiaries, namely—
The Senate of the Free and Hanseatic city of Lubeck, the Senate of the
Free and Hanseatic city of Bremen, and the Senate of the Free and Hanseatic
city of Hamburgh, John Charles Frederick Gildemeister, esq. Doctor of Laws,
member of the Senate of Bremen, at present their Envoy Extraordinary to His
Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, and Charles Sieveking, esq. Doctor of Laws,
Member and Syndic of the Senate of Hamburgh, at persent their Envoy
Extraordinary to his said Majesty; and his Majesty the Emperor of Brazil,
his Excellency the marquis de Queluz, Councillor of State, Senator of the
Empire, &c. who, after having reciprocally communicated their full powers,
found in good and due form, have agreed on the following articles:
ARt. 1. All ports and anchorages in the respective countries, open to the
vessels of any other nation, shall be in like manner open to the Brazilian and
Hanseatic vessels respectively.
248 BRAZIL AND HANSE TOWNS. [Rio.Janeiro, Nov.17,1827
ARt. 2. All vessels bearing the flag of one of the republics of Lubeck,
Bremen, and Hamburgh, belonging exclusively to a citizen or citizens of one
of them. and of which the captain shall in like manner be a citizen of one of
those republics, shall be held and considered for all the objects of this conven-
tion, as a vessel belonging to Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh A perfect
reciprocity shall be observed in respect to Brazilian ships. Passports regularly
executed. shall establish between the high contracting parties the proofs of the
nationality of the Brazilian and Hanseatic vessels.
ART. 3. Lubeck, Bremen, and Hamburgh vessels which shall enter the
Brazilian ports or depart therefrom. and Brazilian vessels which shall enter
the ports of the said republics, or depart therefrom, shall not be subject to
duties levied on vessels (besides the duties payable on their cargoes) under
the head of port-charges. anchorage, light-houses, tonnage, visiting, pilotage,
or any other denomination whatever, other or more considerable than those
which are actually or may hereafter be imposed on national vessels.
ART. 4. The high contracting parties mutually engage not to establish
an v prohibitions of import or export which shall attach to the importations or
exportations of either country, not affecting those articles of the same descrip-
tion of other countries. The contracting parties engage not to burthen them
with any duties or any other charges whatever, which shall not at the same
time be extended to all the importations or exportations of the same sort, with-
out anv distinction of country.
ART. 5. All merchandise which can be imported into the states of the high
contracting parties respectively in national vessels, or which can in like man-
ner be exported therefrom, may also be imported or exported in the vessels of
the other contracting party. -
The coasting trade from port to port, employed for transporting indige-
nous or foreign products already admitted for consumption, being nevertheless
excepted from this general principle, and reserved for the regulations of each
country, it is agreed by both parties, that the citizens and subjects of the high
eontracting parties shall enjoy in this respect the privilege of using the coas-
ting vessels for the conveyance of their merchandise, subject only t , the same
duties which are now levied, or which may hereafter be levied, on the subjects
of the most favoured nation.
ART. 6. Any merchandise whatever, without distinction as to origin,
exported from the Brazilian ports the ports, of Lubeck. Bremen, and Hamburg,
or from these last-mentioned ports to Brazil, in Brazilian vessels belonging to
a nation favoured in the Hanseatic ports in their direct commerce, and any
merchandise imported from any country whatever into the Hanseatic ports by
Brazilian vessels, or exported to any country whatever from the Hanseatic
ports by Brazilian vessels, shall not, in the above mentioned ports, pay the
export and import duties, and any other duties, except according to the rates
granted to direct commerce of the most favoured nation,
Riojaneiro, Nov. 17, 1827] BRAZIL AND HANSE TOWNS. 249
On the other part, any merchandise whatever, without distinction as to
origin, exported from the ports of Lubeck, Bremen, or Hamburgh, to Brazil
or from Brazil to these ports, in Hanseatic vessels or in vessels belonging to
any nation favoured in the Brazilian ports in their direct commerce, shall not
pay in Brazil the import or export duties, or any duties whatever, but such as
are fixed by a rate to the direct and national commerce of the most favoured
nation; a rate which by other treaties has been temporarily fixed at fifteen per
eent. instead of twenty-four for all merchandise introduced for consumption.
The Hanseatic cities not having placed any restriction on the indirect
commerce of Brazil, and the Brazilian government not being in all respects
able, in the present state of their commercial relations, to grant to the indirect
commerce the same latitude and perfect reciprocity, it is agreed that the said
indirect commerce shall for the present be restricted, and shall only take place
with respect to the nations whose direct commerce is or shall be favoured in
the Brazilian ports by particular treaties.
All merchandise exported in Hanseatic vessels from the ports of the said
nations favoured in Brazil, shall pay the same duties of import and export, or
any other duties which are paid by the Hanseatic cities in their direct com-
merce; these merchandises remaining nevertheless liable to the other formali-
ties required when they are imported into the Brazilian ports by nations fa-
voured in their direct commerce.
All bounties, drawbacks, or other such advantages granted in one of the
countries on importation or exportation, in the vessels of any foreign nation
whatever, shall in like manner be granted when the importation or exportation
shall be performed by the vessels of the other country.
In the direct navigation between the Brazils and the Hanseatic cities, the
manifests witnessed by the Consuls, Brazilian or Hanseatic respectively, or if
there should not be any consuls by the local authorities, shall be sufficient to
admit the respective importations or exportations to the advantages stipulated
in this article.
ART. 7. The indigenous articles referred to in the preceding article shall
experience in the respective Custom-houses, as far as regards their valuation,
all the advantages and facilities which are or shall be conceded to the most
favoured nation. It is understood that in cases where they shall not have a
fixed value in the Brazilian tariff, the entry at the custom-house shall be made
on a declaration of their value signed by the party who shall have imported
them; but in the event of the officers of the customs charged with the collec-
tion of the duties suspecting the valuation to be faulty, they shall be at liberty
to take the goods thus valued on paying ten per cent. above the said valuation
and this within the period of fifteen days from the first day of the detention,
and on repaying the duties received thereon. *
ART. 8. The commerce and navigation between Brazil and the Hanseatic
ports shall enjoy in each country, without waiting for any additional conven-
tion, all !he privileges and advantages which are or may be granted to any of
JX3%
250 BRAZIL AND HANSE TOWNS. [Riojaneiro, Nov.17,1827
the most favoured nations, provided always they fulfil the conditions of reci-
procity. It is understood that the privileges which have been, or which may
be, granted to the P-'rtuguese nation, shall not be construed into a precedent,
nor shall the effects of the present convention extend to Portugal, unless there
should be particular treaties for that purpose.
ART.9. The consuls of the respective governments shall be treated, as well
in respect to their persons as to the exercise of their functions, on the same
footing as those of the nost favoured nations. They shall especially enjoy the
right of making representations, as well general as particular, upon the valua-
tions made by the customs, which shall be taken into consideration with as little
delay as possible, without detaining the consignments.
ART, 10. Should either of the contracting parties be engaged in war,
whilst the other is neuter, it is agreed, that whatever the belligerent party may
have stipulated with other powers to the advantage of the neutral flag, shall
still be in force between Brazil and the Hanseatic towns. In order to pre-
vent all mistakes relating to what is considered contraband of war, it is agreed
(without however departing from the general principle above detailed) to
restrict this definition to the following articles:—Cannons, mortars, guns,
pistols, grenades, fusees, gun-carriages, belts, powder, saltpetre, helmets, balls,
pikes, swords, halberds, saddles, harness, and all other instruments whatever
manufactured for the uses of war.
ART. I 1. The citizens and subjects of the respective countries shall enjoy
in the other country, in respect to their persons, their property, the exercise
of their religion, and the employment of their industry, all the rights and pri-
vileges which are or shall be hereafter granted to the most favoured nations.
Some foreigners enjoying in Brazil the privilege of having accounts open
at the custom-houses for payment of duties, on the same condition and sureties
as the Brazilian subjects, this favour shall extend equally to the Hanseatic resi-
dents.
ART. 12. The high contracting parties reserve to themselves the right of
entering into any additional stipulations, which the reciprocal interest of trade
may require, and any articles which may be hereafter agreed on shall be con-
sidered as making a part of the present convention.
ART. 13. Although the present convention be considered as common to
the three free Hanseatic cities of Lubeck, Bremen, and Hamburgh, it is agreed,
nevertheless, that a league of reciprocal responsibility does not exist between
their sovereign governments, and that the stipulations of the present conven-
tion shall remain in full force with regard to the rest of these republics, not-
withstanding a termination on the part of one or more of them.
ART. 14. The present convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications
shall be exchanged in London within the space of four months, or sooner if
possible.
It shall be in full force during ten years, dating from the day of the ex-
change of the ratifications: and beyond that term, until the senates of the
Riojaneiro, Aug.28,1828.] BRAZIL AND B. AYRES. 25i
Hanseatic cities, whether separately or collectively, or his majesty the Emperor
of the Brazils, shall have announced the intention of terminating such conven-
tion, as likewise during the negotiation for a renewal or in dification of it.
In witness whereof, the undersigned, plenipotentiaries of the Senates of
the Hanseatic republics of Lubeck, Bremen, and Hamburgh, and of his majesty
the emperor of Brazil, in virtue of their respective full powers, have affixed
the seal of their arms.
Done at Rio de Janeiro, this 17th day of November, in the year of our
Elord 1827. g
ſ L. s ] GILDEMEISTER. [L s.] Marques de QUELUz.
[L. s.) C. SIEve KING. [L s ] Conde de LAGES.
No. 52. Preliminary Treaty of Peace between the Republics of the United
Provinces of the river Plate and the Emperor of Brazil.
In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity:
The government of the republic of the United Provinces of the river Plate,
and his majesty the Emperor of Brazil, desiring to put an end to the war, and
establish upon solid and durable principles the good understanding, harmony,
and friendship, which should exist between the neighbouring nations, called by
their interests to live united by the ties of perpetual alliance, have agreed,
through the mediation of his Britannic majesty, to adjust between themselves,
a preliminary treaty of peace, which shall serve as a basis to the definitive
treaty of the same, which is to be concluded between the high contracting par
ties. And for this purpose they have appointed their plenipotentiaries, to wit:
The government of the Republic of the United Provinces, Generals Don
Juan Ramon Balcarce, and Don Thomas Guido:
His majesty the Emperor, the most illustrious and most excellent Mar-
quis of Aracaty, Member of his Majesty’s Council, &c. &c.
Whº, having exchanged their respective full powers, which were found to
be in good and due form, agreed upon the following articles:–
ART. 1. His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil declares the Province of
Monte Video, at present called the Cisplatine, separated from the territory of
Brazil, in order that it may constitute itself into a state free and independent
of any nation whatever, under the form of government which it may deem
most suitable to its interests, wants, and resources.
ART. 2. The government of the Republic of the United Provinces con-
aurs in declaring, on its part, the independence of the provinces of Monte
Video, at present called the Cisplatine, and its being constituted into a free
and independent state, in the form declared in the foregoing article.
ART. 8. Both high contracting parties oblige themselves to defend the
independence and integrity of the province of Monte Video, for the time and
in the manner that may be agreed upon in the definitive treaty of peace.
ART. 4. The existing government of the Bauda Oriental, immediately
upon the ratification of the present eonvention, shall convoke the representa-
252 BRAZIL AND B. AYRES.. [Rio.Janeiro,Ang:28, 1828
tives of that part of the said province which is at present subject to it; and the
existing government of Monte Video shall make simultaneously a like convoca-
tion of the citizens residing within the city, regulating the number of deputies
by that of the inhabitants of the province, and using the form adopted in the
election of representatives in the last legislature.
ART 5. The election of deputies for the city of Monte Video shall take
place indispensably eartramuros without the reach of the artillery of the city,
and in absence of armed force.
ART. 6. The representatives of the province being assembled at a distance
of at least ten leagues from the city of Monte Video, and any place occupied
by troops shall establish a provisional government, which shall rule the whole
province until the installation of the permanent government, to be created as
the constitution shall direct. The existing governments of Monte Video and
the Banda Oriental shall cease immediately after the installation of the pro-
visional one.
ARt. 7. The same representatives shall betake themselves afterwards to
the formation of the political constitution of the province of Monte Video; and
the constitution, previously to being sworn to, shall be examined by commision-
ers from the two contracting governments, for the sole object of seeing that it
does not contain any article or articles opposed to the security of their respec-
tive states. Should this be the case, it shall be publicly and categorically set
forth by the said commissioners; but should there be a want of common accord
in these it shall be decided by the two contracting governments.
ART. 8. Any inhabitant of the province of Monte Video shall be at liberty
to leave the territory thereof, taking with him his chattels, without prejudice
to a third person, until the constitution be sworn to, if he do not wish to ad-
here to it. or if it so suit him.
ART. 9. There shall be perpetual and absolute oblivion of all political acts
and opinions whatever done or professed previously to the ratification of the
present convention. by the inhabitants of the province of Monte Video, and of
the territory of the Emperor of Brazil which has been occupied by the troops of
the republic of the United Provinces.
ART. 10. It being a duty of the two contracting governments to assist
and protect the province of Monte Video, until it be completely constituted, and
said governments agree that, if previously to the constitution being sworn to,
and during five years afterwards, its tranquility and security should be dis-
turbed by civil war, they shall lend the necessary aid to maintain and sup-
port the lawful government. After the expiration of the above term, all pro-
tection which is by this article promised to the lawful government of the pro-
vince of Monte Video shall cease: and the said province shall be considered
in a state of perfect and absolute independence.
ART. 1 1. Both the high contracting parties declare most explicitly and cate-
gorically, that whatever may happen to be the use of the protection which in
Rio Janeiro, Aug.28,1828.] BRAZIL AND B AYRES. 258
conformity to the foregoing article, is promised to the province of Monte Video,
it shall in all cases be limited to the restoration of order, and shall cease
immediately that the object is attained,
ART. 12. The troops of the province of Monte Video and those of the
Republic of the United Provinces, shall evacuate the Brazilian territory in
the precise term of two months from the date of the exchange of the ratifica-
tions of the present convention, the latter passing to the left bank of the river
Plate or the Uraguay, with the exception of a force of 1500 men, or more,
which the government of the aforesaid republic, if it deem fit, may maintain in
any part of the territory of the province of Monte Video, until the troops of his
majesty the Emperor of Brazil completely evacuate the city of Monte Video.
ART. 13. The troops of his majesty the Emperor of Brazil shall evacuate
the territory of the province of Monte Video, including La Colonia del Sacra-
mento, in the precise term of two months from the date of the exchange of the
ratifications of the present convention, and retire to the frontiers of the empire,
or embark, with the exception of a force of 1500 men, which his said majesty
may maintain within the city of Monte Video, until the installation of the
provincial government of the province, under the express obligation of with-
drawing this force, in the precise term of four months, first following the installa-
tion of said provisional government, at the latest, delivery, in the act of evacua-
tion, the said city of Monte Video, in statu quo ante bellum, to commissioners
competently authorized ad hoc by the lawful government of the province.
ART. 14. It is understood that neither of the troops of the republic of the
United Provinces nor those of his majesty the Emperor of Brazil, which in
conformity to the two foregoing articles, are to remain temporarily in the pro-
vince of Monte Video, must in any wise interfere in the political affairs, go-
vernment, institutions, &c. of the said province. They shall be considered as
merely passive and on observation, kept to protect and guaranty public and
individual liberties and property; and they cannot operate actively unless the
lawful government of the province require their assistance.
As T. 15. As soon as the exchange of the ratifications of the present con-
vention takes place, there shall be an entire cessation of hostilities by sea and
by land. The blockade shall be raised in the term of forty-eight hours, on the
part of the imperial squadron; hostilities by land shall cease immediately
after this convention and its ratifications are notified to the armies, and by sea,
in two days to cape St. Mary, in eight to St. Catherine's, in fifteen to cape
Frio, in twenty-two to Pernambuco, in forty to the Line, in sixty to the coast
of Africa. and in eighty to the seas of Europe. All prizes made subsequently
shall not be considered bona ſide captures, and indemnification will be reci-
procally made for them.
ART. 16. All prisoners taken by either party during the war, by sea or by
land, shall be set at liberty, as soon as the present convention is ratified and
the ratifications exchanged; but those who have not secured the payment of
the debts contracted by them, cannot leave the country in which they are.
254 BRAZIL AND B. AYRES.. [Riojaneiro,Aug.28, 1828.
ARY. 17 After the exchange of the ratifications, both high contracting
parties shall proceed to appoint their respective plenipotentiaries for the pur-
pose of adjusting and concluding the definitive treaty of peace which is to be
concluded between the republic of the United Provinces and the Empire of
Brazil.
ART. 18. If contrary to expectation, the high contracting parties should
not come to an adjustinent in the said definitive treaty of peace, though ques-
tions that may arise in which they may not agree, notwithstanding the media-
tion of his Britannic majesty, the republic and the empire cannot renew hostili-
ties, before the expiration of five years stipulated in the tenth article; nor even
after this time can hostilities take place, without notification being reciprocally
given. with the knowledge of the mediating power, six months previously
ART. 19 The exchange of the ratifications of the present convention shall
be effected in the city of Monte Video, in the term of sixty days from the date
hereof, or sooner if possible.
In testimony whereof, we, the undersigned plenipotentiaries of the govern-
ment of the United Provinces, and his majesty the Emperor of Brazil, in virtue
of our full powers, sign the present convention with our hand. and seal it with
the seal of our arms. Done in the city of Rio Janeiro. on the 28th day of the
month of August, in the year of the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ, 1828.
L. s.l JUAN RAM on BALCAR CE. L. s.] Jose CLEMENTE PEREIRA.
L. : Thom As GUID.o. E. s.) Jo AQUIN D'OLIVERA A Lv AREz.
L. s. J M ARQUEz DE A RAcATY.
A 1) LITION AL AIRTICLE.
Both the high contracting parties oblige themselves to employ all means in their power in
order that the navigation of the river Plate, and of all others that empty into it, may be kept free
for the use of the subjects of both nations, for the space of fifteen years, in the form that may be
agreed upon in the definitive treaty of peace
The present article shall have the same force and vigour as if it had been inserted for word
word in the preliminary convention of this date.
Done in the city of Rio Janeiro, &c, &c.
ABSTRACT
QF
J U DIC I A L DE CIS I O N S.
ON POINTS CONNECTED WITH OUR
FOR E I GN R E L A TI O N S.
REFERENCES
T THE
PRINCIPAL CASES DECI'YE') IN THE COI ſºrts OF THE UNITED STATES, AND
lN SOME OF THE STATF THIB i 'N At S,
I N
IREGARD TO Pºliºſº S Cº. PºſNCIPLES
CO N N ECT 1. In W IT I I O U R.
jottign islatiºttº.
1. After the treaty of peace of 1783, no proceeding º with Great
tº * f \ }• , t \.
could be maintained in Pennsylvania. upon an attantler for Auunder.
treason, in adhering to the Kids of Great Britain. during the
war. — Respublica v. Gºrdon, 1 Dallas, 233.- Supreme Court
of Pennsylvana, 1788.
2. The law of Nations fºrms a part of the municipal law of Foreign minister.
Pennsylvania, and violations of that law may be prosecuted
by indictment, and punished by fine and imprisonment.—
I'espublica v. De Longchºmps. Dallas, I 14. Court of Oyer
and Terminer, Phila/elphia, 1784.
3. A Foreigner. committing an act in violation of the law id.
of Nations in regard to the person of a secretary of legation
of the nation to which such foreigner belongs, cannot be de-
livered up, by the Executive of the State, to the minister of
that nation; although cases may occur, where, pro bono pub-
lico, and to prevent atrocious offenders evading punishment,
they may be delivered up to the justice of the country to
which they belong, or where the offences were committed;—
nor can such offender against the law of nations be imprison-
ed until his Government shall declare that the reparation is
satisfactory.—id 116.
4. The municipal laws of a country can not change the law id.
of nations, so as to bind the subjects of another nation.—
Miller v. Ship Resolution, 2 Dallas. 4 – Federal Court of Ap.
peals, 1781.
5. America was bound. as an ally of France, by the capitu- Treaty with
lation between Great Britain and France, for the surrender of France.
Dominica.-id 15.
6. The ordinance of Congress founded on the Russian
armed neutrality, declaring that free ships should make free
goods, included British property.—id, 18, 36.
Armed neutrality.
33
258 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. COURTS.
Consuls.
Courts.
Consuls.
Foreign law.
Foreign laws.
Courts.
Admiralty.
Consuls.
Courts.
Adm iralty.
Treaty with
France.
Treaty with Great
Britain.
7. In criminai prosecutions against Consuls, the Circuit
Court of the United States has concurrent original jurisdic-
tion with the Supreme Court, and the District Court.—The
United States v Havara, 2 Dallas, 298.—Circuit Court U. S.
Pennsylvania District, 1793.
8. Consuls are officers known to the law of nations, and
are entrusted with high powers; but not with the power of au-
thenticating the laws of foreign nations. There appears no
reason for assigning to their certificate respecting a foreign
law, any higher or different degree of credit than would be
assigned to their certificates of any other fact.—Church v.
Hubbart, 2, Cranch, 237. —Sup. Court U. S., 1804.
9. Foreign laws must be proved like other facts. They
must be verified by oath, or by some other, such high authori-
ty that the law respects not less than the oath of an individual
—id 187. and Talbot v. Seeman—1, Cranch, 38, 1801, Sup.
Court U. S. *
10. A certificate of the proceedings of a court, under the
seal of a person who states himself to be the secretary of for-
eign affairs in Portugal, is not evidence.—id. 187. 239.
11. If the decrees of the Portuguese colonies are transmit-
ted to the seat of government and registered in the Depart-
ment of State, a certificate of that fact under the great seal
(of Portugal) with a copy of the decree, authenticated in the
same manner, would be sufficient prima facie evidence of the
verity of what was so certified.—id. 238, 239.
12. No foreign power can, of right, institute or erect any
court of judicature of any kind within the jurisdiction of the
United States, but such only as may be warranted by, and be
in pursuance of treaties. The admiralty jurisdiction which
had been exercised in the United States by the consuls of
France, not being so warranted, were not of right.—Glass v.
The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dallas, 16.—Supreme Court of the United
States. 1794.
13. The District Courts of the United States possess all
the powers of Courts of Admiralty, whether considered as
instance or as prize courts.-id. 16. -
14 By the 9th art. of the consular convention with France,
an exhibition of the register vessel, or ship’s roll, was neces-
sary to authorize the District Judge to issue his warrant to
arrest a deserter from a French vessel.—The U. S. v. Judge
Lawrence, 3 Dallas 42. –Sup. Court U. S. 1795.
15. The rights of British creditors, whose debts had been
sequestered, but not confiscated during the war, revived at
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
259
the peace, both by the law of nations and the treaty.—The
State of Georgia v. Brailsford–3 Dallas 4, 5 Supreme
Court U. S. 1794. Ware v. Hylton–3 Dallas, 199 to 235,-
Sup. Court U. S. 1796.
16. Under the 19th art. of the French treaty, the priva-
teers of France had a right to repair in our ports—and resti-
tution was denied of a British ship captured and brought into
the United States, by a French privateer which had been re-
paired in a port of the United States.—Mºodie v The ship
Phoebe Ann.-3 Dallas, 319. Sup. Court U. S. 1796.
17. A Foreign Consul, who draws bills of exchange on ac-
count of his government is not personally liable —Jones v.
Le Tombe, 3 Dallas, 384.—Sup. Court, U. S. 1795.
18. The right and mode of Expatriation discussed.— Talbot
v. Janson—3 Dallas, 133 to 169. —Sup. Court, U. S. 1795.
19. A final condemnation in an inferior court of Ad-
miralty, where a right of appeal exists and has been claimed, is
not a definitive condemnation within the meaning of the 4th
art. of the convention with France of the 30th of Sept. 1800.
—The U. S. v. The schooner Peggy—1, Cranch 103, Supreme
Court, U. S. 1801.
20. The Court is as much bound as the Executive to
take notice of a treaty, and will reverse the original decree of
condemnation, (although it was correct when made) and de-
cree restitution of the property, under the treaty made since
the condemnation —ib. 103
21. Salvage allowed to a ship of war of the United States
for the recapture of a Hamburgh vessel out of the hands of the
French (France and Hamburgh being neutral to each other,)
on the ground that she was in danger of condemnation under
the French arréte of 18th January, 1798.-Talbot v. Seeman
—1, Cranch 1. – Sup, Court U. S. 1810.
22. Marine ordinances of foreign countries, promulgated
by the Executive, by order of the Legislature of the United
States, may be read in the courts of the United States without
further authentication or proof–id. 38.
23. France and the United States were in a state of partial
war in the year 1799–id. 31.
24. An American citizen residing in a foreign country,
may acquire the commercial privileges attached to his do-
micil; and, by making himself the subject of a foreign power,
he places himself out of the protection of the United States,
while within the territory of the sovereign to whom he has
sworn allegiance.— Murray v. The Charming Betsey: 2,
Cranch, 64. Sup. Court U. S. 1804.
Confiscation,
Treaty with France
Prize.
Consul.
Expatriation,
Treaty with
France.
Treaty.
Prize.
Salvage.
Foreign laws.
France.
Prize.
Domici
260 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Expatriation.
Aliens tº
Treaty with Great
lłritain.
id
Aliens.
Foreign laws.
Prize.
Ler loci.
Law of nations.
Courts.
Courts.
‘Colonies.
25. Qu. re. Whether a citizen of the United States can divest
himself absolutely of that character, otherwise than in such
manner as may be prescribed by law? And, whether by
becoming a subject of a foreign power, he is rescued fiom
pu ishment for a crime against the United States, and is
disabled to hold lands?—id. ib. and McIlvaine v. Coace’s lessee
--2, Cranch. 280. Sup. Court U. S. 1804.
26. The treaty of peace with Great Britain prevents the
operation of the act of limitations of Virginia, upon. British
debts contracted before the treaty.--Hopkirk v. Bell.--3,
Cranch. 454, Sup. Court U. S., 1806.
27. Quere, Whether a British subject, born in England, in
the year 1750, and who always resided in England, could. in
the year 1786, take and hold lands in Virginia, by descent or
devise?--Lºmbert’s lessee v. Paine.——3, Cranch, 97, Supreme
Court U. S. 1805. .
28. An executor cannot maintain a suit in the District of
Coium...ia, u) on letters testamentary. granted in a foreign
country.— Diaon v. Ramsay–3, Crunch, 319, Sup. Court,
U S I S06.
29. A for eign sentence of condemnation as good prize, is
not co, ciusive evidence that the legal title to the property
wa. Lot in the subject of a neutral itation.— Maley v. Shat-
tuck–3. Cranch. 458, Sup. Court, U. S. 1806
30. All the rights to a testator’s personal property, are to
be regulated by the laws of the country where he lived; but
suits for those rights must be governed by the laws of that
country in which the tribunal is placed.—Diacon v. Ramsay—
3, C. anch, 458, Sup. Court, U. S. 1806.
31. If a foreign court cannot, consistently with the law of
nations, exercise the jurisdiction which it has assumed, its
sentence is to disregarded; but of their own jurisdiction, so
far as it depends upon municipal laws, the courts of every
country are the exclusive jndges. Every sentence of con-
demnation by a competent court, having jurisdiction over the
subject matter of its judgment, is conclusive, as to the title to
the thing claimed under it. Rose v. Himely-–4, Cranch, 241,
Sup. Court, U. S. 1808. Hudson v. Guestier—4, Cranch, 294
Sup. Court, U. S. 1808.
32. It is for Governments to decide whether they will con-
sider a revolted colony as an independent nation; and until
such decision shall be made, or the parent state shall relin-
quish her claim, courts of justice must consider the ancient
state of things as remaining unaltered, and the sovereign power
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 261
of the parent state over that coioisy as still subsisting.—Gel-
ston v. Hoyt–3, h heaton, 324, 1818. Rose v. Himely—4,
Cranch, 272. Sup. Court U. S 1808. f
The following public documen, s, respecting the revolt of
St. Lomingo, were noticed by the Court:
Notification by Mr Pichon, the French chargé d'affaires to
the American Government, published in March, 1802, inter-
dicing all manner of intercourse with ports of St. Domingo,
in possession of the revolted negroes.
The order of the commander-in-chief of the French repub-
lic in St. Doumingo.
The French arrétes of 22d June, 1802, 2d Oct. 1802.
The decree of General Ferrand of 1st March, 1804 – Rose
v. Himely—4, Cranch. 273. 274. 275, Sup. Court U. S. 1808.
Treaty of alliance between the French Republic and Spain
—19th August, 1796–4, Cranch, 259.
33. An American vessel seized by a French privateer within
the territorial jurisdiction of the government of St. Domingo,
for breach of the French municipal law, prohibiting inter-
course with certain ports in that island, and carried by the
captors directly to a Spanish poſt in the island of Cuba, was,
while lying there. lawfully condemned by a French tribunal
sitting at Guadaloupe.--Hudson v. Guestier––4, Cranch, 293,
Sup Court U. S. 1808.
34. The possession of the sovereign of the captors, gives
jurisdiction to his courts.
The possession of the captors, in a neutral port, is the pos-
session of their sovereign.
If the possession be lost by re-capture, escape, or voluntary
discharge, the courts of the captor lose the jurisdiction which
they had acquired by the seizure.
The trial of a municipal seizure must be regulated exclu-
sively by municipal law.
No foreign court can question the correctness of what is
done. unless the court passing the sentence lose its jurisdic-
tion by some circumstance which the law of nations can no-
tice.--Hudson v. Guestier—4, Cranch, 293, Sup. Court U.S.
1808.
35. The sentence of a foreign court of admiralty, condem-
ning a vessel for breach of blockade, is conclusive evidence
of that fact in an action on the policy of insurance.--Croud-
son v. Leonard––4, Cranch, 433, Sup. Court. U. S. 1808.
36. A person born in the colony of New Jersey before the
year 1775, and residing there till 1777, when he joined the
New states.
St. Domingo.
Prize.
Courts.
id.
Prize. Courts.
Treaty with Great
Britain, -
262 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.s. COURTS,
Aliens.
id.
Treaty with Great
Britian.
Blockade.
Treaty with Great
Britain.
Blockade.
Treaty with Great
Britain.
Courts.
Treaty with Great
Britain.
Courts.
British army, and ever afterwards adhered to the British,
claiming to be a British subject, and demanding and receiving
compensation, from that Government for his loyalty and his
sufferings as a refugee, did not, by the treaty of peace, become
an alien to the state of New Jersey, but had a right to take
lands, by descent, in that State.--McIlvaine v. Core’s lessee—
4, Cranch, 208. Sup. Court U. S. 1808.
87. A person born in England before the year 1775, and
who always resided there, and never was in the United States,
is an alien, and could not, in the year 1793, take lands in Ma-
ryland by descent from a citizen of the United States.--Daw-
Son’s lessee v. Godfrey—4, Cranch, 321, Sup. Court U. S.
1 S08.
38. Persisting in an intention to enter a blockaded port, after
warning, is not attempting to enter it, within the meaning of
the 18th art. of the British treaty of 1794.--Fitzsimmons v.
The Newport Insurance Company—4, Cranch, 185, Kºupreme
Court U. S. 1808.
39. If an act of confiscation, independent of the British
treaty of peace of 1783, should be construed to destroy the
claim of a British mortgagee of land in Georgia, the 5th art.
of that treaty re-instates the lien in its full force.--Higgin-
son v. Mein–4, Cranch. 419, Sup. Court U. S. 1808.
40. A vessel sailing ignorantly for a blockaded port, is not
liable to condemnation, under the law of nations.——Featon v.
Fry—3, Cranch, 335. Sup. Court U. S. 1809.
41 Copies of the proceedings in the vice admiralty court
of Jamaica, are admissible in evidence, not only under the
19th art. of the British treaty of 1794, but under the law of
nations, and the practice of Courts of Admiralty, when au-
thenticated, under the seal of the Court, by the deputy Regis-
trar, who is certified by the Judge of the Court, who is certi-
fied by a notary public.——id. ib. and p. 343.
42. If a defendant in ejectment in a State Court, set up an
outstanding title in a third person, no party to the suit; and
contend that such outstanding title is protected by the British
treaty, and the State Court decide that such outstanding title
is not protected by the treaty, it is not such a case arising
under a treaty, as will give appellate jurisdiction to the Su-
preme Court of the United States, under the constitution of
the United States, although it be a case within the 25th sec.
of the judiciary act of 1789.--Owens v. Norwoods’ lessee—5,
Cranch, 344, Sup. Court U. S. 1809.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 263
43. The Continental Court of Appeals, in prize causes. had
power to revise and correct the sentences of the Admiralty
Courts of the several States.--U. States v. Judge Peters, 5–
Cranch, 115, Sup, Court U. S. 1809.
44. The British orders in council of the 11th of Nov. 1807.
did not prohibit a direct voyage from the United States. to a
colony of France.--King v. The Delaware Insurance Compa-
my—6, Cranch, 71, Sup. Court U. S. 1810. A
45. The Supreme Court of the United States has appellate
jurisdiction of a cause decided in the highest Court of one of
the States, where the question is whether a confiscation under
the law of the State, was complete before the treaty of peace
of 1783, with Great Britain.—Smith v. Maryland Insurance
Company—-6, Cranch, 286, Sup. Court U. S. 1810.
46. By the confiscating acts of Maryland, the equitable
interests of British subjects were confiscated, without office
found, or entry, or other act done, and although such equita-
ble interests were not discovered until long after the peace—id.
47. The jurisdiction of French Courts, as to seizures, is
not confined to seizures made within two leagues of the coast.
48. A seizure beyond the limits of the territorial jurisdic-
tion, for breach of a municipal regulation, is warranted by
the law of nations.—Hudson v. Guestier—6, Cranch, 281, Su-
preme Court, U. S. 1810.
49. The letter of Mr Merry, to the Secretary of State, of
the 12th April, 1804, extended to the island of Curracoa,
the orders of the Lords Commissioners of the admiralty of the
5th of January, 1804, respecting the Blockade of Martinique
and Guadaloupe, by which the British officers were directed
“not to consider any blockade of those Islands as existing
* unless in respect of particular ports, which may be actually
“invested; and then not to capture vessels bound to such
“ ports, unless they shall have been previously warned not to
“enter them.”—JMaryland Insurance Company v. JP'ood—7,
Cranch,402, Sup. Court U. S. 1813.
50. A sentence of a foreign tribunal condemning neutral
property under an edict unjust in itself, contrary to the law
of nations, and in violation of neutral rights, and which has
been so declared by the legislative and executive departments
of the government of the United States, changes the property
of the thing condemned.--Williams v. Armroyd—7, Cranch,
423. Sup. Court U. S. 1813.
51. A sale by the authority of the captors, before sentence
of condemnation, is affirmed by such sentence, and is good
ab initio-id, ib.
Prize.
Courts.
British orders it,
council.
Colonies.
Treaty with Great
Britain.
Courts.
Confiscation,
France.
Courts.
Prize.
Territorial juris-
diction.
Blockade.
Prize.
Foreign sentenee.
Prize.
264 POINTs or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. Courts,
Prize.
Courts.
Prize.
Courts.
Alien.
Law of nations.
Municipal jurisdic
tion.
Prize.
Domicil.
id.
Confiscation.
Prize.
Enemy trade.
Prize.
Prize.
52 A French tribunal, at Guadaloupe, had jurisdiction of
property seized on the high seas for breach of the Milan de-
cree, and carried into the Dutch port of the Island of St Mar-
tins, and there sold by order of the Dutch Governor of St.
Martins, before condemnation, without any authority from
the French tribunal at Guadaloupe.—id. ib
53. The American owner cannot reclaim. in the courts of
this country, his property which has been seized and condemn-
ed in a French Court under the Milan Decree.—id. ib.
54. An Alien Enemy may take lands in Virginia by devise,
and hold the same until office found, and such title is confirm-
ed by the British Treaty of 1794.—Fairfax v. Hunter—7,
Cranch. 604 Sup, Court U. S. 1813.
55. A public vessel of war. of a foreign sovereign, coming
into our p ºr's, and de neating herself in a friendiy manner is
exempt from the jurisdiction of this country. — The Schooner
Er hang, v. McFaddon—7, Cranch, 116. Sup. Court U. S.
1812.
56. A Spanish subject who came to this country in a time
of peace between Spain and Great Britain, to carry on a trade
between this country and the Spanish provinces, under a Royal
Spanish license, and who continues to reside here and car-
ry on that trade after the breaking out of war between Great
Britain and Spain. is to be considered as an American mer-
chant, although the trade could be lawfully carried on by a
Spanish subject onlv. – Livingston v. Maryland Insurance
Company—7, Cranch, 507. Sup. Court United States, 1813.
57. The national commercial character of a person is to be
decided by his domicil, and not by the nature of his trade.—
id ib.
58. British property found in the United States. on land,
at the commencement of hostilities with Great Britain, can-
not be condemned as enemy’s property, without a legislative
act authorizing its confiscation. The act, of the legislature,
declaring war, is not such an act.—Brown v. United States
—8, Cranch, 110. Sup. Court Unitel States, 1814.
59. After a declaration of war an American citizen can-
not lawfully send a vessel to the enemy’s country to bring
away his property.—The Rapid—8, Cranch, 156. Sup-
Court United States. 1814. The Alexander—8, Cranch, 179.
Sup. Court United States, 1814.
60. The sailing on a voyage under the license and passport
of protection of the enemy, in ful therance of his views or in-
terests, constitutes such an illegality as subjects the ship and
UONNECTED WITH OFTR FOREIGN REI, ATIONS. 265
eargo to confi-cation as prize of war.— The Julia––8, Cranch,
# 81. Sºup. Contrf United States. 1814. The Aurora—8,
Cranch. 203. The Hyram—8, Cranch. 444.
61. It is not nece-sarv. in order to subject the property to
condemnation for sailing under a license from the enemy,
that the person granting the license, should be duly authorised
to grant it, provided the person receiving if tºkes it with the
expectation that it will protect his property from the enemy.—
The Aurora, 8, Cranch. 203. Sup Court U. S. 1814,
62. Sailing, with intent to further the views of the enemy,
is sufficient to condemn the property, although that intention
be frustrated by capture.
63. Sailing with a cargo of provisions to the port of a neu-
tral, who is the ally of our enemy in his war with another
power. is such a furtherance of the views of the enemy, as
will subject the ship and cargo to condemnation as prize of
war.—The Hiram—8, Cranch. 444, Sup. Court U. S. 1814.
64. The case of a vessel and cargo belonging to a citizen
of one belligerent nation, captured on the high seas by a crui-
zer of the other belligerent, given by the captor to a neutral.
and by him brought into a port and libelled in a court of his
own country, between which, and the nation to which the ves-
sel originally belonged, war breaks out before final adjudication,
is to be considered as a case of salvage. One noief w adjudged
to the libellants, and the other moiety to remain subject to the
future order of the court below; and to be restored to the
original owner after the termination of the war, unless provi-
sion should previously be made for the confiscation of enemy’s
property, found in the country at the declaration of war.—
The ſldventure —8, Cranch, 2 1, Sup. Court. U. S., 181 ...—
The ſistrea—1, Wheaton, 12 , Sup Court, U. S. 1s 16.
65. If a citizen of the United States establish his domicil in
a foreign country, between which and the United States hostili-
ties afterwards break out, any property shipped by such citi-
zen before knowledge of the war. and captured by an American
cruizer after the declaration of war, must be condemned as
lawful prize.—The Venus—8, Cranch, 253, Sup. Court, U.
5., 18 (4. *.
66. If the option be given to the consignee to take the goods
to his own account or not, the right of property does not vest
in the consignee until he has made his election —id. ib.
67. A naturalized citizen, who, in time of peace, returns
to his native country for the purpose of trade, but with inten-
tion of returning to his adopted country, coutinuing in the for-
License.
Enemy trade.
Prize.
id.
Salvage.
Prize.
Confiscation.
Prize,
Domicil.
Proprietary
Prize.
Prize.
$4
266 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S COURTS.
Domicil.
Prize.
Proprietary
interest.
Prize.
Domicil.
Prize.
Proprietary
interest.
Prize.
President’s
instructions
Prize.
Fnemy trade.
Prize.
met a year after knowledge of the existence of war between;
the two countries, for the purpose of winding up his complica-
ted affairs; and engaging in no new commercial transaction
whatever with the enemy, and actually returning to his adop-
ted country in a little more than a year after his first know-
ledge of the war, is to be considered as having gained a domicil
in his native country.—And his goods captured during the
war, are liable to condennation.—The Frances (Thompson
and al. claimants)—8, Cranch, 335. Sup. Court U. S. 1814.
68. Goods, appearing by the Ship’s papers to be a consign-
ment from Alien enemies to American merchants, are liable to
condemnation, as prize. although further proof was offered
that American merchants were jointly interested, and that
they had a lien upon the goods, in consequence of advances
made by them.—id. ib.
69 The commercial domicil of a merchant at the time of
the capture of his goods determines the character of those
goods, hostile or neutral.-The Frances (Gillespie's claim)—8
Cranch. Sup. Court U. S. 1814.
70. A municipal forfeiture under the laws of the United
States is absorbed in the more general operation of the law of
war.—The Sally—8, Cranch, 382. Sup. Court U. S. 1814.
71. No lien upon enemy’s property, by way of pledge for
the payment of purchase money, or otherwise, is sufficient to
defeat the rights of the captors in a prize court, unless in very
peculiar cases, where the lien is imposed by a general law of
the mercantile world, independent of any contract between
the parties.—The Frances (Irvin's claim)—8, Cranch, 418.
Sup. Court U S 1814.
72. The President’s instruction of 28th of August, 1812,
was meant to protect all British merchandise on board an
American ship without any exception on account of British
proprietary interest.—The Thomas Gibbons–8 Cranch, 421,
Sup. Court U. S. 1814. -
73. A vessel sailing to an enemy’s country after knowledge
of the war. and taken bringing from that country a cargo
consisting chiefly of enemy-goods, is liable to confiscation as
prize of war.—The St. Lawrence—8 Cranch, 434. Sup. Court
of the U. S. 1814.
74. Trade with the enemy is not excused by the necessity
of obtaining funds to pay the expenses of the ship; nor by the
opinion of an American minister, expressed to the master, that
by undertaking the voyage he would violate no law of the U. S.
— The Joseph—8 Cranch, 451. Sup. Court U. S. 1814.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 267
75, An illegal act committed in the former part of a circui. Prize.
tous voyage is good of condemnation.—id. ib.
76. A capture as prize of war may lawfully be made within id:
the territorial lim.ts of the United States at any place below
How water-mark.—id, ib.
77. Timber floated into a salt water creek, where the tide id.
ebbs and flows, leaving the ends of the timber resting of the
mud at low water, and pi evented by booins from flºating away
at high water, and so found at the commencement of the war,
is to be considered as landed, and not subject to condenna-
tion as prize of war.—Brown v. U. S. —3 Cranch, 110 Sup
Öourt U. S. 1815.
78. If a vessel be captured by a superior force, and a prize- Prize.
master and small force be put on board, it is not the duty of
the master and crew of the captured vessel to attempt to res- Rescue.
cue her; for they may thereby expose the vessel to condemna-
tion, although otherwise innocent: The Short Staple—9 Cranch
55. Sup. Court U S 1815.
79. If a merchant vessel of the United States be seized by Territorial
the naval force of the United States within the territoria. "“”
jurisdiction of a foreign friendly power, for a violation of the
laws of the United States. it is an offence against that power,
which must be adjusted between the two governments. This
court can take no cognizance of it; nor does the law connect
that trespass with the subsequent seizure by the civil authority
under the process of the district-courts, so as to annul the
proceedings of that court against the vessel.—The ship Rich-
mond—9 Cranch. 102. Sup. Court U. S. 1815.
80. If, upon the breaking out of a war with this country, Prize.
our citizens have a right to withdraw their property from the Withdrawing
enemy’s country, it must be done within a reasonable time. *
Eleven months after the declaration of war is too late —The
St. Lawrence—9. Cranch, 120. Sup. Court U. S. 1815.
81. Where an American consignee of two cargoes has an Prize.
option to take or reject both, within 24 hours after their arrival,
and he accept one, and says he will consider as to the other,
the shipper may either cast the whole upon the American
consignee, or resume the property and make the latter accoun-
table for what came to his hands. The right of property in Proprietary
the cargo not accepted does not. in transitu, vest in the Ameri- interest.
can house, but remains in the shipper and is liable to condemna-
tion, he being an enemy.—The Frances (Dunham and Ran-
dolphs’ claim)—9 Cranch. 183. Sup. Court United States, 1815.
82. The produce of an enemy’s colony is to be considered Prize
Domicil.
Confiscation.
268 Points OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts.
Domicil.
Courts.
Tºrize
Salvage.
Prize.
Dounicil.
Reciprocity.
Prize.
Neutral rights.
Prize.
Courts.
Prize.
Treaty.
Free ships
free goods.
Treaty with
Spain.
Prize.
Reciprocity.
Neutral rights.
Alien.
as hostile property so long as it belongs to the owner of the
soil, whatever may be his national character in other respects,
or whatever may be his place of residence.—30 hogsheads of
sugar v Boyle—9 t ranch, 191 Supreme Court U. S., 1815.
t 3. An island, in the temporary occupation of the enemy is
to be considered as an enemy’s colony.—id. ib.
84. In deciding a question of the law of nations, the court
will espect the decisions of foreign courts.-id ib.
85. Salvage is an incident to the question of prize, and may
be given upon a libel praying condemnation as prize of war.—
The schooner.ddeline and cargo–9 Cranch, Sup. C. U S 1815.
86 The propert v of persons domiciled in France (whether
they be Americans, Frenchmen, or foreigners) is good prize if
recaptured after being 24 hours in the possession of the enemy,
that being the rule adopted in the French tribunals.-il. ib.
87. Property unclaimed will be decreed as good prize. id ib.
88 The district courts ºf the United States. (being neutral,)
have jurisdiction to restore to the original Spanish owner (in
amity with the United States) his property captured by a
French vessel whose force has been increased in the United
States. if the prize be brought infra præstdia.—The brig Jilerſ &
and cargo v. Blas Moran—9 Cranch, 359. Superior Court
United States, 1815.
89, in order to constitute a capture, some acts should be
done indicative of an intent to seize and to retain, as prize: It
is sufficient if such intent is fairly to be inferred from the con-
duct of the captor.—id. ib.
90. The stipulation in a treaty that “free ships shall make
free good,” does not in ply the converse proposition that
enemy “ ships shall make enemy goods.”—The Nereide—9
Cranch, 389. Shºp, eme Court United States, 1815.
91. Our treaty with Spain does not contain, either expressly,
or by implication, a stipulation that enemy ships shall make
enemy goods.— id. ib.
92. The principle of retaliation, or reciprocity, is no rule of
decision in the judicial tribunals of the United States.—id. ib.
93 A neutral may lawfully employ an armed belligerent
vessel to transport his goods; and such goods do not lose their
neutral character by the armament, nor by the resistance made
by such vessel, provided the neutral do not aid in such arma-
ment or resistance, although he charter the whole vessel and
be on board at the time of the resistance.—id. ib.
94. Although the original plaintiff become an alien enemy
after the judgment below, yet the judgment in his favor
may be affirmed in the Supreme Court upon a writ of error
Owens v. Hannay—9 Cranch, 180. Sup. Court U. S. 1815
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 269
S5. The President’s instructions (to privateers) of the 28th President's in-
3- * * * - Stru Ct 10 il S.
of August, 1812. protected an American vessel sailing from
England, in August 1812, in consequence of the repeal of the
British olders in Council, and compelled by dangers of the British orders
seas to put into Ireland, where she was necessarily detained, "“”
until April. 1813, when she sailed again for the United States.
under the protection of a British license. The co, tinuity of º of
the voyage was not broken. The Mary—9 Cranch, 1-6, 815, 5 * *
96. The holder of a bottomry bond, has not such an inter- º
est as will support a claim to the vessel in a court of prize. y.
id. ib.
97. An interest acquired in war, by possession, is divested Prize.
by the loss of pºssession.—The vistrea, 1 Pł heaton, 125, Sup.
Court U. S. 1816.
98. The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the Treaty.
United States, extends to a final judgment or decree, in any
suit in the highest Court of law, or equity of a State, where Courts.
is tirawn in question the validity of a treaty, and the judg-
ment or decree is against the validity of the right claimed
under the treaty; and such judgment may be re-examined by
writ of error. in the same manner as if rendered in a Circuit
Court.— ..}/artin v. Hunter’s lessee— 1 h heaton, 304. Sup.
Court U. S. 1816.
99. Provisions, neutral property, but the growth of the ene- Prize.
my’s country, and destined for the supply of the enemy’s mi-
litary or naval forces, are contraband; but if they be the growth Contraband
of a neutral country, and destined for the general supply of "*
human life in the enemy’s country, they are not contraband.--
The Commercen—1 || heat...n, 382, 8wp. Court U. S. 1816. Frize
100. Freight is never due to the neutral carrier of Contra- Cºntraband
band.— id. ib. Freight.
101. A neutral ship laden with provisions, enemy's proper- ".
ty, and the growth of an enemy’s country, specially permitted
to be exported for the supply of his forces, is not entitled to
freight. It makes no difference, in such case. that the enemy
is carrying on a distinct war, in conjunction with his allies,
who are friends of the captor’s country, and the provisions
are intended for the supply of his troops, engaged in that war:
and that the ship in which they are transported, belongs to
subjects of one of those allies.—id ib.
102 Goods, the property of persons actually domiciled in Prize.
the enemy's country, at the breaking out of the war, are sub- Domicii.
ject to capture and condemnation as prize.—The Mary and
Susan—ſ ſtichardson Claimant,.) I Wheat, 46. Sup. Court,
270 Points or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
Alien.
Prize.
Prize.
|Ereight.
Prize.
Domicil,
Trize.
Neutral rights.
Drize,
Courts.
Prize.
Nentral rights.
U. S. 1816. See also, 2 Dallas, 42—JMr Vantelengen s claim,
in the continental Court of Jippeals, and 2 Crauch, 65, Murray
v. Charming Betsey,
103. The fact. that the commander of a privateer was an
alien enemy, at the time of the capture made by him, does
not invalidate such capture.—id. ib.
104. If part of the cargo of a neutral vessel, brought in for
adjudication, be condemned and part restored, the freight is
chargeable upon the whole cargo, as well upon that part re-
stored as upon that condemned. Query. Whether more than
a pro rata freight be due to the master.—The Jintonia Johan-
ma, 1 Wheat, 159. Sup Court U. S. 1826.
105. It seems that the property of a house of trade in the
enemy's country, is confiscable as a prize of war, notwith-
standing the neutral domicil of one or more of its partners —
id. ib.
106. The courts of this country, have no jurisdiction to re-
dress any supposed torts committed on the high seas, upºn the
property of its citizens by a cruiser regularly commissioned by
a foreign and friendly power, except where such cruiser has
been fitted out in violation of our neutrality.— L’Invincible—
1, Wheaton, 238. Sup Court U. S. 1816.
107. The exclusive cognizance of prize questions belongs
to the capturing power. This is a consequence of the equali-
ty at d absolute independence of sovereign states, on the one
hatid, and of the duty to observe uniform, impartial, neutrali-
ty, on the other. Under the former, every sovereign becomes
the acknowledged arbiter of his own justice, and cannot, con-
sistently with his dignity, stoop to appear at the bar of other
nations to defend the acts of his commissioned agents, much
less the justice and legality of those rules of conduct which
he prescribes to them. Under the latter, neutrals are bound
to withhold their interference between the captor and captured;
to consider the fact of possession as conclusive evidence of
the right. Under this, it is also, that it becomes unlawful to
divest a captor of possession, even of the ship of a citizen,
when seized under a charge of having trespassed upon belli.
gerent rights.-id. p. 254, 255. -
108. That the mere fact of seizure as prize does not, of
itself, oust the neutral admiralty court of its jurisdiction, is
evident from this fact, that there are acknowledged cases in
which the courts of a neutral may interfere to divest posses-
sions; to wit: those in which her own right to stand neutral is
invaded: and there is no case in which the court of a neutral
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 271
may not claim the right of determining whether the capturing
vessel be, in fact, the commissioned cruiser of a belligerent
power. Without the exercise of jurisdiction, thus far, in all
cases, the power of the admiralty would be inadequate to af-
ford protection from piratical capture.—id. p. 258.
109. Navigating under a license from the enemy is cause of
confiscation, and is closely connected in principle with the of
fence of trading with the enemy; in both cases the knowledge
of the agent will affect the principal, although he may, in re-
ality, be ignorant of the fact.—The Hiram—1, Wheaton, 440,
447. I 816. sº
1 10. The following is an account of the dates and substance
of the British orders in council, and the French decrees, af-
fecting our neutral rights, and which preceded the war of 1812
between Great Britain and the United States.
On the 16th of May, 1806, the British Government issued
an order in council, declaring the coast included between the
Elbe and Brest in a state of blockade.
On the 21st of November, 1806, the French emperor issued
his Berlin decree, declaring Great Britain and her dependen-
cies in a state of blockade.
On the 7th of January, 1807, the British government issued
an order in council, prohibiting neutral ships from carrying on
trade from one enemy’s port to another, including France and
her allies.
On the 11th of November, 1807, the British orders in coun-
cil were issued, which declared the continental ports from
which British ships were excluded in a state of blockade, (ex-
cept in case of ships cleared out from Great Britain whose car-
goes had paid a transit duty,) and rendered liable to condem-
nation all neutral ships, with their cargoes, trading to or from
the ports of France, or her allies, and their dependencies, or
having on board certificates of origin.
On the 7th of December, 1807, the French emperor issued
his Milan decree, declaring that any neutral ships which should
have touched at a British port, or paid a transit duty to the
British government, or submitted to be searched by British
cruizers, should be liable to condemnation.
On the 22d of December, 1807, the American embargo took
place.
On the 1st of March, 1809, the embargo was removed, and
a non-intercourse substituted with both France and England.
On the 19th of April. 1809, a negociation was concluded by
Mr Erskine, in consequence of which the trade with Great
Britain was renewed on the 10th of June,
Prize.
License.
Neutral rights.
British orders,
272 points on PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U s. courts,
Jºritish orders.
On the 26th April, 1809, a British order in council was is-
sued, modifying the former blockade. which was henceforth to
be confined to ports under the governments of Holland (as far
north as the river Ems) and France. together with the colonies
Prize.
Proprietary
interest.
Prize.
Practice.
Neutral rights.
Rule of 1756.
Prize.
Enemy trade.
of both, in all ports of Italy included between O bitello and
Pesaro.
On the 10th of August, 1809, the non-intercourse with Great
Britain again took place, in consequence of Mr Erskine’s ar-
rangement not being ratified.
On the 1st of May, 1310, the trade with both Great Britain
and France was opened, under a law of congress, that when-
ever either power should rescind its orders or decrees, the
president should issue a proclamation to that effect; and in
case the other pattv should not, within three months. equally
withdraw its orders or decrees, that the non-importation act
should go into effect with respect to that power.
On the 2d of November, 1810, the mresident issued his pro-
clamation, declaring the Berlin and Milan decrees to be so far
withdrawn, as no longer to affect the neutral rights of Amer-
ica: and the orders in council not being rescinded.
On the 2d of February. 1811, the importation of British
goods, and the admission of British ships into America, were
prohibited. *.*
On the 4th of April, 1812. an embargn was laid in the
United States. and on the 18th of June following, war was
declared against Great Britain.—1 Wheaton, p. 278. 279.
111. If the national character of property captured, and
brought in for adjudication appear ambiguous or neutral, and
no claim be interposed, the cause will be postponed for a year
and a day after the prize proceedings are commenced; and if
no claimant appear within that time, the propertv will be con-
denned to the captors. — The Harrison—1 Wheat. 298 1816.
112. As to the principles of practice in prize causes, see
Wheaton’s note II. in the appendix to the 1st vol. of his Re-
ports, p. 494, and note I. in the appendix to his 2d volume
of Reports, p. 1. :-
| 13. As to “the Rule of the War of 1756,” and its history,
see Mr. Wheaton’s note III. in the appendix to the 1st vol.
of his R ports, p. 507.
114. Trading with the enemy, by own citizens, whether
from our own or a foreign port, is lawful cause of confiscation
as prize; and the offence is complete the moment the vessel
sails with intent to carry a cargº to the port of an enemy.-
The ſtugen—1 Wheaton, 74, 1816.
UONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 273
115. Where enemy’s property is fraudulently blended in the
same claim with neutral property, the latter is liable to share
the fate of the former - The St. JV'icholas–1 JWheaton. 4 17.
431. 1816. 1 Caine's Reports, 565–Blagge v. New York
Insurance Company—Supreme Court of New Fork 1804–2
Binney, 308—The Phaenia. Insurance Company v. Prat et al –
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania 1816.
116. The “Rule of 1756” prohibits a neutral from engaging,
in time of war, in a trade in which he was prevented from
participating in time of peace, because that trade was, by
law. exclusively reserved fºr the vessels of the hostile state.
This prohibition stands upon two grounds:–1st. That a trade,
such as the coasting or colonial trade, which, by the perma-
ment policy of a nation, is reserved for its own vessels, if
opened to neutrals during war, must be opened under the
pressure of the arms of the enemy, and in order to ob-
tain relief from that pressure. The neutral who interposes
to relieve the belligerent under such circumstances, rescues
him from the condition to which the arms of his enemy have
reduced him, restores to him those resources which have been
wrested from him by the arms of his adversary, and deprives
that adversary of the advantages which successful war has
given him. This the opposing belligerent pronounces a de-
parture from neutrality, and an interference in the war to his
prejudice, which he will not tolerate, 2d. That if the trade
be not opened by law, a neutral employed in a trade thus re-
served, by the enemy, to his own vessels, identifies himself
with that enemy, and by performing functions exclusively ap-
pertaining to the enemy character, assumes that character.—
The Commercen—1 Wheaton, 396, 397. 1816.
i 17. A British subject claiming to take lands in this coun.
try by descent from a British subject in 1798, under the Bri-
tish treaty of 1794, must show title in his ancestor at the time
of making the treaty.—Harden v. Fisher—l Wheaton, 390,
1816.
118. In prize causes, the evidence to acquit or condemn,
must come, in the first instance, from the papers and crew of
the captured ship.
It is the duty of the captors to bring the ship's papers into
the registry of the district court, and to cause the examina-
tions of the principal officers and seamen of the captured ship
to be taken on the standing interrogatories. It is exclusive-
ly upon these papers and examinations that the cause is to be
Prize
Neutral rights.
Rule of 1756.
Alien.
Prize,
Practice,
35
274 PoinTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. COURTS,
Prize.
License.
Trize.
Spoliation of
papers.
Neutral rights.
ſtight of search
Prize.
Sea-letter.
Proprietary
interest.
Treaty with
Spain.
Alien.
Naturalization.
heard in the first instance. If, from this evidence the pro-
perty clearly appears to be hostile, or neutral, condemnation
or restitution, immediately follows. If the property appear
to be doubtful, or the case suspicious, farther proof may be
granted, according to the rules which govern the legal discre-
tion of the court.
If the parties have been guilty of fraud, or gross miscon-
duct, or illegality, farther proof is not allowed, and condem-
nation follows.
If a party aftempt to impose upon the court, by knowingly
or fraudulently claiming as his own, property belonging in part
to others, he will not be entitled to restitution of that portion
which he may ultimately establish as his own.
The claimants have no right to litigate the question whether
the captors were duly commissioned; but if the capture be
made by a non-commissioned captor, the prize will be con-
demned to the United States.—The Dos Hermanos—2. Whea-
tom, 77. 1817.
119. The sailing under the enemy’s license, constitutes,
of itself, an act of illegality, which subjects the property to
confiscation, without regard to the object of the voyage, or the
port of destination.—The Ariadne—2 Wheaton, 143. 1817.
120. Concealment, or even spoliation of papers, is not, of
itself, a sufficient ground for condemnation in a prize court;
but it may be ground for denying further prodf.—The Piz-
arro–2 PWheaton, 241. 1817.
121. The right of visitation and search is a belligerent
right which cannot be drawn in question; but must be con-
ducted with as much regard to the safety of the vessel de-
tained, as is consistent with the thorough examination of her
character and voyage.—The ſluma Maria—2 Wheaton, 327–
1817. The Eleanor—2 ſº heaton, 358–262. 1817.
122. Under the Spanish treaty of 1795, stipulating that
free ships shall make free goods, the want of such a sea let-
ter or passport, or such certificates as are described in the
17th article. is not a substantive ground of condemnation; it
only authorizes capture and sending in for adjudication; and
the proprietary interest in the ship may be proved by other
equivalent testimony.—The Pizarro–1 Wheat 227, 1817.
123. The term “subjects.” in the 15th article, extends to
all persons domiciled in the Spanish dominions.—Id. ib.
124. The power of naturalization is exclusively in Cen-
gress.—Chirac v. Chirac—2 Wheaton, 269. 1817,
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
275
125. The treaty between France and the United States, Alien,
of 1778, enabled the subjects of France to hold lands in the
United States.—Id p. 270.
The repeal of that treaty did not affect the title of a French-
man, who, before its repeal, became naturalized under the
act of Congress. Upon his death, in 1799, intestate, his
lands descending in fee to his French heirs under the Mary-
land statute of 1780, whose title was determinable upon their
failure to perform the condition contained in that act. While
they were so seized in fee, another treaty was entered into
between France and the United States in 1800, which enabled
French subjects to dispose of their lands by testament or
otherwise, and to inherit lands without obtaining letters of
naturalization. This treaty did away the incapacity of alien-
age, and placed these French heirs in precisely the same situ-
ation, with respect to lands, as if they had become citi-
zens. But the treaty farther stipulates, “ that in case the
“ laws of either of the two states should restrain strangers
“ from the exercise of the rights of property with respect to
“ real estate, such real estate may be sold, or otherwise dis-
“ posed of, to citizens or inhabitants of the country where it
“may be.” This will probably prevent a French subject
from inheriting or purchasing the estate of a French subject,
who is not also a citizen of the United States; but it cannot
affect the right of him who takes or holds by virtue of the
treaty, so as to deprive him of the power to sell, or otherwise
dispose of, the property to citizens or inhabitants of this
country. This power endures for life. This treaty control-
led the act of Maryland, and substituted the term of life for
the term of ten years. The expiration of the treaty did not
affect the rights acquired and vested under it.—Chirac v.
Chirac-2. Wheaton, 269 to 278. 1817.
126. It seems that where a native citizen of the United
States emigrated, before a declaration of war, to a neutral
country, there acquired a domicil, and afterwards returned to
the United States during the war, and re acquired his native
domicil, he became a redintegrated American citizen; and
could not afterwards, flagrante bello, acquire a neutral domi-
cil by again emigrating to his adopted country.—The Dos
Hermanos—2 PWheaton, 7.7–98. 1817.
127. The commander of a squadron is liable to individuals
for the trespasses of those under his command, in case of posi-
tive or permissive orders, or of actual presence and co-opera-
tion.—The Eleanor—2 Wheaton, 356.
Prize.
Domicil.
Prize.
276 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS.
Prize.
Troprietary
interest.
New States.
Courts.
Prize.
New States.
Courts.
St. Domingo.
Alien.
So the commander of a single ship is responsible for the
acts of those under his command; as are, likewise, the
owners of privateers for the conduct of the commanders ap-
pointed by them. —Id ib.
128. Under the treaty with Spain, the Spanish character
of the vessel being ascertained, the proprietary interest in the
cargo cannot be inquired into, unless so far as to ascertain
that it does not belong to citizens of the United States, whose
property engage! in trade with the enemy is not protected by
the treaty — The Pizarro–2 Wheaton, 246. 1817.
129. The act of Congress of 1794, ch. 50, sec. 3, prohibit-
ing the fitting out any ship, &c. for the service of a foreign
prince or state, to cruise against the subjects of any other
fºreign prince or state, with whom the United States are at
peace, does not apply to any new state not acknowledged by
the United States, or by the government of the country, to
which such new state previously belonged.—Gelston v. Hoyt–
3 117teatom. 328. 1818
130. The decision of a court of peculiar and exclusive ju-
risdiction, is completely binding upon the judgment of every
other court, in which the same subject matter comes incident-
ally in controversy. Such are the sentences of ecclesiastical
courts in the probate of wills, and granting of administrations
of personal estate; the sentences of prize courts in all mat-
ters of prize jurisdiction; and the sentences of courts of
Admiralty, and other courts acting in rem, either to enforce
forfeitures or to decide civil rights. *
And the sentence is equally conclusive whether it be of
condemnation or acquittal—Id. p. 315–316.
131. It belongs exclusively to governments to recognise new
states, arising in the revolutions which may occur in the
world; and until such recognition, either by our own govern-
ment, or the government to which the new state belonged,
cours of justice are bound to consider the ancient state of
things as remaining unaltered —Id. p. 324.
Neither the Government of Petion, nor Christophe (the
rival chiefs in the island of St. Domingo.) had been recog-
nised as a foreign state by the government of France, or of
the United States, in the year 1818.-Id. p. 325.
132. A married woman who was a British subject before
the revolution, and always continued such, but whose hus-
band resided in this country both before and after that period,
was entitled to a dower of those lands of which he was seized
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
7
27
before the revolution, but not of those of which he was sub-
sequently seized — Kelly v. Harrison—2 Johns. cases, 29.
Supreme Court, of .New Hork 1800.
133. When the lands ºf a British subject in N. York, descend-
ed in 1752, to his daughters who were British subjects, and
who married British subjects, neither they nor their wives
having become citizens of the United States, s ch marriages
ever, after the revolutiºn, did not impair the rights of the
wives, nor prevent the full enjoyment of the property, accord-
ing to the rights of the marriage state, especially after the
prºvision of the 9th art of the treaty of 1794–Jackson v.
J.unm. 3 Johns cases, 109 1802—Jackson v. Wright, 4 Johns.
Rep. 75. Supreme Court ºf New York, 1809.
134. The treaty of 1794 relates only to lands then held by
British subjects, and not to any after acquired lands. --Jack-
son v. Decker–11 Johns. Rep. 418, 429, Sup, Court, JNew
Fork, 1814.
135. An Alien may, by the common law, take by purchase
a freehold or other interest in land, and may hold it against
the world, except the King; and even against him until
office found, and is not accountable for rents and profits pre-
viously received.—Craig v. Leslie—3 Pł heat. 589. 1818–
Craig v. Itadford—3 Wheaton, 594, 1818.
136. A grant of land by Virginia in 1788, to a British sub-
ject, issued upon a warrant, and survey made in 1774, vested
a good title in fee in the British subject, which title was ren-
dered absolute and indefeasible by the 9th art. of the treaty
of 1794.—Craig v. Radford—3 Wheaton, 594, 599. 1818.
137. The native character does not revert by a mere return
to his native country, of a merchant domiciled in a neutral
country at the time of capture, who afterwards leaves his com-
mercial establishment in the neutral country, to be conducted
by his clerks in his absence, who visits his native country
merely on mercantile business and intends to return to his
adopted country. Under these circumstances the neutral
domicil still continues.—The Friendschaft—3 Wheaton, 14–
1814.
138. British subjects, resident in Portugal (though entitled
to great privileges) do not retain their native character, but
acquire that of the country where they reside and carry on
their trade.—Id. p. 14.
1.9. By the law of this country the rule of reciprocity pre-
Alier.
id.
Prize.
Domicil.
id.
id.
Prize.
wails upon the recapture of the property of friends. The Reciprocity.
278 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Prize.
Hlicense.
Piracy.
Courts.
New States.
Courts.
Prize,
law of France denying restitution upon salvage after 24 hours
possession by the enemy, the property of persons domiciled
in France is condemned as prize by our courts, on recapture,
after being in possession of the enemy that length of time.—
The Star—3 Wheaton, 7.8, 92. 1818.
140. One citizen of the United States has no right to pur-
chase of, or sell to another, a license or pass from the public
enemy, to be used on board an American vessel.—Patton v.
Nicholson—3 PWheaton, 204, 207.
141. A robbery committed on the high seas, although such
robbery, if committed on land, would not, by the laws of the
United States, be punishable with death, is piracy under the
8th $ of the act of 1790, c. 36, (ix.) for the punishment of
certain crimes against the United States and the circuit cºurts
of the United States have jurisdiction thereof.--The United
States v. Palmer—3 /Pheaſon, 610, 626 1818.
The crime of robbery, as mentioned in the act is the crime
of robbery as recognized and defined at common law. Id. 630.
The crime of robbery committed by a person who is not a
citizen of the United States on the high seas, on board of a
ship belonging exclusively to subjects of a foreign state, or
on persons in a foreign vessel, is not piracy under the act,
and is not punishable in the courts of the United States.—
ld. ib.
142. When a civil war rages in a foreign nation, one part
of which separates itself from the old established government,
and erects itself into a distinct government, the courts of the
Union must view such newly constituted government as it
is viewed by the legislative and executive departments of the
government of the United States. If that government re-
mains neutral, but recognises the existence of a civil war, the
courts of the Union cannot consider as criminal those acts
of hostility which war authorises, and which the new govern-
ment may direct against its enemy.—ld. 634.
The same testimony which would be sufficient to prove that
a vessel or person is in the service of an acknowledged state,
is admissable to prove that they are in the service of such
newly created government. Its seal cannot be allowed to
prove itself, but may be proved by such testimony as the nature
of the case admits: and the fact that a vessel or person is in
the service of such government may be established otherwise,
should it be impracticable to prove the seal.—id. 635.
143. Where a neutral ship-owner lends his name to cover a
fraud with regard to the cargo, this circumstance will subject
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 279
the ship to condemnation.—The Fortuna---3 Wheaton, 236–
245. 1818.
144. Spoliation of papers by an enemy master, carrying a Prize.
cargo chiefly hostile, will not preclude a neutral claimant, to iºn of
whom no fraud is imputable, from further proof. The Friends-
schaft—3 Wheaton, 48.
145 A blockade does not, according to modern usage, ex- Prize,
tend to a neutral vessel found in port, nor prevent her coming
out with a cargo which was on board when the blockade was Blockade.
instituted. Olivera v. The Union Ins. Company—3 Wheaton,
194–1818.
146. A neutral cargo found on board an armed enemy’s ves- Prize.
sel is not liable to condemnation as a prize of war. The ſit- Neutral rights.
alanta–3 Wheaton, 409–15, 1818.
147. It is not competent for a neutral Consul, without the Prize.
special authority of his government, to interpose a claim on
account of a violation of the territorial jurisdiction of his coun-
try. The flnne—S Wheaton, 435-445–1818.
Quere, Whether such a claim can be interposed even by a
public minister, without the sanction of the government in
whose tribunals the cause is pending?—id. p. 446.
148. A capture made within neutral territory is, as between Prize.
the belligerents, rightful, and its validity can only be question- Neutral rights.
ed by the neutral state.—id. p. 447.
149. If the captured ship commence hostilities upon the id.
captor within the neutral territory, she forfeits the neutral pro-
tection, and the capture is not an injury for which redress can
be sought from the neutral sovereign.—id ib.
150. British subjects who took lands in New York by devise Treaty will,
in December, 1776, continued to hold the same until their G. Britain.
title became complete by the 9th article of the treaty of 1794. Alien.
Jackson v. Clarke—3 Wheaton, 1. 1818.
151. By the maritime law, condemnation completely ex- Prize.
tinguished the title of the former owners. The Star—3 ºhea. * *
ton, 86, 1818. -
152. The original owner of an American vessel, captured Prize.
by the enemy, condemned, sold, and re-captured by an Ame- Salvage.
rican privateer, was not entitled to restitution on payment of
salvage under the salvage act of 3d March, 1800, ch, 14, and Jus Postliminii
the prize act of 26th June, 1812, ch. 107. The Star—3 PWhea-
tom, 78 1818.
153. As to the rules of the several maritime codes, in re- Salvage.
gard to salvage, see Mr Wheaton's note to the case of The
Star—3 Wheaton, 93.
Consul.
id.
280 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
Alien.
Treaty with
G. Britain.
Alien.
Treaty with
G. Britain.
£’rize.
1)omicil.
Conquest.
154. An alien may take an estate in lands by the act of the
parties, as by purchase, but he cannot take by the act of the
law, as by descent.—Orr v. Hodgson—4 Wheaton, 453. 1819.
155. The 6th article of the treaty of peace of 1783, com-
pletely protected the titles of British subjects to lands in the
United States which would have been liable to escheat for the
defect of alienage. That article was not meant to be confined
to confiscations jure belli.—id ib.
156. The 9th article of the British treaty of 1794 gives to
the title of the parties, whatever it may be, the same legal vali-
dity as if they were citizens. It is not necessary to show ac-
tual seizure or possession, but only that the title was in them
at the time the treaty was made.—id ib.
The 9th article of that treaty did not mean to include any
other persons than British subjects and citizens of the United
States.—id. ib.
157. The property of a house of trade established in the
enemy’s country is condemnable as prize, whatever may be
the personal domicil of the partners.-The Friendshaft–4,
Wheafon, 105 1819.
158. By the conquest and military occupation of a portion
of the territory of the United States by a public enemy, that
portion is to be deemed a foreign country, so far as respects
our revenue laws.—United States v. Rice—4 Wheaton, 247-
i818.
159. A vessel and cargo which is liable to seizure as ene-
my’s property, or for sailing under the pass or license of an
enemy, may be seized after her arrival in a port of the United
States, and condemned as prize of war. The delictum is not
purged by the termination of the voyage –The Caledonian--
4. Wheaton, 100. 1819.
160. The government of the United States, having recog-
nized the existence of a civil war between Spain and her co-
lonies. but remaining neutral, the courts of the United States
are bound to consider as lawful, those acts which war author-
ises, and which the new governments in South America may
direct against their enemy.--The Divina Pastora, 4 Wheaton,
52–63, 1819.
Captures made by the cruizers of those governments, are
to be regarded by us, captures jure belli, the legality of which
cannot be determined by the courts of a neutral country, un-
less the neutral rights of the United States be violated.-
Id. 64.
Prize.
License.
New states.
Courts.
254.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 281
161. As to the jurisdiction of neutral courts over belliger. * *
ent captures, made in violation of the neutral jurisdiction, see
Mr Wheaton’s note to the case of the Divina Pastora.-49*
}}'heaton. 65. 1819.
For a cºllection of the public acts by which the government jºin color
of the United States recognized the existence of a civil war "
between Spain and her colonies, before the year 1819– See
.Mr H heaton's Appendia to the 4th vol of his reports, page 23
fo 59.
162 The right of adjudicating, on all captures, and ques. Prize.
tions of prize belongs exclusively to the courts of the captors, Courts
country; but it is an exception to this general rule, that where
the captured vesssel is brought, or voluntarily comes, infra
prasila of the neutral power, that power has a right to enquire Neutral rights.
whether its own neutrality has been violated by the capturing
cruizer; and if such violation has been committed, is in duty
bound to restore to the original owner, property captured by
cruizers illegally equipped in its ports.-The Estrella—4
JP'heaton, 307. 1819.
163. No part of the act of the 5th of June. 1794, c. 226,
was repealed by the act of the 3d of March, 1817, c. 58. The
act of 1794, c. 226, remained in fºrce until the act of 20th of
April, 1818, c. 83, by which all the provisions respecting our
neutral relations were embraced, and all former laws on the
same subject were repealed –Id. 311.
164. In the absence of every act of Congres on the subject,
the Courts of the United States would have authority, under
the general law of nations, to decree restitution of property
captured in violation of their neutrality, under a commission Neutral rights,
issued within the United States, or under an armament, or
augmentation of the armament, or crew, of the capturing
vessel, within the same Id 31 1.
165. War having been recognised to exist between Spain New states.
and her colonies, by the government of the United States, it
is our duty, when a capture is made by either of the belliger- Colonies.
ent parties, without any violation of our neutrality, and the
prize is brought innocently within our jurisdiction, to leave
things in the same state they find them; or to restore them to
the state from which they have been forceably removed by the
act of our own citizens. The JWeustra Senora de la Caridad.
4 Wheaton, 502, 1819.
The above case was not within the Spanish treaty, as the §. with
Carthagenian captors were not pirates, and the capture was pain.
Courts.
36
282 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. courts,
Piracy.
Troprietary in-
terest"
Prize.
Jurisdiction.
High seas.
Piracy.
not made within the jurisdictional limits of the United States,
the only two cases in which the treaty enjoins restitution.
Id. 502.
166. Upon a piratical capture, the property of the original
owners cannot be forfeited for the misconduct of the captors
in violating the municipal laws of the country, to which the
vessel seized by them is carried. The Jocefa Segunda—5
Wheaton, 338, 351. 1820
167. But where the capture is made by a regularly com-
missioned captor he acquires a title to the captured property,
which can only be divested by recapture, or by the sentence
of a competent tribunal of his own country; and the property
is liable to forfeiture for a violation, by the captor, of the re-
venue, or other municipal laws of the neutral country into
which the prize is carried. Id.
168. A murder committed on board of a ship of war of a
nation, on the high seas, is committed within the jurisdic-
tion of that nation.—
Mr.Marshall’s speech in the House of Representatives of the
United States, upon the case of Thomas Nash, alias Jonathan
Robbins. See p. 5 of the Appendia to 5 Wheaton’s Rep.
The jurisdiction of a nation at sea, is personal, reaching
its own citizens only; and consequently that of the United
States cannot extend to a murder committed by a British
sailor on board a British frigate navigating the high seas, un-
der a commission from the King of Great Britain. Id. p. 6
and 7.
A contract made at sea is governed and to be decided upon
according to the laws of that nation to which the vessel, or
contracting parties, belong. Id p. 7.
So if a crime be committed on board a ship at sea, no ma-
tion but that to which the vessel belonged has jurisdiction of
the ºffence and can punish the offender. Id. ib.
The right of every nation to punish is, in its nature, limited
to offences against the nation inflicting the punishment. It
compreheads every possible violation of its laws on its own
territory, and extends to violations committed elsewhere by
persons it has a right to bind. It extends also to general
piracy. A pirate, under the law of nations, is an enemy of
the numan race. Being the enemy of all, he is liable to be
punished by all; any act which denotes this universal hostility,
is an act of piracy. Not only actual robbery therefore, but
cruizing on the high seas without commission and with intent
to rob, is piracy. This is an offence against all and every na-
connECTED witH oUR FOREIGN RELATIONs. 283
tion, and is therefore alike punishable by all. But an offence, Piracy.
which, in its nature, affects only a particular nation, is only
punishable by that nation. It is by confounding general piracy,
with piracy by statute, that indistinct ideas have been pro-
duced respecting the power to punish offences on the high
seas. A statute may make any offence piracy, committed
within the jurisdiction of the nation passing the statute, and
such offence will be punishable by that nation. But piracy
under the law of nations, which alike is punishable by all na-
tions, can only consist in an act which is an offence against
all. No particular nation can increase or diminish the list
of offences thus punishable. d. p. 7 and 8.
No new offence is made piracy by the British Statutes which
make offences committed at sea, triable and punishable as if
committed on land. If a man be indicted as a pirate the of.
fence must be shown to have been piracy before the statute,
except where in the case of British subjects, express acts of
parliament have declared that the crimes therein specified
shall be adjudged piracy, or shall be liable to the same mode
of trial and degree of punishment.
It is true that the offence (piracy) may be completed by a
single act; but it depends upon the nature of that act. If it
be such as manifests a general hostility against the world; an
intention to rob generally, then it is piracy.—id. p. 9, 10 and 11.
169. If a British subject commit distinct acts of murder and
piracy on board a British frigate at sea, and escape into this
country, he is liable to be lawfully arrested and delivered by
the President of the United States, up to the British Govern-
ment, under the 27th Article of the British Treaty of 1794,
although he might be tried for the piracy in the courts of this
country.—id. p. 11 and 12.
The judicial power of the United States is by the constitu-
tion confined to cases in law and equity; it cannot extend to
political compacts, as the establishment of a boundary line
between the American and the British dominions; the case of
the late guaranty in the treaty with France; or the case of the
delivery of a murderer under the 27th article of our treaty
with Great Britain.—id. . 17.
170. Piracy, under the law of nations is of admiralty and
maritime jurisdiction; and upon this principle the courts of
admiralty under the confederation took cognizance of piracy,
although there was no power in congress to define and punish
the offence.—id. p. 18, -
Treaty with
G. Britain.
Fugitives.
Courts.
Piracy.
Courts.
Admiralty,
284 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. Counts,
President of
U. States.
Treaty.
President of
U. States.
Piracy.
id.
Piracy.
High seas.
171. The President is the sole organ of the nation in its
external relations, arid its sole representative with foreign ua-
tions. Of consequence the demand of a foreign nation can
only be made on him. He losseses the whole executive
power. He holds and directs the force of the nation. Of
con-equence, any act to be performed by the force of the na-
tiot, is to be performed through him.
He is charged to execute the laws. A treaty is declared to
be law. He must then execute a treaty, where he and he
alone, possesses the means of executing it.—id. p. 26.
172. The President may order a mulle proscqui to be enter-
ed.—id p. 29.
173. The act of the 30th of April, 1790, c. 36 S. 8, concern-
ing certain crimes committed upon the high seas, &c. extend to
all persons on board all vessels which throw oil their national
character by cruizing piratically, and commiting piracy on
other vessels. – U S v. Klintock—5 P; heaton. 15%. , 890.
U. S. v. Furlong—5 # heaton, 84--192. 820.
174 ſhe act of the 3d of March. 1819, c. 76, §. 5, referring
to the law of nations for a definition of the crime of piracy,
is a constitutional exercise of the power of Congress to define
and munish that crime.— United States, v. Smith—5 Wheato;,
153--1 57. 1820.
The crime of piracy is defined by the law of nations with
reasonable certainty.—id. p. 60.
Piracy, by the law of nations, is robbery upon the sea—.
vd. 162.
175. The 8th S. of the act of the 30th of April, 1790, c.
36. for the punishment of certain crimes against the United
States is not repealed by the act of the 3d of March, 1819. c.
76, to protect the commerce of the United States, and to pun-
ish the crime of piracy — United States v. Furlong and al.—5
Wheaton, 184–192. 1820.
In an indictment for a piratical murder (under the act of
the 30th of April, 1790, c. 36, § 8,) it is not necessary to
allege that the prisoner is a citizen of the United States, uor
that the crime was committed on board a vessel belonging to
citizens of the United States, but it is sufficient to charge it
as committed from on board such a vessel by a mariner sail-
ing on board such a vessel. id. 194.
The words. “ out ºf the jurisdiction of any particular State,”
in the act of the 30th of April, 1790, c. 36, § 1, mean out of
the jurisdiction of any particular state of the Union, id. p. 200.
A vessel lying in an open roadstead of a foreign country, is
CoNNECTED WITH our Foreign RELATIONS. 285
“upon the high seas” within the act of 30 Jīpril 1790, c. 36, §.
8. id. ib.
A citizen of the United States fitting out a vessel in the
ports of the United States, to cruise against a power in amity
with the United States, is not protected by a foreign commis-
sion from punishment for any offence committed against the
property of citizens of the United States. id. p. 210.
176. The courts of the United States have jurisdiction un-
der the act of 30th April, 1790, c. 86 S. 8, of murder or robbery
committed on the high seas by a citizen, or by a foreigne, on
board of a piratical vessel; and the burden of proof is on the
prisoners to show the national character of the vessel. The
offence is equally within the statute if the murder be committed
by throwing the person into the sea. The United States,
Holmes—5 Wheaton. 416–418. 18.0.
77. In cases of violation of our neutrality by any of the
belligerents, if the prize come voluntarily within our territory,
it is to be restored to the original owner by our courts. But
their jurisdiction for this purpose, under the law of liations,
extends only to restitution of the specific property with cost
and expenses during the pendency of the suit, and does not
extend to the infliction of vindictive damages, as in ordinary
cases of marine torts. The Josefa Segunda—5 PPheaton, 389,
1820.
178. Where the original owner seeks for restitution in our
courts upon the ground of a violation of our neutrality by the
captors, the onus probandi rest upon him; and if there be rea-
sonable doubts respecting the facts, the court will decline to
exercise its jurisdiction. id. 391.
179. On the subject of prize law, and the prize ordinances
of foreign governments, see 5 Wheaton’s Jippendia, Note III.
180. On the subject of the neutrality of the United States,
in the contest between Spain and her colonies, See 6 Whea-
ton’s Appendia, Note V.
181. Whether the capture be made by a duly commissioned
captor, or not, is a question between the government and the
captor with which the claimant has nothing to do.—The .3mi-
able Isabella—6 Wheaton, I, 66–1821.
182. The 17th article of the Spanish treaty of 1795, so far
as it purports to give any effect to passports, is imperfect and
inoperative, in consequence of the omission to annex the form
of passport to the treaty; consequently the proprietary inte-
rest of the ship is to be proved according to the ordinary rules
of the prize court; and if thus shown to be Spanish, will pre-
tect the cargo.—id, p. 69.
Piracy.
Prize.
Neutral rights.
Courts.
Law of nations.
I’rize.
Neutral rights.
Courts.
Prize.
Spanish colo-
lies.
Prize.
Treaty with
Spain.
Proprietary
interest.
286
POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Prize.
Practice.
Çonsuls,
Prize.
Courts.
Treaty with
Spain.
Prize.
Treaty with
Spain.
Spanish colo-
mies.
New states.
Prize.
Nentral rights.
183. By the rules of the prize court the onus probandi of
a neutral interest rests on the claimant—id. p. 77.
The evidence to acquit or condemn must come in the first
instance from the ship's papers, and the examination of the
captured persons. Where these are not satisfactory, farther
proof may be admitted, if the claimant has not forfeited his
right to it, by a breach of good faith. On the production of
further proof, if the neutrality of the property be not estab-
lished beyond reesonable doubt, condemnation follows.
The assertion of a false claim. in whole or in part, by an
agent, or in connivance with the real owner, is a substantive
cause of condemnation. id. ib.
184. A foreign consul has a right to claim, or libel, in rem,
where the rights of property of his fellow subjects are in ques-
tion, without any special authority from those for whose be-
nefit he acts; but he cannot receive actual restitution of the
thing in controversy without such special authority. The Bello
Corrunes—6 H heatºn, 152, 168, 169.—1821.
185. A citizen of the United States, cannot in the courts of
the United States, claim as prize the property of a nation in
amity with the United States, captured by him under a for-
eign commission. id. ib.
186. In case of an illegal capture in violation of the neu-
trality of this country, the property of the lawful owners, can-
not be forfeited for a breach of our revenue laws by the cap-
tors, or persons who have rescued the property from their pos-
session. Id. ib.
187. By the 2d section of the 14th article of the treaty
with Spain, citizens of the United States, who take commis-
sions from any prince or state with which Spain is at war, to
cruize against Spain, are to be punished as pirates, and can-
not support, in the courts of the United States, any claim for
prizes made under such commissions. Id. 171.
188. Under the 14th article of the Spanish treaty, the new
Spanish South American States are to be considered as “states
at war” with Spain; and the neutrality act of June, 1797, c.
1, extends the same prohibition, with all its consequences, to
a colony revolting and making war against its parent country.
Id. ib.
189. The property of a friendly nation captured by a ves-
sel built, armed, equipped, and owned in the United States,
will, if brought within our territorial limits, be restored to the
eriginal owners. La Conception—6 Wheaton, 235-238. 1821
ČONNEC'PED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 287
190. In 1821 the Government of the United States had not Mexican
acknowledged any Mexican Republic or State at war with republic.
Spain, nor could the Supreme Court of the United States re-
cognize the existence of any court of admiralty sitting at
Galveztown with authority to adjudicate upon captures. The
JWueva Jinna and Liebre—6 Wheaton, 193. 1821.
191. As to the powers of consuls—see 6 PWheaton, 156, note Consuls.
(a) to the case of the Bello Corrunes, and the Jippendia, note
V. p. 3.
192. As to the form and effect of passports to neutral ves- Passports.
sels—see 6 Wheaton, Appendix, mote II. p. 12.
For the Convention of 1801. between Russia and Great Bri- º: lºyees
tain—see 6 PPheaton, Appendia, note IV. p. 52. Great Britain,
193. British subjects bºrn before the revolution are equally Aliens'
incapable with those born after, of inheriting, or transmitting
the inheritance of lands in this country. Blight's Lessee v.
Rochester—7. Wheaton, 535. 1822.
194. The treaties of 1783 and 1794 only provide for titles Treaty with
existing at the time those treaties were made, and not to titles "“*
subsequently acquired. Id. 544.
Actual possession is not necessary to give the party the be- Aliens.
nefit of the treaty; but the existence of title at the time is ne-
cessary. Id. 545.
195. The British treaty of 1794 did not enable the next of Treaty with
kiſh of a British subject who acquired land in Kentucky after Great Britain.
the treaty of 1783, and who died seized before that of 1794, Alien,
to take that land by descent, although the next of kin were
citizens of the United States, ld, 546.
196. The commission is conclusive proof of the national Prize.
character of a public ship. The Santissima Zºrinidad—7,
Wheaton. 283-335. 1822,
197. During the existence of the civil war between Spain jºin colo-
and her colonies, and previous to the acknowledgment of the ""
independence of the latter by the United States, the colonies
were deemed by us belligerent nations, and entitled to all the
sovereign rights of war against their enemy. Id. 337.
198. Our municipal laws do not prohibit the trade in con- coatraband
traband articles. It is merely subject, by the law of nations,
to the penalty of confiscation in case of capture. Id. 340.
199. In cases of capture, supposed to be in violation of our Neutral rights.
neutrality, where the enlistment of men in our territory is
proved, the onus probandi is thrown upon the claimant to
prove that such enlistment was lawful, as being of the subjects
of the state under whose flag the capture was made. Id, 340.
© º
Courts.
.
:
:
:
i
©
º
e
.
:
288 . PoſNTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courtTs,
Treaty with 200. The 6th article of the Spanish treaty of 1795, only
Spain. provides for the restitution of Spanish ships captured within
our jurisdiction? I'l, 346.
Expatriation. 201. Quere, As to the right of expatriation. Id. 347.
Supposing such a right to exi-f, it cannot be exercised with-
out a bona fide change of domicil, and can never be asserted
as a cover for fraud, or to justify a crime against the country,
or any violation of its laws, Il. 348.
Prize. 202. An augmentation of force, or illegal outfit within the
Neutral rights. neutral territory, only affects captures made during the cruise
for which such augmentation. or outfit, was made. Id. ib.
id. 203, Captures made by public ships, as well as by privateers
if made in violation of our neutrality, are subject to restitu-
tion. Id. 350. *
204. A condemnation as prize in the court of the captor’s
country, will not i ust the jurisdiction of the neutral tribunal
which has custody of the res capta, before its condemnation
in the court of the captor. 1d 355.
205. Prizes made by armed vessels which have violated the
statutes for preserving the neutrality of the United States,
will be restored if brought into our ports; but the Court has
never decided that the offence adheres to the vessel under all
circumstances; nor that it cannot be deposited at the termina-
tion of the cruise in preparing for which it was committed.
But if this termination be merely colorable, and the vessel
were originally equipped with the intention of being employ-
ed on the cruise during which the capture was made, the de-
lictum is not purged The Gran Para—7 Wheaton, 471–486.
1822.
206. The Court will restore to the former owners property
captured in violation of the neutrality of the United States,
where it is claimed by the original wrong-doer, although it
may have come back to his possession after a regular condem-
nation as prize. The 1rrogante Barcelones—7 PWheaton, 496.
id.
id.
id.
1822.
Treaty with 207. The 4th article of the Spanish treaty of 1795, which
Spain. prohibits the citizens or subjects of the respective contracting
parties from taking commissions from the enemy of the other,
is confined to private armed vessels, and does not extend to
public ships. The Santissima Trinidad, 7 Wheaton, 284, 1822.
Prize. 208. The exemption of foreign public ships coming into our
waters under an express or implied license from the local ju-
risdiction, does not extend to their prize ships or goods cap-
tured in violation of our neutrality. Id. ib.
Neutral rights.
:
:
;
:
:
:
.
;
connecteD witH our Foreign RELATIONS. 289
209 The capacity of private individuals (British subjects,)
or of corporations, created by the Crown. in this country, or
in Great Britain, to hold lands or other property in this coun-
try. was not affected by the revolution. g
The proper courts in this country will interfere to prevent
an abuse of the trusts confided to B itish corporations holding
Hands here to charitable uses, and will aid in enforcing the
due execution of the trusts; but neither those courts, nor the
local legislatures where the lands lie, can adjudge a forfeiture
of the franchises of the foreign corporation, or of its property.
The lands of British corporations in this country are pro-
tected by the 6th article of the treaty of peace of 1783, in the
same manner as those of natural persons; and their title thus
protected is confirmed by the 9th article of the treaty of 1794,
so that it could not be forfeited by any intermediate legisla-
tive act, or other proceeding, for the defect of alienage.
The termination of a treaty, by war, does not divest rights
of property already vested under it; nor do treaties in general
become extinguished. i0so facto, by war between the two go-
vernments. Those stipulating for a permanent arrangement
of territorial and other national rights, are, at most, suspend-
ed during the war, and revive at the peace, unless they are
waived by the parties, or new and repugnant stipulations are
made. The Society for the propagation of the Gospel, &c. v.
The Town of New Haven, et al. —8 Wheaton. 464–1823.
210. Discovery is the orignal foundation of titles to land
in America, as between the different European nations, by
whom conquests and settlements were there made; and gave
to the nation making the discovery the sole right of acquiring
the soil from the natives: and establishing settlements upon
it. It was a right with which no Europeans could interfere.
It was a right which all asserted for themselves, and to the as-
sertion of which, by others, all assented. The relations which
were to exist between the discoverer and the natives, were to
be regulated by themselves.
While the different nations of Europe, respected the rights
of the natives as occupants, they asserted the ultimate domin-
ion to be in themselves; and claimed, and exercised as a con-
sequence of this ultimate dominion, a power to grant the soil,
while yet in possession of the natives. These grants have
been understood by all to convey a title to the grantees. Sub-
ject only to the Indian right of occupancy. Johnson v. McIn-
fbsh–8 Wheaton, 573–574. 1823.
Alien.
Courts,
Prize.
Treaty with
Great is ritains
Alien.
Treaty.
Discovery.
Conquest.
Indian title.
Origin of land
titles.
gº
37
290 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DEGIDEI) IN U.S. courts,
Treaty with
Great Britain.
Indian title.
Discovery.
Conquest.
Indian title.
211. It has never been doubted, that either the United States
or the several states. had a clear title to all the lands. within
the boundary lines described, in the treaty (of peace of 1783.)
subject only to the Indian right of occupancy; and that the
exclusive power to extinguish that right was vested in that
government which might constitutionally exercise it. Id 385.
The several stafes have, generally, ceded those lands to the
United States Thev were occupied by numerous, warlike,
and in denendent tribes of Indians, but the exclusive right of
the United States. to extinguish their title, and to grant the
soil. has never been doubted: and any attempt of others to in-
trnde into that country, would be considered as an aggression
which would justify war.
212 The United States maintain, as all others have main-
tained that discovery gave an exclusive right to extinguish the
Indian title of occupancy. either by purchase or by conquest;
and gave also a right to such a degree of sovereigntv, as the
circumstances of the people would allow them to exercise.—
I+. 587.
213. Conquest gives a title, which the courts of the con-
queror cannot den v. Id. 588.
214. The Indian title is not inconsistent with a seisin in fee.
by a sovereign State. Id. 592.
A grant of lands, by the Indians to an individual, conveys
only the Indian title. The grantee holds under their laws,
and incornorates himself with the Indian nation, so far as re-
spects the pronertv purchased. The courts of the United
States cannot interpose for the protection of his title. Id. 593.
By the King’s proclamation in 1763, the crown reserved
under its own dominion and protection, for the use of the In-
dians, “all the lands and territories lying to the westward of
the sources of the rivers which fall into the sea, from the west
and northwest.” and forbade all British subjects from making
an v murchases or settlements whatever, or taking possession
of the reserved lands. Id. 594.
In Virginia the complete title of the crown to vacant lands
was alwa vs acknowledged: and so far as respected the author-
ity of the crown, no distinction was taken between vacant
lands and iands occupied by the Indians. Id. 596.
A title to lands under grants, to private individuals, made
by Indian tribes or nations northwest of the river Ohio, in 1773
and 1-75 cannot be recognised by the courts of the United
States. Id, 543.
connected with our Foreign RELATIONS. 291
215. Whether a regular sentence of condemnation in a court P*
ºf the captor, or his ally, the captured property having been Neutral rights.
carried infra praesidia, will preclude the courts of this coun-
try from restoring it to the original owners, where the capture
was made in violation of our law, treaties and neutral obliga-
tions; yet whoever claims under such a condemnation must
show that he is a bonæ fidei purchaser, for a valuable consid-
eration, unaffected by any participation in the violation of our
neutrality by the captors. La Nereyda–8 Wheaton, 108,
174–1823.
2.6. When the boundary between two nations runs through
the middle of a river, the waters of the whole river must, upou
the general principles of the law of nations, be considered as
eoman on to both nations, for all purposes of navigatiou as a
common highway, necessary for the advantageous use of its
own territorial rights and possessions. The Jippollum—9 Pł hea-
#on, 369. 1824. -
217. The municipal laws of a nation do not extend, in their
operation, beyond its own territory, except as regards its own
citizeus; nor can a seizure for a breach of the municipai iaws
of oue nation be lawfully made within the territory of another.
Id. 370. -
It seems, that the rights of visitation and search for enfor-
cing the revenue laws of a nation may be exercised beyond the
territorial jurisdiction upon the high seas on the vessels oi such
nation and on foreign vessels bound to its ports. Id. 371.
218. Under the 9th article of the British treaty of 1794, it
is not necessary fºr the Allen to show that he was in the ac-
tual possession or seisin of the land at the date of the treaty,
which applies to the title, whatever that may be, and give it
the same iegal validity as if the parties were citizens. Hughes
w. Edwards—9 Pł heaton, 489-496. 1824.
The title of an alien mortgagee is protected by the treaty.
But independent of the stipulations of the treaty he has a right
to coine into a court of equity and have the property sold to
raise the money due on the mortgage. This demand is mere-
ly personal, the debt being considered as the principal, and
the land as an incident. Id. 97.
The power of Congress to regulate commerce, extends to
the regulation of navigation and to every species of commer-
cial intercourse between the United States and foreign nations,
and among the several states. It does not stop at the exter-
nal boundary of a state. It has no limitations, but such as are
prescribed in the Constitution itself. So far as it extends it
Boundary.
River.
Municipal
laws.
Right of search
Treaty with
G. Britain.
Alien.
Power of
Congress to
regulate come
Iſlet’00’s
292
POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Alien.
Slave trade.
Right of
search.
Prize.
Consul.
Treaty with
France.
Alien.
Prize.
is exclusive, and no part of it can be exercised by a state. It
extends to navigation carried on in vessels exclusively employ-
ed in transporting passengers; and to vessels propelled by
steam as well as to those lavigated by nºt ans of wind and sails,
Gibbons v. Ogden–9 Pł heaton, 1. 186. 1824.
220. The statute of 11 and 12, W. III. c. 6, which is in force
in Maryland, removes the common law disability of ciaiming
title through an alien ancestor, but does not apply to a living
alien ancestor, so as to create a title by heirship where none
would exist by the common jaw, if the at cestor were a natural-
born subject or citizen. Thus the children of the person who
would have been heur if he had not been an alien, were citizens
of the United States and would, by virtue of the statute of 11
and 12 W III. c. 6, have taken the estate by descent if their
father had died before the intestate; but he being living, and
being an alien at the time of the death of the intestate, could
not take the laid by descent nor could his children claim
through him. McCreery's lessee v. Somervill–9 Pł heaton,
354. 1824.
221. The African slave trade is contrary to the law of na-
ture, but is not prohibited by the positive law of nations. The
Jinfelope—10 Pł'heaton, 66. 1 14. 1825.
222. The right of visitation and search does not exist in
time of peace. A vessel engaged in the slave trade, contrary
to the laws of the country to which it belongs, cannot, for that
cause alone, be seized on the high seas and brought in for ad-
judication, in time of peace, in the courts of another country.
But if the laws of that other country be violated, or the pro-
ceeding be authorised by treaty, the act of capture is not un-
lawful. Id Ib
223. Although a consul may claim for subjects unknown of
his nation, yet restitution cannot be decreed without specific
proof of the individual proprietary interest. Id. ib.
224. The treaty of 1778, between France and the United
States, allowed the citizens of either country to hold lands in
the other; and the title once vested in a French subject to hold
lands in the United States, was not divested by the abroga-
tion of that treaty, and the expiration of the subsequent con-
vention of 1800. Carneal v. Banks 10 Wheaton, 181. 1825.
225. Seizures made jure belli, by non-commissioned captors,
are made for the government, and no title of prize can be
derived but from the prize acts. The Dos Hermanos—10
Wheaton, 306–310 1825.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
293
226. A non-commissioned captor can only proceed in the *
prize-court as for salvage, the amount of which is discre-Salvage.
tionary. Id. ib.
227. An attack made upon a vessel of the United States,
by an armed vessel, with avowed intention of repelling the
approach of the former, or of crippling or destroying her, upon º,
a mistaken supposition that she was a piratical cruiser, and
without a piratical or felonious intent, or for the purpose of
wanton plunder, or malicious destruction of property, is not a
piratical aggression under the act of Congress of 3d March,
1819. c. 75 The JMarianna Flora— 11 PP7teatom, 39. 1826.
Piracy.
Nor is an armed vessel, captured under such circumstances, Law of nations,
liable to confiscation, as for a hostile aggression under the
general law of nations Id. 40. \
228 The act of 3d March, 1819, c. 75, extends to foreign
vessels committing a piratical aggression, and whatever re-
sponsibility the Uuited States may incur towards foreign states
by executing its provisions, the tribunals of the United States
are bound to carry them into effect. Id. 39.
Pirates may be lawfully captured by the public or private
ships of any nation, in peace or in war; for they are hostes
humani generis. Id, 40.
Piracy.
American ships offending against our own laws may be sei- Municipal
s s tº - . . . . seizure.
zed upon the ocean; and foreign ships thus offending within
our territorial jurisdiction, may be pursued and seized upon
the ocean, and brought into our ports for adjudication. Id. 42.
But in such cases the party seizes at his peril, and is liable to
costs and damages if he fail to establish the forfeiture. Id. ib.
229. Ships of war sailing under the authority of their govern- Right of
ment, in time of peace, have a right to approach other vessels
at sea for the purpose of ascertaining their real character, so
far as the same can be done without the exercise of the right
of visitation and search, which does not exist in time of
peace. Id. 43. -
No vessel is bound to await the approach of vessels under
such circumstances; but such vessel cannot lawfully prevent
their approach by the use of force, upon the mere suspicion of
danger. Id. 40.
The captor, under such circumstances of mutual mistake,
and being a public ship of war, is not liable for damages or
costs. Id. 50.
230. An alien may take real property by grant, whether Alien.
from the state or an individual; and may hold the same until
his title is divested by an inquest of office, or some equivalent
search
294 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Foreign
ministers.
Courts.
ſ’iracy.
Courts.
Mistake of
national
eharacter.
Flag.
Pira ey.
Probable
©ºtlSee
$panish grants.
Spanish
grants.-
proceeding. Governeur’s Heirs v. Robertson—11 Wheaton,
332--351. 1826.
231 An indictment under the act of Congress of 1790, c.
36, (IX.) S. 37, for infracting the law of nations by offering
violence to the person of a foreign minister, is not a case
“affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls,”
within the 2d $ of the 3d article of the Constitution of the
United States, but is cognizable by the Circuit Courts of the
United States. The United States v Ortega—11 Wheaton,
467 826. (See, also, Mr Wheaton's note to that case, page 469.
232. In cases of seizure, in time of peace, for an alleged
hostile or piratical aggression in time of peace, the country of
the captors and of the captured have a concurrent jurisdiction;
and when the res cap ta is brought into a port of the captor's
country for adjudication, its courts may exercise jurisdiction.
The Jºlarianna Flora—11 Wheaton, 1-56. 1826.
233. In order to exempt a captor from damages and costs,
for a capture founded on mutual mistake of the national
character of the conflicting vessels, it is not necessary that he
should have affirmed his national flag with a gun. If such be
the custom of France, Spain, Portugal, and other continental
European powers, it is not that of England or the United
States, nor is it binding upon them. Id. 48.
234. A justly founded suspicion of piracy will excuse the
captors from costs and damages.
Although probable cause will not excuse a seizure under a
mere municipal statute, unless made a ground of justification
by the statute itself, (see the Appollon—9 Wheaton. 372)
This principle does not extend to captures jure belli, nor to
marine torts generally, nor to acts of Congress, authorising
the exercise of belligerent rights to a limited extent, such as
the piracy acts of 3d March, 1819, c. 75 and 15th May, 1820,
c. 112. The Palmyra,—12 Wheaton, 16, 17, 1827.
235. Spanish grants made after the treaty of peace of 1783,
between the United States and Great Britain, within the
territory east of the river.Mississippi, and north of a line drawn
from that river, at the 31st degree of north latitude, east, to
the middile of the river ſpalachicola, have no intrinsic validity,
and the holders must depend for their titles exclusively on the
laws of the United States. Henderson v. Poindeacter’s lessee—
21 PWheaton, 531. 1827.
236. No Spanish grant, made while the country was wrong-
fully occupied by Spain, can be valid, unless it was confirmed
by the compact between the United States and the state of
eoNNECTED with out. Foreign RELATIONS, 295
Georgia of the 24th of April, 1802, or has been laid before the
board of Commisioners, constituted by the act of Congress of
the 3d of March, 1803, c. 340, or of March 27th, 1804, c.
414, Id. ib. *
237. An alien can take land by purchase and hold it until
office found. He can grant it, and his grantee can maintain
an action to recover it, and may declare of his own seisin in
fee. Sheaffe v. O' Weil,-1 Mass. T. R. 256. 1804. Sup.
Court of Massachusetts.
238. To constitute a blockade, so as to effect a policy of
insurance, by a violation of it, there must be an actual exist-
ing force before the port at the time it is entered. The ami-
mus revertendi of an obsidiary fleet does not continue the
blockade, nor is the entry of a neutral, after being warned, a
breach of his neutrality, if blockading force be not before the
port. Williams v. Smith–2 Caines N. P. T. Rep. 1. Sup.
Court of W. Pork 1804.
289. A cargo belonging to enemies found afloat in our ports
at the breaking out of the war, is confiscable jure belli with-
out any special act of Congress authorizing the seizure; and
belongs to the United States, unless granted by them to other
persons. Cargo of the Emulous—Brown claimant, 1 Galli-
son, 563. Circuit Court U. S. 1813.
240. No subject can legally commit hostilities where the
sovereign has either directly or constructively prohibited such
acts. Id. ib.
241. An alien enemy cannot sustain a claim in a prize
Gourt, nor can a purchaser from an enemy. Id. id.
242. Upon a declaration of war, the President has an au-
thority, as incident to his office, to authorize the capture of
enemy property, wherever, by the law of nations, it is liable
to capture. Id. ib.
243. A trade exclusively eonfined to the subjects of one
country is purely national, and must follow the situation of
that country, as to peace or war, and be deemed hostile or
neutral accordingly; and, it is immaterial whether the ship-
ment be made in time of peace or war.
In time of war, property cannot change its ebaraeter in
transitu. Id, ib.
244. Captors of neutral property in an enemy's ship are
not, in general, entitled to freight, unless the goods are car-
ried to their port of destination, within the intent of the con-
tracting parties. Id. ib.
Alien.
Blockade.
Neutral rights.
Prize.
War.
Alien:
President of
the U. States,
Prize.
Enemy trade,
*Fransfer trº
transitu.
Prize.
Freight,
296 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Prize.
245 The captors are not liable to damages where there is
Probable cause probable cause; such as sailing from the port of an enemy
Prize.
Confiscation.
Confiscation.
.#/eac ſoci.
Leac loci.
Effect of war
upon contracts.
Territorial ju-
risdiction.
War,
iracy.
without license, &c. The Liverpool Packet—l Gallison, 513,
Circuit Courf, U. S. 1813.
246. It has not been the modern usage to extend the right
of confiscation to enemy’s property found in the country at
the beginning of the war. The Ann Green—1 Gallison, 292,
C. Court. U. S., 1813.
247. By the law of nations, the debts, credits, and cor-
poreal property of the enemy found in the country at the
breaking out of the war, are confiscable. The cargo of the
Emulous—1 Gallison, 563, C. Court, U. S. 1813.
248. The law of the place where a contract is made, is to
govern as to the validity, nature, and construction of the con-
tract: but the remedy on such contract is to be pursued accord-
ing to the law of the place where the suit is brought. Van
Reimsdyk v. Kane & al—l Gal. 371, C. Court, U. S. 1813.
But where the contract is to be executed in a place differ-
ent from that in which it is made, the law of the place of ex-
ecution will apply, Id, ib.
249. A state, by virtue of its general authority, may act
upon contracts made between its own citizens in every coun-
try; but not as to contracts between its own citizens and
foreigners made in foreign countries. Hil. 377.
250. By the general law, a state of war puts an end to all
executory contracts between the citizens of the different coun-
Whatever then remains in fieri is either suspended or
The Frances—l Gal. 448, Circuit
tries.
dissolved, flagrante bello.
Court, 1813.
251. Every nation has exclusive jurisdiction over the wa-
ters adjacent to its shores, to the distance of a cannon shot,
or marine league. Brig Jinn—1 Gal. 62, Circuit Court U.
State S. 1813
252. On a declaration of war, the citizens are not bound
to return from foreign countries, unless so ordered by the go-
vernment. The Joseph—1 Gallison, 545, Circuit Court U.
States. 1813.
253. To constitute the offence of piracy within the act of
1790, c. 9, by piratically and feloniously running away with
a vessel, personal force and violence is not necessary; but it
must be aniano furandi. United States v. Tully & al–1 Gal.
247, Circuit Court, U. S. 1813.
cowspoten with our Foreign RELATIONº. 297
254. Under that, act the term “High seas.” In eans any waters
on the sea coast, which are without the boundaries of low-wa
ter mark; although such waters may be in a roadstead or bay
within the jurisdictional limits of a foreigº government. U.
States v. Ross— Gallison. 624. Circuit Court, U. S. 1813.
255. The prize court has jurisdiction to decree res' is u-
tion of a vessel recaptured from the enemy. and to award
damages against the recaptors for embezzlement The Dove
and cargo–1 Gallison, 585, ("ircuit Court. U. S. 1813.
256. A special order of the sovereign. though confrary to
the law of nations, justifies the captors in all tribunals of
prize. Maisonaire v. Keating—2 Gallison, 585, C. Court,
QUnited States. 1815.
257. A commission to capture the enemy’s property extends
to all neutral property seized in violating neutral duties.
Id. 339.
258. Provisions become contraband when destined to a port
of naval equipment of an enemy, or for the supply of his
army. Id. 335.
259. A territory conquered by an enemy is not to be con-
sidered as incorporated into the dominions of that enemy,
without a renunciation in a treaty of peace, or a long and per-
manent possession Until such incorporation it is still en-
titled to the full benefit of the law of postliminy. United
States v Hayward–– 2 Gallison, 501, C. Court. U. S. 1815.
260 The trial of prizes. and of all incidents to the ques-
tion of prize, and the awarding of damages for an illegal cap-
ture made by a lawfully commissioned cruiser, belong exclu-
sively to the courts of the capturing powers. The Invincible—
9. Gallison. 29, Circuit Court, United States 1814.
261 The tribunals of one sovereign cannot revise the acts
done under the authority of another, Fl 44.
262. The admiralty courts of the United States will exer
oise jurisdiction in rem. to enforce a bottomry bond executed
in a foreign country, between subjects of a foreign country
when the ship is within the territory of the United States.
The Jerusalem–2 Gallison, 191, Circuit Court, U. S. 1814.
263. The admiralty has exclusive jurisdiction of suits on
ransom bills; but not of a suit upon a bill of excharge given
as security for payment of a ransom bill. Maisonaire v.
Keating —2 Gallison, 341, Circuit Court, U. S. 1815. "
264. The jurisdiction of the District courts of the United
sº courts of admiralty, extends to all maritime con-
J
i’irãey.
High seas. A
Prize.
C, urts.'
Prize. *
Prize.
Neutral rights. -
Prize,
Contraband.
Conquest,
Jus Postlininii.
Prize
Courts.
Law of nations.
Bottomry.
Ransom.
Admiralty.
298 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. eoURTS,
Courts.
Prizc,
Admiralty.
Prize.
Domicil.
Prize.
L
Pr
iz
€
Duties.
$ºrize.
Neutral rights.
License.
Frize.
Duties,
tracts, and to all torts and injuries committed on the high
Seas, or within the ebb and flow of the tide. A policy of in-
surance is a maritime contract and therefore within the ad-
miralty jurisdiction. De Lovio v. Boit–2 Gallison, 398, C.
Court. United States. 1815.
The courts of common law have a concurrent jurisdiction
with the admiralty courts over maritime contracts. Id ib.
265. Goods owned and shipped by an American citizen,
(after a known war) from an enemy’s port to a port of his
colony, are subject to confiscation. The Iliana—2 Gallison,
93. 98. Circuit Court, United States. 1815.
266. A wharfenger has a lien on a foreign ship for wharfage
by the law of the admiralty; which lien will overreach a prior
bottomry. Earparte Lewis—2 Gallison, 483, Circuit Court,
United States, 1815.
267. The treaty of 1810 between Great Britain and Portu-
gal did not prevent British merchants resident in the Brazils
from acquiring the neutral character of their domicil. S. J.
Indiano–2Gallison. 292, Circuit Court, United States. 1814.
268. All goods found on board an enemy’s ship are pre-
sumed to the property of the enemy, unless a distinct neutral
character be impressed upon and accompany them. The Fly-
ing Fish–2 Gallison. 374, Circuit Court, United States. S.
P The Avery–2 Gallison, 537. Circuit Court, U. S. 1815.
269. Prize goods, brought in by ships of war of the United
States are liable to the payment of duties, as to the moiety
belonging to the efficers and crew of the capturing ships; but
no duties are payable upon the moiety belonging to the United
States, the whole of that moiety belongs to the navy pension
fund The Liverpºol Hero—2 Gallison, 184, Circuit Court,
United States. 1814.
270. No suit can be sustained in a neutral tribunal against
a lawfully commissioned cruizer which is brought within its
jurisdiction to recover damages for a supposed illegal capture.
Th. Invincible—2 Gallison, 29, Circuit Court, U. S. 1814.
271. To make a vessel good prize for using an enemy’s li-
cense, she must have been seized in delict.0.
of blockade, &c. The Saunders—2 Gallison, 215, C. Court,
Öniſed Stafes. 1814.
272 As it respects duties, condemnation of prize goods re-
lates to the time of importation. Duties accrue upon a volun-
tary importation ºnly. If a neutral be captured, brought
in and restored, no duties attach, unless the cargo were after-
So of breaches
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 299
wards voluntarily unladen and an election made by the neu-
tral to consider the United States, as the port of discharge.
Prince v. United States—2 Gallison, 208, 209, C. Court United
States, 1815
273. A ransom cannot lawfully be made at any distance of
time after the capture, and by a new voyage undertaken for
that special purpose; but such voyage is such a trading with
the enemy as subjects the vessel to confiscation. The Lord
Wellington—2 Gallison, 104, Circuit Court, U. States. 1814.
274 Under the naturalization act of 14th of April, 1802,
the registry of aliens required by the 2d sec. of the law, must
have been made 5 years before the application for naturaliza-
tion. Anonymous—1 Peters’ Rep. 457. C. Court, U. S. 1817.
275. A person beneficially interested in a suit, if an alien
enemy, connot support the suit in the name of his trustee
who is not an alien, unless the contract arise out of a licensed
trade. Crawford v. The Wm. Penn—1 Peters’ Rep. 106, C.
Court, United States. 1815.
276. The President of the United States had authority,
under the act of Congress of the 6th of July 1798, respecting
alien enemies to order their confinement in certain cases, and
to use the necessary means for that purpose.
The marshals of the several districts are the proper officers
to execute the orders of the President under the alien act;
and it is not necessary to call in the aid of the judicial au.
thority on all occasions to enforce the orders of the President.
Lockington v. Smith—1 Peters’ Rep. 466, C Court, U. S. 1817.
277. A bottomry bond given for the repairs of a vessel
which had been employed as a cartel, made in an enemy’s
port, may be enforced by the admiralty pewers of the Dis-
trict Court of the United States, although the hypothecation
was to an alien enemy Crawford v. The PWm. Penn—1 Pe-
ters’ Rep. 466, Circuit Court, United States 1815.
278. A cartelis, pro hac vice, a neutral licensed vessel, and
all persons concerned in her navigation, upon the particular
service in which both belligerents have employed her, are
neutral in respect to both, and under the protection of both.
All contracts made for equipping and fitting her for this ser-
vice are to be considered as contracts made between friends,
and consequently ought to be enforced in the tribunals of
either belligerent, having jurisdiction of the subject. Id. 112.
279. It is in the Department of State, that a reference must
be made for the official acts of the President of the United
Neutral rights.
Prize.
transom.
Fnemy trade.
Alien. g
Naturalization,
Alien enemy.
Alien enemy.
T’resident of
United States.
Cartel.
Bottomry.
Alien enemy.
Cartel.
Department of
State.
300 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS.
Prize.
A. miralty.
Courts.
Prize.
Capture on land
Treaty with
Franee.
Sea-letter.
Prize.
Practice.
Prize.
Courts.
Prize.’’
Neutral rights,
\
States, in relation to - ch public measures as are not imme-
dia elv connected with the duties of some other department.
Lockington v Smith—1 Peters’ Rep. 466, C Court, U. S. 1817.
But the President may direct some ºther department to
make know is such measures as he may establish. Id. ib.
280 The question of prize or no prize exclusively belongs
to the admiralty jurisdiction, and the sentence of a coupe-
tent court of aduiralty, condemning the property as prizi , is
conclusive. Jenkins v. Putnam—1 Bay's Report, 9, Supreme
Court, South Carolina 1784.
What ver is an incident springing out of a prize case, is as
exclusively within the jurisdiction of the admiralty, as the
original capture. Sasportas v Jennings and Woodrop—2 Bay,
463, 471. Supreme Court. South Carolina. 1795.
281. Captures made or land by unauthorised individuals
from an enemy, do not divest the property out of the origi-
naţ ownel unless there has been a condemnation by some
court of countiei ent authority. Turnbull v. Ross—2 Bay, 19,
22. Sup Court, South Carolina. 1785.
282. Under the 25 ari. of the French treaty of 6 Feb. 1778,
it was not absolutely necessary in order to give a vessel of
the United States the character of a free ship, so as to pro-
tect belligerent property on board of her, that she should
have a sea-letter on board at the time of capture: but the
want ºf such sea letter excused the captor from payment of
costs and damages. Tunno v. Preary—Bees, Rep. 6, Districë
Court, United States, 1794.
283. To a libel in the admiralty no person can answer un-
less he oe named in the libel; nor can a third person inter-
pose a plea to the jurisdiction of the Court. Teasdale v.
Sloop Hambler & E. Ballard—Bee's Rep. 9, Dist. C. U. S. 1794.
284 The question of prize by longs exclusively to the courts
of the captor’s country. Casiello v. Bouteille—Bee's Rep. 29,
District Court, United States. 1794. Sheaffe & Turner v 70
hogsheads sugar—Bee 163, District Court, United S. 1800.
285. The courts of a neutral country have jurisdiction in
cases of prize made in violation of its neutral rights, and
brought within its territorial jurisdiction. Janson v. Wrow
Christina Magdalena—Bee's Rep. 28. Kelly v. Schoomer Prus-
perity—Bee's Rep. 38. District Court, United States, 1794.
British Consul v. Schooner Mancy—Bee’s Reports, 73. Dist.
court. United States, 1795. Ellison v. Ship Bellona—Bee
114 Mo die v. The Betty Cathcart--Bee’s ſteport, 299, D.
Court, United States, 1795.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 301
But by the treaty with France of 6 Feb, 1778, art. 17 and Treaty with
22, the subjects of France had a right to equip and arm their France,
vessels in our ports; to bring in their prizes and d; part
with them, without interference by our courts. Stirunick v.
Ship Friendship——Bee’s Report 40, District Court United’S.
1794. Salderondo v. Ship Nostra Signora del Camino–Bee
43, 1784.
286. The words “a marine league from the coasts on shores Territorial
of the U.ited States,” in the act of Congress of the 5th of jurisulcuion.
June, 1794, thean a league frºm the land, bot dering ºn, and
wash ‘d by the sea, extending to low water mark; and riot a
league from a shoal at a distance from the shºre. , Souli v.
L.fricaine—Bee’s Rep. 204, District Court U States, 1804
287. False papers divest a neutral vessel of her natiºns: Prize. . .
character. Mann's eacecutors v. Sacks—Bee’s Rep. 282 List: Neutral rights.
Court, United States, 1804.
288 Foreign co: suls are general agents for the subjects ºf Consul.
their respective countries not otherwise represented. Gernon
w. Cochran—Bee’s Reports 210. District Court, U. S. 1804.
A master of a ship in a foreign port represents both own-
ers and shippers, not having other agent on the spot. Id. ib.
289. A sale before condemnation, becotnes vali" by the sºi; Prize.
sequent condemnation. Dennis v Hrig Lºur-àee's Sºp
213, District Court, United States. 1805. Poung v Tavel—
£d 229, S P. District Court, United States, 1806.
290 The courts of admiralty in this country will not Admiralty.
generally take cognizance of cases, between foreigners, if the Alien.
cause of action do not arise within our jurisdiction. Thomp.
son v. Ship Wanny—Bee's Rep. 224, District Court, United
States, 1805.
291. Salvage is not due for the rescue of the property from salvage.
the possession of a friendly power. Waite v. Brig Jintelope— Prize.
Bee's Reports, 233. District Court. United States, 1806.
292. Belligerents have no right, unless by treaty, to sell Prize.
their prize in a neutral country The neutral government Neutral rights.
may grant permission, but ought not to do so unless all the
powers at war can be put upon an equal footing. The Con-
sul of Spain v. the Consul of Great Britain—Bee's Reports,
263. District Court, United States, 1806.
293. The stipulations of a treaty are paramount to the pro- Treaty.
visions of the constitution of a particular state of the confe-
deracv. Gordon s lessee v. Kerr & al.—1 Washington. Cir-
cuit Court Reports, 502. Circuit Court United States, 1806.
\
302 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDEI) IN U. S COURTS.
Treaty with
G. Britain.
Taaw of nations.
Secretary of
Juegation.
Foreign minis-
ters •
Courts.
Prize.
JZeac loci.
294. The treaty of peace between Great Britain and the
United States, was in force from the 20th of January, 1783,
that being the day on which terms of peace were “agreed up-
“on between Great Britain and France; and his Briannic
“Majesty was ready to conclude such treaty accordingly.”—
Hylton’s lessee v. Brown—l Płashington, Circuit Court Re-
ports, 353 Circuit Court United States, 1806.
295. A foreign secretary of legation is entitled to the pro-
tection of the law of nations, and cannot lawfully be arrested
by the civil authorities of the United States, or of the respec-
tive states, even by the consent of the legation: but if commit-
ted under the authority of one of the states, he cannot be dis-
charged upon Habeas Corpus, by a court or judge of the Uni-
ted States; it having been expressly provided in the 14th sec.
of the judiciary act of 1789 “ that such writs of Habeas Cor-
“pus, shall in no case, extend to prisoners in goal. unless
“ where they are in custody under, or by colour of the autho-
“rity of the United States, or are committed for trial before
“some court of the same or are necessary to be brought inte
“court to testify.”
The laws of the United States for the punishment of those
who violated the privileges of a foreign minister, are as obli-
gatory upon the state courts as upon those of the United States,
and it is equally the duty of each to quash proceedings against
any one having those privileges. The injured party may seek
redi ess in either court against the aggressor, or he may pro-
secute under the 26th sec. of the act of 30th April 1790, ch.
1x. But the circuit court of the United States cannot quash
proceedings depending in a State Court. Eacoarte Cabrera—
1 Washington, Circuit Court Reports, 232. Circuit Court
United States, 1805.
296. Prize causes are always in rem, against the vessel and
cargo, or one of them; or quasi in rem, against the proceeds,
whatever they are. Carson’s Eators. v. Jennings—I Washing-
ton, Circuit Court Rep. 131. Circuit Court U. S. 1804.
297. A law, of a foreign country, which protects the party
to a contract from execution, will, in the courts of the United
States protect the same individual from arrest upon the same
contract. Camfranque v. Burnell—1 Washington, Circuit
Court Rep. 340. Circuit Court United States, 1806.
The laws which in any manner affect a contract, whether
in its construction, in the mode of discharging it, or which
control the obligation which the contract imposes, are essen-
tially incorporated in the contract. Id. ib.
con NECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 303
A contract is governed by the law of the country where it
was made, and may be enforced in foreign countries, accord-
ing to their own form of proceeding; but in such a manner as
to give effect to the contract according to the law which gave
it validity. Id ib.
298. The law of nations is part of the law of Pennsylvania.
Wilcoa, v. Union Insurance Company—2 Binney, 581. Supe-
rior Court Pennsylvania, 1810.
2.99. A British antenatus is incapable of taking lands by de-
scent in Pennsylvania. Jackson v. Burnes—3 Binney, 75–
Supreme Court Pennsylvania. 1812.
Law of nations
Aliens.
300 The English doctrine that no man can divest himself Alien.
of the allegiance under which he was born, is not compatible
with the constitution of Pennsylvania, or of the other states.
Id. 85.
301. In order to give jurisdiction to the courts of the cap-
tors’ country it is not necessary that the prize should be brought
within its territorial jurisdiction.
Seizure as prize and safe possession in a neutral port are
sufficient. Cheriot v. Faussat—3 Binney, 220. Superior Court
Pennsylvania, 1810.
302. A court of common law has no jurisdiction of a cause
to recover property taken and condemned as prize for having
violated the law of France, prohibiting trade with the revolted
parts of St. Domingo. Id. ib.
303. A state court has no jurisdiction of suits or prosecu-
tions against a foreign consul. Mannhardt v. Soderstrom—
Binney. 138. Supreme Court Pennsylvania, 1808.
304. Under the 12th article of the convention with France
of the 14th of November, 1788, the courts of this country had
not jurisdiction of suits between French subjects. Bertrndt
v. Gautier—1 Feates, 571. Sup. Court Pennsylvania, 1794.
305 An alien defendant in an action of slander, brought in
a state court, cannot remove it, under the 19th sec. of the ju-
diciary act of 1789, to the circuit Court of the United States
although he make affidavit that the matter in dispute exceeds
500 dollars exclusive of cost. Rush v. Cobbet—2 Feates 276.
Superior Court Pennsylvania, 1798.
306. Belligerents cannot establish prize courts in a neutral
country; nor can they make any sale of their prizes there, un-
less authorised by treaty. Wheelwright v. Depeyster—1 John-
sons, 471. Sup. Court Wew-Fork, 1806.
307. The B.itish treaty of 1794, confirmed the title of lands
in New-York to British subjects then holding, and their heirs,
Prize.
Courts,
Prize.
Courts.
Consul.
Courts.
Treaty with
France.
Courts.
Aliens-
Courts.
Prize.
Neutral rights.
Treaty with
G. Britain.
304 PoſNts on PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. Courts,
Al ie tl.
Courts.
Prize.
1Marine
trespass.
Prize.
Courts.
Courts.
Aiten.
Admiralty.
Jurisdiction.
Admiralty.
Jurisdiction.
Admiralty
Further proof
Admiralty.
Prize.
Proteable
C3UASé.
notwithstanding their alienage. Jackson v. Wright—4 Jºhn.
son 75. Sup Court wºr-Fork, 1809. *
30s. The state courts have jurisdiction of actions for forts
committed on board of a foreign vessel on the high seas where
both parties are foreigners; for personal injuries are of a tran-
sitory nature and follow the person or forum of the defendant.
Gardner v. Thomas— 14 Johnson, 184. Superior Court JWew-
Fork, 1817.
And though the injury is laid in the declaration to be contra
pacem, &c. that is matter of form only and not traversable. Id. ib.
But it rests in the sound discretion of the court to exercise
jurisdiction or not, according to the circumstances of the case.
Il. ib.
309. The state courts of common law have jurisdiction of
marine trespasses, where there is no question of prize. It is
not the place. but the nature of the case, which determines the
the jurisdiction II. ib.
310. Trover will lie in a state court, by the original owner
of an American vessel against the owner of a Carthagenian
privateer, illegally fifted out in the United States, for a capture
of the plaintiff’s vessel as prize. Hallett v. Noviom—14
Johnson, 273. Superior Court N. F. 1817.
31 1. The courts of the United States have no jurisdiction
of causes between aliens. Monſalet v Murray—4 Cranch,
47. Superior Court United States, 1808.
312. The District Court, as a court of Admiralty and mari-
time jurisdiction, may entertain suits for all torts. damages
and unlawful seizures at sea. 1, ..Mason, 96. Burke v. Trevitt
Circuit ('ourf, Massachusetts. 1816.
313. The admiralty has jurisdiction in personam, as well
as in rem. for pilotage earned in piloting ships to, from, and on
the sea. Id. p. 50-7'he flnne, Circuit Court, Mass. 1818.
314 Farther proof will be ordered where the captors have
been guilty of irregularity in not bringing in the master of the
captured vessel, or the papers. Fl. p. 14, London Packet.—
Cirenſit Court JMassachusetts 1815
315 Captors are bound to good faith and ordinary diligence
and are therefore liable for negligence.
Probable cause is a justification of capture; but such protec-
tion may be forfeited by subsequent misconduct or negligence.
It is not necessary that there should be primá facie evi-
It is sufficient if there be circumstances
Id.
dence to condemn.
which warrant a reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct.
24. The George. Circuit Court Massachusetts. 1815.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
305
316. Where the vessel has been captured on her voyag,
and condemned at an intermediate port, and a part of the
cargo has been restored and sold at the same port, no freight
is due for the cargo so restored. Il 42—Sampago v. Salter.
Circuit Court, JMassachusetts. 1816.
317. The effect of capture upon mariner's wages, does not
dissolve the contract, it only suspends it till acquittal or con-
demnation. Id. 45—Emerson v. Howland. Circuit Court,
Massachusetts. 1816.
318. The cognizance of seizures upon the high seas belongs
to any District Court of a district into which the property
is brought. 1. Wason, 36—The Jibby. Circuit Court, Mas-
sachusetts. 1818.
319. A Court of Equity has jurisdiction to decree an account
and distribution according to the lear domicilii, of the estate
of a deceased person domiciled abroad, which has been collec-
ted under an administration granted here. But whether it will
proceed to decree such account and distributions, or direct
such assets to be remitted, to be distributed by a foreign tribu-
nal, depends upon the circumstances of the case. Id. 381,
Harvey v. Richards. Circuit Court, Massachusetts. 1818.
320. Where property is shipped in an enemy’s vessel, the
presumption of it’s being enemies' propertv, can only be
repelled by strong and clear proofs of a neutral interest. Id.
14. London Packet. Circuit Court, Massachusetts. 1's 15.
321 A vessel lying on the sea, out side of the bar of a har-
bor of the United States, within 3 miles of the shore, is on
the high seas. Id. 147. United States, v. Smiſh. Circuit
Court. JMassachusetts. 1816. &
322. A right of seizure may exist on the high seas, inde-
pendently of any right of search. 2. Mason, 409–La Jeune
Eugenie. Circuit Court JMassachusetts. 1822.
323. The African slave trade, abstractly considered is
in consistent with the law of nations; and a claim founded
upon it may be repelied in any court where it is asserted,
wnlºss the trade be legalized by the nation to which the claim-
antbelongs. Id ib.
324. A letter of marque, insured as such, has no right to
cruize at large for prizes, but she may chase and capture hos-
tile vessels coming in sight, in the course of her voyage. with-
out its being a deviation. 2, JMason, 230–Haven v. Holland
Circuit Court, Massachusetts. 1820.
Every vessel has a right of self defence against hostile at-
tacks; and the master has a large discretion on this subject.—
Admiralty.
Prize.
Freight.
Admiralty.
Captures.
M.riners.
Admiralty
Jurisdiction,
Seizure.
Leac Locº.
Foreign laws.
Administration
Admiralty.
Enemy’s
vessels.
Evidence.
Admiralty.
High seas.
Admiralty.
Seizure.
Search.
Slave trade.
Law of nations. }
Admiralty.
Letter of
Marque.
Prize.
Self-defence,
39
306
POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Admiralty.
Salvage.
Mariners.
Admiralty.
Torts.
Admiralty.
Neutrals.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Neutrals.
Freight.
Mariners.
Aliens.
Esu beat.
Inquest of office
Evidence.
Admiralty.
High seas.
*
He is not bound to attempt to escape in the first instance and
only to repel an attack when made. He may lay to, or attack
the enemy ship or chase her, and if she capture the enemy she
may man the prize, if her own crew he not thereby injuriously
weakened. 2 Mason 230. Haven v. Holland. C. C. Massa-
chusetts, 1820.
325. Salvage paid to seamen, in cases of shipwreck is a
charge on the property saved, and to be borne by the under-
writers, if the ship is abandoned to them.
The contract of the seamen is not dissolved by the ship-
wreck, but they are bound to labour to preserve the wreck of
ship and cargo—and if they leave the ship without endeavor-
ing to save them, they desert their duty and may forfeit wages
antecedently due. Id. 319. Two Catharines. C. C. JMassa-
chusetts, 1821.
326 The admiralty has jurisdiction of personal torts and
wrongs committed on a passenger, on the high seas, by the
master of the ship. It is immaterial whether such torts be by
direct force, as frespasses, or consequential injuries. 3 Mason
242. Chamberlain v. Chandler C. C. Massachusetts, 1823.
3s 7. The master of a captured neutral ship is bound to re-
main by the ship until condemnation, or a recovery is hopeless;
and his wages after the capture and until condemnation, &c.
are a charge to be paid by the owners, and ultimately to be
borne as a general average, by all the parties in interest.
Id 161. PPillard v. Dorr. C. C. Massachusetts, 1823.
328. If a neutral ship, after capture, is condemned and sold,
and afterwards, on appeal. the sentence is reversed, and freight
for the full voyage is allowed in damages, it seems the seamen
are entitled to full wages for the voyage; at all events they are
entitled to wages up to the time of condemnation if they re-
main by the ship so long. 3 Masok, 161. Willard v. Dorr.
C. C. Massachusetts. 1823.
But the right to wages is not complete until the restitution.
See 3.Mason 91—Willard v. Dorr. C. C. Massachusetts, 1822.
$29. An inquest of office by the Attorney General for lands
escheating to the Government by reason of alienage, is evi-
dence of title in all cases; but is not conclusive evidence
against any person, who was not tenant at the time of the in-
quest, or party, or privy thereto. Such person may prove that
there are lawful heirs, not aliens, in esse. 4 JMason, 268–
Stokes v. Dawes. C. C. Massachusetts, 1826.
330. An offence committed in a bay, entirely landlocked
and enclosed by reefs, is not committed on the high seas, with-
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 307
in the purview of the act of Congress, 26th March, 1804, C.
40. Id. 307, U. S. v. Robinson. C. C. Massachusetts, 1826.
331 The constitution of the United States gives jurisdic-Jurisdiction.
tion to the Courts of the United States, in cases where foreign
states are parties; and the judicial act gives to the Circuit *g, *.
Court jurisdiction in all cases between aliens and citizens. 2 *
Washington C. C. Reports, 429. The King of Spain v. Oli-
ver. C. C. Pennsylvania, 1810.
332. The Court refused to enquire, upon motion, whether Foreign States.
Terdinand the WIlih King of Spain, could institute a suit, not Jurisdiction.
having been acknowledged by the United States as King of
Spain. Id ib.
333. The sentence of a court of exclusive jurisdiction, ope- º §62n-
rating directly on the thing itself, is conclusive between the º
same parties, upon the same matter coming in any manner be-
fore another court of co-ordinate jurisdiction, not only of the
right which it establishes, but of the fact which is decided.—
Id. p. 508—Jirmroyd v. PPilliams, C. C. Penn, 1811.
334. Whatever may be done by foreign tribunals, in refer- id.
ence to the established principles of the law of nations, rela- Law of nations,
tive to the conclusiveness of sentences of foreign prize courts,
the courts of the United States will not, for the purposes of
retaliation, depart from the fixed principles of the law of na-
tions, which declares that they are conclusive. Id. ib.
335. Written statutes and edicts of foreign countries must Foreign laws.
be produced.—Common, or unwritten law may be proved by Evidenee.
parol. Seton v. Delaware Ins. Company—2 Washington C.
C. Reports, 175, S. P.—2 Tyler’s Rep. 367. Woodbridge v.
.Austin. Sup. Court Vermont, 1803 S. P. 2 Washington,
C. Court Reports 1. Robinson v Clifford, C. Court Pennsyl-
vania, 1807.
336. The laws of a foreign country where a contract is Foreign laws.
made, will be regarded by the tribunals of another country as -
to the obligations of the contract, and as to its discharge. Id. * *
p. 157. Webster v. JMassey, C C. Pennsylvania, 1808. Green
v. Sarmiento–3 PPashington C. C. Reports 17, S P 1811.
337. A discharge of the person under a foreign insolvent Foreign laws.
ław, leaves the contract still in force; and whether bail shall
be demanded or not, unust depend upon the laws of the coun-
try where the suit is brought. Id. ib.
338. The property of a foreign minister, attached to his fºrm minis-
person or in his use is protected by the law of nations; to in- i.aw of nations.
sult it is an attack on the minister himself, and upon his sove-
reign. It is an insult to both Offences of this sort were in-
tended to be covered by the 27th S. of the act of Congress to
Leac loci.
308 Points or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
Foreign minis-
ter.
Foreign
recºrds.
Evidence.
Foreign
minister.
Evidence.
Alien Enemy.
Trade with
Enemy.
Law of nations.
Admiralty.
Weutrals.
Neutrals.
Trade with
enemy.
St. Domingo.
New states.
unish crimes But to constitute this an offence against the
Fº of natious the defendant must have known the prope ty
to belong to the minister; otherwise it is merely an offe ºce
against the tisunicipal law. It, 435. U. S. v. Hand, C. C.
Pennsylvania. 1810
339 it a foreign minister make the first assault, the defen-
dant will be excused for the subsequent battery. 2 u ash-
ington, C C, Reports, 205–United States v. Liddle, C. Court
Pennsylvania. 1808. See U. S. v. Ortega–4 tº ashington C.
C. ſteports, S P 557. C. C. Pennsylvania, 825. -
340. A certificate of the Register of a foreign court of ad-
miralty, is not evidence of the loss of a paper. Id. p. 1 Ro-
binson v. Clifford, C. C. Pennsylvania 1807.
341. The certificate of the Secretary of State, is the best
evidence of the diplomatic character of a foreign minister.—
Id. 05, U. S. v. Liddle, C. C. Pennsylvania, 1808. See U.
S. v. Ortega—4 Washington, C. C. Rep. 535, C. C. Pennsyl-
vania, 1825.
342. Contracts, made with an alien enemy, are lawful. if
made in a trade carried on under license of the government,
whether they arise directly or collaterally out of such licens-
ed trade; or if the enemy, with whom the contract is made,
be in the hostile country by license of the government; or if .
the contract be a ransom botd.
Contracts made by prisoners of war, in the enemy’s coun-
try, for subsistence, are binding 3 Hashington C. C. Reports
484–Crawford v. The Wan. Penn, C. C JVew-Jersey, 1819.
343. The law of nations does not prohibit the carrying ene-
mie’s goods in neutralivessels; but even allows freight, in case
of condemnation of the goods.
But if a neutral endeavours, by false appearances, to cover
the property of a belligerent from the lawful seizure of his
enemy, such conduct identifies the neutral with the belliger-
ent whom he thus endeavours to protect; and is a fraud upon
the neutrality of his own government, and upon the rights of
the belligerent. Id. 117, Schwartz o. Ins. Com. of Worth
.America, C. C. Penusylvania, 18, 1.
344 Whether a neutral, within the territory of one belliger-
ent commits a crime against that belligerent, by as intercourse
with the enemy, must depend on the nature of that intercourse.
3 Washington, C. Court Reports, 381. Bas v. Steele, C. C.
Pennsylvania, 1818.
345. It is for the government of the United States to
decide whether the Island of St. Domingo is independent or
not; and until such a declaration is made, or France shall re-
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 309
linquish her claim, the courts of the United St a si ( , n-
sider the ancient state of things as remaining unaltered; and
the Sovereign power of France over the country as still ex-
isting.
The surrender of a town, to an invading enemy, does not Conquest.
divest its Sovereign of more country than ihat which has sub-
mitted to the conqueror. If the whole Island of St Domin-
go had been conquered by the British and given up to the
Blacks, the right of France would have revived; since the
conqueror gains nothing but the temporary right of posses.
sion and government, until a pacification; and cannot in the
meantime impair, by a fly transfer, the rights of the former
Sovereign. Id. p. 101—Clark v. United States, C. Court,
Penn., 1811.
346. The owners of a privateer who have given bond to Privateer's
the United States are not liable, beyond the penalty of their bond .
bond and the loss of their vessel, for piratical acts of the mas-
ter and crew, not done in the execution of the business in
which they were employed. Id. 262—Dias v. Privateer Re-
venge, Circuit C. Pennsylvania. 1814.
347. Carrying despatches to the enemy is cause of con-
demnation. The citizen thereby makes himself, pro hac vice
an enemy, and his vessel enemies’ property, and renders him:
self liable to prosecution as a traitor, or as guilty of a misde-
meanor, according to the circumstances of the case. 3 Wash-
ington. Circuit Court Reports 1814. The Tulip, C. C. Penn-
sylvania, 1812. .**
348. Going from the enemy’s squadron to the shore, with id.
intent peaceable to obtain provisions for the enemy, is not an
act of treason; but to carry provisions towards the enemy,
with intent to supply him is, though that intention should be
defeated.
If the intention of the defendant were to procure provisions
for the enemy, by uniting with him in hostilities against the
United States, his progressing towards the shore would be an
overt act of adhering to the enemy, though no other act was
committed. Id. 234. United States v. Pryor, C. C. Penn. 1814.
349. A Sovereign state has a right to regulate by law, the Hunting.
manner in which the common goods are to be used; such as §. right.
the common right of hunting and fishing, &c. 4 Washington,
Circuit Court Reports, 379–Corfield v. Coryell, Circuit C.
Pennsylvania, 1823. -
350. In the United States material-men have a lien on for- Material-men.
eign vessels furnished. Water-casks are materials, for which Admiralty.
the person furnishing them may have a lien. -
Intercourse
with enemy.
Treason.
310 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Foreign vessels
Law of nations.
Foreign minis-
ter’.
Law of nations.
Foreign vessel.
Treaty.
Alien.
Treaty.
British treaty.
Foreign re-
cords.
Admiralty.
Evidence.
Sonsul.
By the common law, no such lien was given either upon a
domestic or foreign vessel; but the civil law gave it upon
both. Id. 453–Zane v. Brig. President, C. C. Penn. 1824.
351. Upon an indictment, under the 27 S of the act of 1789,
for punishment of certain crimes, for assault and battery on
a foreign minister, it is immaterial whether the defendant
knew that the person assaulted was a foreign minister. 4
Washington C. C. Reports 537—United States v. Ortega, C.
C. Pennsylvania, 1825–2 Washington, C. C. Rep. 209, 210–
Onited States v. Liddle, S. P., C. C. Penn. 1803.
352. If the person committing an assault on a foreign mill-
ister, be ignorant of the character of the person assaulted, it
is not an offence against the law of nations, 2 Pfashington
C. C. Reports 209, 210–U. S. v. Liddle, 1808.
353. A state law inconsistent with a subsequent treaty is
void.
The alienage of the Plaintiffs in Ejectment who were Brit-
ish subjects, is no bar to the recovery of lands held by their an-
cestor at the time of the treaty of 1794. 1 Paine's Reports
55—Fisher v. Harden C. C. New Pork, 1812.
354. Under the 2d art. of the British Treaty of 1794, the
the precints and jurisdiction of a post are not to be consider-
ed as extending 3 miles in every direction, by analogy to the
jurisdiction of a country over its surrounding coasts; but
they must be made out by proof.
The clause in that article which provides that settlers with-
in such precincts simail be protected in the enjoyment of their
property, as well as the 9th article, was intended to protect
legal and equitable interests in land; and not trespassers and
intruders without right. Id. 457—Jackson v. Porter, C. C.
New York, 1825.
355. The proceedings of a foreign court of vice admiralty,
purporting to be under the seal of the court, and to be certi-
fied by the Registrar, and accompanied by a certificate of the
American Consul, under his seal of office, that he was such
Registrar, are not so authenticated as to entitle them to be
read in evidence.
The seal does not prove itself. Some proof aliunde is al-
ways required; either that it is the seal of the court, by a
witness who knows the fact; or by proof of the hand writing
of the judge or the clerk; or by an examined copy, compared
with the original in the proper office; or some other evidence
of a similar character: 'I hey do not alone, unaided by ex-
trinsic evidence, carry with them such verity as to make them
evidence in foreign courts.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
11
3
The court can attach no credit to the consular certificate.
The law of nations recognizes him only in commercial trans-
actions; but not as clothed with any authority to authenticate
judicial proceedings. 1 Paine's Rep 594–Catlett v. Pacific
Insurance Company C. C. New York, 1826. 1 Tyler’s Rep.
366–PPoodridge v. Justin, Supreme C Vermont, 1800, contra.
356. A citizen of the United States may lawfully, during
war with a foreign country, draw a bill on one of its subjects.
Such an act does not amount to trading with the enemy. Id.
156—United States v. Barker, C. C. New York, 1820.
357 The sentence of a court of admiralty, in questions
of prize binds all the world. Oae court of admiralty will
sustain a libel to carry into effect the sentence of another.—
3 Dallas 86—Panhallow v. Doane. Supreme C. U. S. 1795.
358 A belligerent vessel captured by a citizen of a neu-
tral country, although under a commission from the enemy of
the captured vessel, must be surrendered to the original owner.
3 Dallas, 133–Talbot v. Jansom, Supreme Court, U. S. 1795.
359. Immediately on capture as prize, the captors acquire
such a right as no neutral nation can question: neutrals are
always bound to consider the existing state of things between
the belligerents as right. 3 Dallas, 188. McDonough v. The
JMary Ford. Sup, Court United States, 1796.
360. The right of seizing and bringing in a vessel for fur-
ther examination, does not authorise or excuse any spoliation
or damage done to the property. The captors proceed at their
peril, and are liable for all consequent injury and loss. 3 Dal-
las, 833–1)el Col v. Arnold, Sup. Court United States, 1796.
361. Questions of prize are only cognizable in the courts
of the power making the capture; and therefore our Courts
can hold no jurisdiction in a case of prize litigated between
the subjects of two belligerent nations, although the capture
was made within the territorial limits of the United States.—
1 Peter’s Ad. decisions 12, Ship William. District Court Pa.
1793. Ib. 809— The Fanny, District Court Penn, 1793. 1
Johns. 471. Wheelwright v. Depeyster. S. P.
362. The property of a neutral is not divested by capture and
sale by a belligerent, unless condemned as prize by a compe-
tent court. 1 Johns. 471. Ił'ſ celwright v. Demeyster, Sup.
Contrf W. P. 1806. S. P. 2 Peters...fl.d. decisions, 345–1}istrict
Court Pennsylvania. 1804.
863. The property of the original owner is not changed by
capture without condemnation. 1 Cr. 32 Talbot v. Seeman,
Sup. Court U. S. 1801.
War.
Trading with
enemy .
Admiralty.
Foreign sen-
tent: e.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Ad miralty.
Prize.
Neutrals,
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Admiralty,
rize,
312 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
Admiralty.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Salvage.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
Salvage.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Foreign Seſh -
tellce.
Admiralty.
Foreign sen-
tence.
id.
F oreign Seſh-
tence.
364. Prize courts proceed in rem, and cannot adjudicate on
a prize lying in a foreign port, or out of the jurisdiction of the
captor or his ally. 1 Johns. 471. Wheelwright v. Depeyster,
Sup. Court W. P. 1806. -
365, Salvage is demandable of right from vessels saved from
pirates or from the enemy, but not on a re-capture made by a
neutral power: the act of re-taking being a hostile act unjus-
tified by the situation of the nation of the capturing vessel, in
relation to the nation from whose possession such re-captured
vessel was taken. --
The liberation of a clear neutral from the hands of an ene-
my gives no title to salvage to the re-capturing belligerent.
But where the capturing power has habitually disregarded the
law of nations, the re-capturing power is entitled to salvage.
1 Cranch. 1. Talbot v. Seeman, Sup Court U. S. 1801.
366. There is no positive rule which governs the rate of
salvage in case of wreck. The coninion usage of commercial
nations, however, and especially of those whose subjects are
interested in the particular case, must be regarded. 2 Cranch
267, Mason v. The Blaireau, Sup Court U S 1804.
3. 7. If the commander of a public vessel captures a vessel
on the high seas. without probable cause, which vessel is af-
terwards taken from him by a superior force and condemned
as enemy’s property, the original captor is bound to make re-
stitution in value to the owner, with damages and costs; and
the owner is not bound to resort to the recaptors. 3 Cranch,
460, JMaley v Shatſuck. Sup. Court, U. S. 1806.
368. A sentence of condemnation in a foreign court of ad-
miralty, of competent jurisdiction. cannot be called in ques-
tion on account of fraud practised in obtaining it, but must re-
main in force until avoided in some regular mode in the coun-
try where it passed. 1 Dey's cases, 142. Stewart o. Warner,
Sup. Court Errors Conn. 1803.
369. The sentence of a foreign court of admiralty is not
even prima facie evidence of any fact, if there appear in it
enough to rebut such a presumption. 1 Caine’s cases in Error.
Johnson v. Leadlow XXIX. .N. P. 1801.
370 But unless something suspicious appear on the face of
it. it is to be deemed prima facie correct. 2 Caine’s cases in
Error, 110. Smith v. W iſliams, W. P. 1805.
371. In an action on a policy of insurance, the sentence of
a foreign cºurt of admiralty is not conclusive on the character
of the property. Id. 217. Vandenheuvel v. United Ins. Co.
N. P. 1805.
connectiºn with our FoltBIGN RELATIONs. 318
372. A sentence of a foreign court of admiralty condem- Admiralty.
ning a vessel as good and lawful prize without assigning any Foreign sen-
reason, is to be considered as proceeding upon the ground of “"“”
its being enemy’s property, and such a sentence is conclusive
evidence of the breach of warranty by the assured 1 Johns.
eases, 341. Goia v Low, Sup. courſ, V. P. 1800. 2 Johns, ca.
481. S. C. Court of Errors. .N. P. 1802, contra, 2 Johns, ca-
sex, 481, Johnston et. al. v. Ludlow, S. P. contra, in Cºurt of
Errors. New-York. 1802
373. Every man is bound to know the laws of his own coun- Foreign laws.
try, but not the laws of foreign countries.
Foreign laws can affect contracts made in this country only
in two cases: 1st. Where the parties reside or trade in a for-
eign country. 2d. Where the contracts plainly referring to a
foreign country for their execution, adopt and recognize the
lear loci. 4 Dallas. 327. Searight v. Galbraith, C. C. U. S.
Pennsylvania. 1796.
374. Our courts will not sustain a suit on a contract between Foreign con-
foreigners made in a foreign country, if, by the laws of that ºod.
country no action would be had there. 4 Dallas, 419–Con-
framp v. Bunel. C. C. U. S. Pennsylvania, 1806.
375. Contracts are to be construed according to the laws Ler 10, i.
of the country in reference to which they are made, but the Foreign laws.
remedy on them is to be prosecuted according to the laws of
the country in which the remedy is sought. 1 Caine's Reports
412. Vash v. Tupper, Sup Court, W P. 1803.
376. Our courts do not take notice of the revenue laws of Foreign laws.
foreign countries. 1 Johns. Reports, 94–Ludlow v. Van Rens-
selaer, Sup. Court, JW P 1806.
377 The common law of a foreign country may be proved id.
by respectable and intelligent witnesses; but foreign statutes
cannot be proved by parol. Id 385–Kenny v. Clarkson,
Sup. Court, W. P. 1806.
378. All rights to personal property are to be regulated by id.
the laws of the country in which the Testator lived, but the
suits for those rights must be governed by the laws of that Leac loci.
country in which the tribunal is placed. 3 Cranch, 319—Diac-
on v. Ramsay, Sup. Court, U. S. 1806. 2 Mass. T. R. 84—
Pearsal v. Dwight, S. P. 1806. 3 JMass. T. R. 77—Powers
v. Lynch, S. P. 1807.
$79. A seizure, beyond the limits of the territorial juris. Law of nations,
diction, for breach of a municipal regulation, is warranted by
the law of nations. 6 Cranch, 281 – Hu son v Guestier, S.
Court U. S. 1810. Contra—4 Cranch, 241–Rose v. Himely.
40
314
POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Admiralty.
id.
Neutrals.
Blockade.
Admiralty.
Blockade.
Neutrals.
Foreign laws.
Evidence.
Admiralty
Foreign sen-
tence.
Evidence.
Foreign law.
Bankrupt.
Foreign laws.
1,éac loci.
Admiralty.
Foreign sen-
Yet, Ce,
id.
Jurisdiction.
380 The owner of a privateer capturing neutral property
is not liable to a decree of restitution, unless the property or
its proceeds came to his hands; and the property, having been
libelled in a prize court, is presumed to be in the custody of its
officers, unless the contrary appear. 4 Cranch, 2—Jennings
v. Carsºm. S. C. U. S. 1807.
381 Neutral goods, bound to a blockaded port, are to be
considered as contraband of war. 6 Mass. T. R. 102—Rich-
ardson v JMaine Ins. Com. Sup. Court, Mass 1809
382. Notice, either actual or constructive, of the existence
of a blºckade, is requisite before a neutral can be deemed in
delicto, or to have violated his neutral duty, by attempting to
enter the port. 7 Johns. Rep. 38–Radcliff v. United Insu-
rance Cºmpany. S C. N. P. 1810.
383. Foreign laws and regulations respecting trade may be
proved by parol, if they are not proved to be in writing as
public edicts. 6 Cranch, 274–Livingston v. Md. Ins. Com.
S. C. U. S. 181 ().
384 A sentence of a court of admiralty is sufficient evidence
of a condemnation, without showing the previous proceedings,
and a copy of the sentence under the seal of the court, signed
by the actuary in the absence of the registrar, accompanied
by the deposition of a witness proving the seal and signature,
is a sufficient authenfication. 7 Johns. Rep. 514–6 ardere v.
The Columbia Ins. Company, S. C. W. P. 18 1.
385. The Bankrupt law of a foreign country cannot trans-
fºr property in the United States. 5 Cranch, 289—Harrisone
v Sterry ot. al. Sun Court U S 1809.
386. The lex loci contractus is to govern unless the parties,
by the terms of the contract, had in view a different place.
8 Jºhns. Reports, 189—Thompson v. Ketchum. Sup. Court,
Never- Pork, 1811
387. If the sentence of a foreign court of admiralty, condemn-
ing a vessel for breach of blockade. state facts, which, by the
law of nations, or by treaty subsisting between the countries,
do not amount to a justifiable cause of condemnation, such
sentence does not falsify a warranty of American property,
and the parties may be let in to other evidence upon the sub-
ject. 4 ('ranch, 185—Fitzsimmons v. Newport Ins. Com.—
Sup Court U. S. 1808.
388. The constitution of a foreign court, and whether it has
not exceeded its jurisdiction, are questions examinable in the
Courts of this country. 4 Cranch, 241–Rose v. Himely.—
Sup. Court U. S. 1808,
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 153
389 The sentence of a foreign court of V. Admiralty, con. *…
<demning a ship for breach of blockade, is conclusive evidence truce.
of the fact of breach of blockade. 6. Mass. T. R. 277—Baw- *
ter v. New England Marine Ins. Co. Supreme ('ourt Mass.
1810. 7 Do. 275—S C. Sup. Court Jºlass. 1811. 4 Day's
cases. 179–Brown v. The Union Ins. Co. at .N. Lºndom S.P.
2 Johns, ca. 127— Vandenheuvel v. The United Ins. Co S. P.
Sup. Court N. Pork, 1801. 2 Johns cases 451. S. C.—S P.
contra Court of Errors N. Pork, 1802. 2 Johns. cases, 174
—Laing v. The United Ins. Co S. P. accord. Sup. Cºurt N.
Pork, 1801. 2 Johns. cases, 487. S. C.—S. P. contra. Court
of Errors. JV. Fork, 1802. 9 Johns. Reports, 277— Radcliff
v. The U. S. Ins. ( 0. S. P. accord. Sup. Court, JN. Fºrk, 1812.
390. A British subject, naturalized and residing in the U. Naturalization.
States, cannot, by taking an oath of allegiance to the King of Aliens.
Spain, and exercising, in this country, the office of Spanish
Consul, become an alien, or a Spanish subject. 2 Johns. cases,
407—Fish v. Stoughton. Sup. Court, W. Pork, 1801.
391. The 4th article of the treaty of peace between the Treaty.
U. States and Great Britain, overrules and annuls, ab initio, British treaty.
all laws of the U. States, or of the individual States, made to
sequester or confiscate debts due to British subjects, and re-
stores to the creditor the full rights of recovering his claim
against the American debtor; and it is the duty of the State
and federal Judges to pronounce all laws contrary to the treaty
null and void.
If a treaty be broken by one of the parties, it becomes, not
absolutely void, but voidable only at the option of the other
contracting party. 3 Dallas, 199—Ware v. Hylton, Supreme
Court, United States, 1796.
392. That an interest may be protected by the British Treaty.
Treaty, it must be an interest holden as a security for money
at the time of a treaty, and the debt must still remain due.
5 Cranch 344—Owens v. Norwood’s lessee S. C. U. S. 1809.
393. Under the treaty of 1794, with Great Britain, a Bri-Treaty.
tish subject could hold lands purchased prior to that time.
6 Mass. 7. R. 441—Commonwealth v. Sheafe, Supreme C.
JMassachusetts, 1810.
394. Although there may be cases in which the court will
exercise jurisdiction in disputes between foreigners, yet it
will generally remit them to their own domestic forum.—
Pee's Reports 217–The Wanny, District C., S. C. 1805.
395. Supplies to a foreign vessel in a neutral port will con-
stitute a lien on the vessel, and are recoverable in admiralty.
Bee, 78–The Eagle, District Court, S. C., 1796.
British treaty,
British treaty,
Aliens.
Jurisdiction.
Admiralty.
Material-men.
316 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
A 'n. Iralty.
Material-men.
Admiralty.
War.
396 Where the contract for repairs was made on land,
and the owners were represented on the spot by a consigree
who had funds, the admiralty has not jurisdiction. Bee, 167,
Pritchard v. The Horatia, District Court, S. C., 1800.
397. If the master borrow money for repairing damages to
a vessel, done on the high sea, the admiralty has jurisdiction
of a libel by the lender. Bee, 116—The Rainbow, District
Court, South Carolina, 1798.
398. A capture made on land by unauthorised individuals,
Capture on land from an enemy, does not divest the property frºm the original
Admiralty.
Hypothecation.
Admiralty.
Sa } vage.
Prize.
Admiralty.
INeutrals.
False papers.
War.
Trade with
enemy
Treaty.
British treaty.
Blockade.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutrals.
owner. without condemnation or distribution by some cºm-
perent authority. 1 Bay, 20–Turnbull v. Ross, C. C. pleas,
South Carolina, 1785
399. The master of a vessel can only hypothecate in a for-
eign port, where his owner has no personal credit, and the
vessel is in such distress that the voyage cannot be completed
without it. Bee, 120–Tunno v. The Mary. Dis. Court, S. C.
1798. I f. 131— Boreal v. The Golden Rose. Dis. C. S. C.
1798. Id. 197—Putnam v. The Polly, Dis. C., S. C. 1800'
Id 250–Sloane v, Haley. Dis. C., S.C. 1808.
400. A captured vessel saved by a neutral is to be restored
to the captor on payment of salvage. Bee 92— Booth v. The
Esperanza, Dis. C., South Carolina, 1798.
401. False papers divest a neutral of all right to redress
under treaties, or the law of nations. Bee, 202—Mann v.
Sacks, Dis. C., South Carolina, 1804.
402. A declaration of war puts a period to all commercial
executory contracts subsisting at the time between the citi-
zens of the belligerent nations. 1 Nott & McCord, 563–
McGrath v. Isaacs, C. C., South Carolina, 1819.
403. Under the treaty of 1794 with Great Britain, a breach of
blockade, to warrant a capture, must consist in a second at-
tempt to enter the blockaded port after being duly warned—
a declaration of the master, that he intended to enter the port
if released, is not sufficient ground of capture. 2 Bay, 388–
Williamson v. Tunno, C. C., S. C., 1802.
404 The crew of a neutral vessel. unlawfully captured by
a belligerent. may retake the vessel, and may recover dama-
ges out of goods put on board by the captors. Bee, 141–
British Consul v. Thompson, District Court, S C 1799.
405. Belligerents have no right to sell their prizes in
a neutral port, unless privileged by treaty. But the neutral
government may grant permission without violating neutrality;
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 317
if all the belligerents are in this respect put upon an equal
footing. Bee, 263—Consul of Spain v. Consul of G. Britain,
C. C., South Carolina.
406. The sale of a prize in a port not belonging to the cap. Admiralty.
tors, before condemnation, does not divest the property of the Prize.
original owner. Bee, 300—Rose v. Himely, District Court,
South Carolina, 1804.
407. Neutral courts have no jurisdiction of the question of Aºrally.
prize as between the b lligerents. Bee, 66–Reid v The Neutrals.
pere. District Court South Carolina.
408. The courts of admiralty in this country will maintain Admiralty.
a suit for damages happening to a vessel in the hands of the Prize.
captor, after a decree of restitution in a foreign court. Bee.
60–McGrath v. Sloop Candalero, /)is. Court S Car., 1794.
409. Under the treaty with France, a French armed ship rºº.
* & we e - - French treaty.
duly çommissioned, but fitted out in an American port, might *
bring in and carry away her prizes, without being subject to
the courts of this country. Bee, 40—Stannick v. The Friend-
ship, District Court, S. Car, 1794. Id. 69— British Consul
w. The Men maid, Dis. Court, South Carolina, 1795.
410. In such case the court can only interfere where the Treaty.
equipment of the privateer in the neutral port, contravenes French, treaty.
the laws of neutrality. Bee, 40–Salderondo v. The Nostra Neutrals.
Signora, District Court, South Carolina, 1794.
411. An augmentation of force in an American port, is a Admiralty.
breach of neutrality, and of the law of nations, as well as of Neutrals.
the laws of the United States; and a prize captured by such º nations.
a vessel must be restored if brought within the jurisdiction of
our courts. Bee, 73— British Consul v. The Nancy, District
Court, South Carolina, 1795.
412. A condemnation of captured goods in a court of com- Admiralty.
petent jurisdiction, is absolutely necessary before the proper- Prize
ty can be divested out of the original owner. 1 Bay, 470—
Sasportas v. Jennings, Court of Common Pleas, S. C., 1795.
413. A condemnation, in a French Court of Admiralty, of Admiralty.
property lying in the ports of an ally, cannot be enquired into Prize.
by the courts of this country. Bee, 163— Sheaff v. Goods, Neutrals.
&c., District Court, South Carolina, 1800.
414 A sentence of condemnation founded on a municipal Admiralty.
regulation, not made until after the capture of the property
on the high seas, is not final and conclusive, and the property
may be restored to the original owners, if brought within the
jurisdiction of the courts of their own county. Bee, 308–
Rose v. Himely. District court, South Carolina, 1805.
Prize.
318 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIf FD IN U.S. COURTS,
Admiralty.
JForeign sen-
tence.
Law of luations.
Admiralty.
Foreign sen-
tell Ce ,
Law of nations.
Admiralty.
Foreign
Sentern Ce.
Law of nations.
Evidence.
Foreign
St’i) { tº Il Cé.
Evidence.
Foreign
Sel) {e IACC
Bºvidence.
Aliens.
Aliens.
Aliens.
Aliens.
Aliens.
Aliens,
415 If a foreign court of admiralty condemn a vessel
as lauful prize, or as the property of an enemy generally,
without assigning any reasons, the law of nations will pre-
sume that they have gone upon proper grounds, and the ir sen-
tence is conclusive on all the world. 2 Bay, 237—Campbell
v. PWilliamson, C. C., South Carolina, 1800.
416. But where the ground of the seritence is uncertain,
the truth may be examined, as where the vessel was libelled
as enemy’s property, and condemned for breach of blockade.
2 Bay, 363— Blacktock v. Stewart. C. C., S. ( ar. 1802.
417. A sentence of condemnation is not conclusive if it do
not state sufficient grounds, 2 Bay, 388 h illiamson v.
Tunno, Carcuit Court South Carojina. 1802.
418. A condemnation as prize is not a condentation as
enemy's property, so as to conclude the assured. 1. Wott and
McCord 541, in note—Bailey v. South Carolina Insurance
Company, C. C. South Carolina. 1809.
419. In an action on a policy of insurance, a condemnation
as enemy’s property, by a foreign Court of admiralty is conclu-
sive evidence of a breach of neutrality. I, wVott and McCord
537, Groning v. Union Insurance Company, C. C South
Carolina. 1819.
420. The title, of an alien friend, to lands in Maryland, is
good against every body but the state, and can only be deves-
ted by office found, or by some act done by the state to take
possession; and his chattels real vest in his representa-
tives. 4, Har. and McHenry, 409–McCreery v. Jilea'ander,
Gen. Court. Wearyland. 1799.
421. In North Carolina, an aiien cannot take lands by de-
vise. 2 Haywood. 104––University v.–. 2 do. 108--Gilmour
v. Kay.
422. In North Carolina, the title to lands purchased by an
alien continues in him until office found. 2 Haywood, 37,
Doe v. Horniblea. *
423. An alien cannot maintain ejectment; but if he is in
possession of real property he may maintain trespass quare
clausum fregit. 1 Hayw, 485—Bayes v. Hogg.
424. A foreigner naturalized in a state before the adoption
of the Federal Constitution, and who continued to reside there
until that event, became thereby a citizen of the United States.
2 Car. Law ſtepository, 112—Teſtre v. White, Sup. Court
Morth Carolina. 1815.
425. Where a father has been a citizen of the United States
his children are entitled to inherit lands in South Carolina,
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS, 319)
though born out of the limits of the United States.—Aliter
of the child of a citizen mother by an alien father. 1 Nott and
McCord, 292 - D, vis v. Hall C. C. South Carolina. 1818.
426. By an act of South Carolina of 1807, a grant of land
to an alien is valid, provided he has declared his intention to
become a citizen of the United States agreeably to the act of
congress. 1 Rep. Con. C. 411—Meeks v. Richbourg.
427 A subject of Great Britain, though born before the
declaration of Independence, is an alien and incapable of
holding lands in South Carolina, although he may take by
purchase. 4 Dess. 330–Clifton, v Haig, Court Chancery,
South Carolina. 1812.
428. The husband of an alien female who had given notice
of her intention to become a citizen and had taken the oath,
but who died before she was duly naturalized, was held to be
incapable of inheriting, through her, lands in South Carolina.
1.McCord 187—McDaniel v. Richards, C. C. South Caro-
tima 1821.
429. Aliens cannot take lands by descent in Kentucky.
Harºling, 61–Hunt v. Warnicke. 1806.
430. A person deriving title to lands in Kentucky, in virtue
of the act of 1800, under an alien claiming by descent, must
show, on the trial, that such alien was 2 years in the country
previous to the death of the ancestor. 1 Litt. 149—Trustees
of Louisville v. Gray. 1822.
431. After the ratification of the articles of confederation,
an alien who became a citizen of any one of the United States,
becaine thereby a citizen of Virginia, so as to be able to hold'
lands. 3 Litt. 476–Elmendorf v. Carnichael, Court ſppeals,
Kentucky. 1823.
432. A condemnation, by a court of admiralty of pri-
zes, brought into the port of an ally, is valid. 15 Johns. Rep.
172—Page v. Lenox, Sup C N. P. 1818.
433. No action can be maintained at common law for an
Aliens.
Aliens.
Aliens.
Aliens,
Aliens.
Aliens.
Admiralty,
Prize;
Prize,
illegal capture, on the high seas, as prize of war; and no irreg-
ularity or misconduct of the captor, in the subsequent dispo-
sition of the prize, can confer jurisdiction as to the original
taking, or is, in itself, a ground of action at common law. 16
Johns. Rep. 327–-Wovion v. Hallet C. Errors, N. H. 1819.
434. An alien may take lands by devise in Massachusetts.
The 9th article of the Treaty of 1794 with Great Britain,
was not annulled by the war of 1812. That article applied,
as well to vested reim inders as to estates in possession. 12
JMass. 143—Foz v. Southack, Sup. C. Mass. 1815.
Aliens.
Treaty British
320 POINTs or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S courts.
Aliens. 435. Alienage cannot be pleaded in bar; it must always be
pleaded in abatement. 9 Mass. 363—Lewall v. Lee, Sup.
court, Mass, 1812 Il. 377––.Martin v. Wood, Sup. court,
JMass, 1812, 12 do. 8––Levine v. Taylor, Sup. cºurt, Mass.
18 l 5,
Treaty British. 436. The treaty of 1794, with Great Britain, does not pre-
vent or cure the disability of a British subject as an Alien En-
emy. - t
Aliens. The plea of Alien Enemy is a temporary disability only
which ceases with the war. The effect of the plea is only to
suspend the process; and the plea is defective when it con-
cludes either in bar or in abatement of the writ. The form is
a praver whether the Plaintiff should be further answered.
11 Mass. 19––Hutchinson v. Brock, Sup. court, Mass. 1814.
437 Aliens resident in the United States, at the breaking
out of a war. between their own country and the United
States, or who come to reside in the United States, after the
breaking out of such war, under an express or implied per-
mission, may sue as in time of peace; and it is not necessary
for that purpose, that such aliens should have letters of safe
conduct, or actual license to remain in the United States; but
a license and protection will be implied from their being suffered
to remain without being ordered out of the United States by
the Executive. 10 Johns. 69–Clarke v. Morey, Sup. court,
AV. P. 1813.
45 °. An officer of the British army who was detained in the
State of New York as a prisoner of war until December 1776,
when he returned to England and died in 1800, never becaume
a citizen of New York, but remained a British subject, and by
reason of his alienage could not take lands by descent in 1792.
20 Johns. 313—Jackson v White, Sup. court, JW. K. 182%.
439. The declaration of Independence did not operate so
Aliens. completely to disunite the United States from England, as to
subject all British antenafi to the disabilities of alienage. Their
rights continued until the acknowledgement by Great Britain
of our Independence. 2 Hals. 305—Den. v. Brown, Sup.
court, W. Jersey, 1799.
t 440. The 4th S. of the act of Congress of 1802, which pro-
Aliens. vides that the children of citizens of the United States, born
abroad, shall be citizens of the United States, applies to those
only whose parents were citizens of a state, as such, after the
Union had commenced, and not parents born in a state, when
a colony, before the adoption of the constitution. 16 JMass.
230—Manchester v. Boston, Sup. court, Mass. 1819.
Aliens.
War.
Aliens.
+2ONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN REI, ATIONS. 321
441. The whole personal estate of an alien enemy dying in Aliens.
'New York during the war, goes exclusively to his next of kin
resident in New Fork, to the exclusion of such as were then
resident in the enemy’s country, 13 Johns. 1 Bradwell v.
Weeks, court of Errors, V Fork. 1815. 1 Johns. chancery
Reports, 206 Couth Carolina, contra. 1814.
442. When debt is brought on a foreign judgment rendered Foreign
by default, the Court will go into the consideration of such nºt.
judgment, and if it appear that it was surreptitiously obtained, Evidence.
they will not sustain it i Tyler, 237—Waddams v. Burnham
Cuperior Court. Vermont, 1801.
443. When a foreign judgment is produced in the Courts of .
Massachusetts, if the court which rendered the judgment had
jurisdiction, the regularity of its proceedings cannot be called Evidence.
in question. In an action of debt upon such judgment nil Freight
debet is the general issue. 9 Massachusetts. Rep. 462— Bissel "#"""
v. Briggs, Superior Court, Massachusetts, 1813.
444. In an action on a foreign judgment it is competent for Foreign judg-
the defendant to avoid it by showing that he was not within ment"
the jurisdiction of the foreign court. 8 Massachusetts, Rep. Evidence.
273–Buttrick v. Allen, Supreme Court, Massachusetts. 1811.
445. A decree of a foreign court of admiralty made without Foreign
fibel or trial, condemning a vessel and cargo for breach of block- ****
ade, is not conclusive of that fact. 12 Massachusetts. Rep. 291– Evidence.
Sawyer v. Maine. F. and JM. Insurance Company, Supreme
Court, JMassachusetts. 1815.
446. The sentence of a foreign Court of admiralty is con- Foreign
clusive only when it distinctly and specially states the causes *.
of condemnation. 8, Massachusetts, Rep. 5.6—Robinson v. Evidence.
Jones, Supreme Court, JMassachusetts. 181:.
447. The cause of action for a balance due to a factor arises Aliens.
in the country in which the factor resides. 15 JMassachu-
setts, Rep. 427—Coolidge v. Poor, Sup, Court, Mass. 1818.
448. Contracts are to be construed by the lex loci con- Lex loci.
tractus unless, it appears from their tenor that they were Foreign
entered into with a view to the laws of another place. 3 laws.
Conn Rep. 253–- Smith v. Mead, Sup. Court Errors, Con-
Aecticut. 1820.
449. Rights dependent upon nuptial contracts are to be
determined by the lea, loci contractus. 3 Johns C. R. 190—
J)econche v. Savetier, Court of Chancery, W. F. 1819.
450. It is the law and usage of nations, resting on the plain- Aliens.
est principles of justice and public utility, to deliver up offen- ...es from
* > e o justices
ders charged with felony and other high crimes, and fleeing
Lear loci.
4]
322 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Aliens.
Fugitives from
justics.
British
Treaty .
Treaty.
Brú ish treaty.
F. gºtives from
Justice.
"Wºr.
Enemy.
Trade with
enemy.
War.
Trade with
Enemy.
Admiralty.
Trade with
enemy.
from the country in which the crime was committed, into a
foreign and friendly jurisdiction. When a case of that kind
occurs it is the duty of the civil magistrate, on due proof of
the fact, to commit the fugitive, to the end that a reasonable
time may be afforded for the Government here to deliver him
up, or for the foreign Government to make the requisite appli-
caſion to the proper authorities here, for his surrender. Who
are the proper authorities in this case, whether it be the execu-
tive of the state, or, as the rule is international, the executive
authority of the United States, the only regular organ of com-
munication with foreign powers, it is not now the occasion to
discuss, it is sufficient to observe that if no application be
made, and duly recognized within a reasonable time, the
prisoner will then be entitled to his discharge upon Habeas
corpus; whether such offender be the subject of the foreign
governument, or a citizen of this country would make no
difference in the application of the principle.
The 27th article of the treaty of 1795, with Great Britain,
which provided for the delivery of criminals, charged with
murder or forgery, was only declaratory of the law of nations,
and is equally obligatory upon the two nations, under the sanc-
tion of public law. Since the expiration of that treaty, as they
were before. 4 Johns C. R. 108—Washburne’s case. Chun-
cellor of Mew Pork, 1819.
451. The United States will deliver up to Great Britain,
offenders charged with murder or forgery, agreeably to the
27th article of the treaty of 1795. Bee, 266—U. S. v. JWash
alias Robhins. District Contrf. S. C. 1799. |
452. One who knowingly aids another in a trade with a pub-
lic enemy in time of war, cannot recover compensation for
his services. A lams’ Reports, 184—Beach v. Kerzar. Sup.
Court of Judicature, W. Hampshire, 1818.
453. F)uring a war all communication and intercourse be-
tween citizens of the United States and the subjects of the
enemy are illegal without the express permission of the Gov-
ernment, and no promise can arise by implication of law from
such intercourse. 16 Johns. 438—Griswold v. Waddington,
court of Errors, New York, 1819.
454. A citizen of one belligerent may lawfully withdraw
his property from the country of the other belligerent, provid-
ed he does it in a reasonable time after the declaration of war,
and does not himself go to the enemy’s country for the pur-
pose. 15 Johns. 24—JAmory v. McGregor. Supreme Court,
New-Fork, 1821. * *
CONNECTED WITII OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 323
455. A contract for the delivery of goods within the United
States to a subject of the enemy’s country, partly executed be
fore the war, may be lawfully completed during the war, by
delivery to the agent of the purchaser. 19 Johns. 137—Bu-
channan v. Curry. Sup. court, Mew-York. 1821.
450. A bill of exchange drawn in New-York upon a person
in England, during war with that country, for supplies furnish-
ed to a British vessel authorized by act of Congress to sail
for a port of the enemy, may legally be remitted to Engiand
for collection. 15 Johns. 338—Suckley v. Furse. Sup, court
New-Fork, 1818.
457. A contract for the ransom of a vessel captured by a
public enemy, is a lawful contract, and will sustain a suit in
the Courts of the United States,
A passport to protect a ransomed vessel from all other ves-
sels of the same nation may be received without a violation of
the act of Congress of 1813. 15 Johns. 6—Goodrich v. Gor-
dom. Sup. court New-Fork, 1818.
458. Property taken in a battle on land does not vest in the
captor until the battle is over; and this is not until all pursuit
has ceased and all hope of recovery gone. Moveable things
taken from an enemy in a war on land belong to the sovereign
of the captor. 13 Johns. 276—Cook v. Howard. Sup court,
AVew-York, 1816,
459. An officer in the Navy of the United States, may law-
fully sink a vessel employed as a transport in the service of
the United States, and laden with munitions of war, to pre-
Vent them from falling into the hands of the enemy, and is
not liable to the owner of the vessel for its value 17 Johns.
46—Bronson v. Phoolsey. Sup. court Wew-Pork, 1819.
460. The parts of the Island of St Domingo, which, in 1810
were respectively under the Government of Petion and Chris-
tophe, were not to be considered as independent states, within
the meaning of the act of Congress of June 5th, 1794, prohi-
biting armaments against foreign states with whom the United
States were at peace. 13 Johns. 141–Hºyt v. Gelston. Sup.
court, New-York, 1816. S. C. in court of Errors, 13 Johns.
561. 1816.
461. The laws of a foreign country may be proved by oral
testimony. 14 Mass. Rep. 455–Frith v. Sprague, Sup. court
Mass 1817.
462. The public national seal of a foreign state is noticed
Trade with
enemy.
id.
Ransom.
Trade with
enemy sº
War.
Capture on
land.
Prize.
VVal".
Officer.
St. Domingo.
New states.
Foreign laws.
Evidence.
National seal.
judicially by the tribunals of other states; and the record of Law of nations.
a judgment authenticated by such seal, need not be accompa-
Evidence,
324 POINTS OR PRINCI: , ES DECIDED IN U.S. court's,
F. : “ign re-
cords.
Foreign sen-
Eviº ence.
Atkin iralty.
A miralty.
Nº tº rals.
Rescue.
Enemy license.
id.
Frize.
Tomicil.
Search.
Prize.
Spoliation.
Admiralty.
Further proof.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Capture on
land.
Admiralty.
Notice of seiz-
All*C e
nied by any certificate of its being a copy under the officicai
signatures of any officer of the court rendering such judg-
ment. 2 Conn. Reports. 85—Griswold v. Pitcairn, Supreme
court Errors, Conn. 1816.
463. The seal of a foreign court of admiralty need not be
proved. 3 Conn. Rep. 171— Thompson v. Stewart, Supreme
court Errors, Connecticut, 1819.
464. A rescue by the crew of a neutral vessel, captured by
a belligerent for an alleged violation of neutrality, is a gºod
cause of condemnation. 8 Mass. Rep. 536—Robinsºn v. Jones.
Sup, court JMass. 1812. 12.Mass. Rep. 246—JMcLellan v. Jºſe.
F. and .41. Insurance Co. S. P. Sup. cºurt Mass. 1815.
465. An enemy’s license to a neutral vessel will not avoid
the policy. 12 Mass. Rep. 176—Hayward v. Blake, Supreme
court Mass. 18 3.
466. The acceptance and sailing under an enemy's license
is an illegal act, without regard to the object of the voyage; and
no action can be maintained on a policy containing a warranty
that the vessel should have an enemy’s license. 15 Johns. 352
—Colquhoun v. N. F. Firemen Ins. Co Sup. court, JW. Y 1818.
467. The goods of a merchant domiciled in the enemy’s
country at the breaking out of war, are liable to condemnation
as enemy’s property. 16 Johns. 128—Elbers v. U. S. Ins.
Company, Sup. court New-Fork, 1819.
468. The belligerent right of search draws after it a right
to the production and examination of the ship’s papers. Liv-
ingston v. JMaryland Ins. Co.—-7 Cranch, 544, Sup. court U.
S. 18 3.
469. Concealment and even spoliation of papers do not or-
dinarily induce a condemnation of the property; but they al-
ways afford cause of suspicion, justify capture and detention,
and by inducing a refusal of further proof, may lead to con-
demnation. Ibidem—see also the Pizarro–2 Wheaton, 227,
Sup. court U. S 1817.
470. The prize jurisdiction is not confined to mere captures
at sea; it does not depend upon locality, but upon the subject
matter. It takes cognizance, not only of captures made at
sea, and in creeks, &c. but of all captures on land by a naval
force, or by co-operation with a naval force. Brown v. U. S.
—8 Cranch, 139. Sup. court U. S. 1514. The Emulous, 1
Gallison, 574. C. C. Massachusetts, 1613.
471. Those who have no interest in the vessel which could
be asserted in the court of admiralty, have no notice of her
Aseizure, and cannot be considered as parties in the proceeding
'oon NECTED witH ot"r for EIGN RELATIONS. 325
against the vessel. The Mary–9 Cranch, 126. Sup. court
|U. S. 1815. -
472. Material men, and others, who furnish supplies to a Admiralty.
foreign ship, have a lien on the vessel, and may proceed in ad Material men.
miralty to enforce it. The Jurora— Wh: atom, 105. See
also, The General Smith——4 W healon, 438. The Robert Ful.
tom—l Paine, 620. C. C. New-York. 1826. The Jerusalem–
2 Gallison, 45, C. C Mass. 1815.
473 A privateer of a friendly nation, twice re-captured by ºlº.
an American privateer, will be restored to the original owner, ...ge.
on payment of salvage. L’Invincible—l Wheaton, 238, Sup.
gourt U. S. 1816.
474. ln cases of violation of our neutrality, by any of
the belligerents, if the prize comes voluntarily within our Admiralty Pr.
territory, it is restored to the original owners by our courts; Neutrals.
but their jurisdiction for this purpose, under the law of na- Law of nations
tions, extends only to the restitution of the specific property,
with costs and expenses during the pendency of the suit;
and does not extend to the infliction of vindictive damages,
as in ordinary cases of maritime tort.—La Jimistad de
I'ues—5 Wheat, 385 Sup, court, U. S. 1820.
475. The mere circumstance that a neutral sailed under Admiralty.
convoy of a belligerent, is not, it seeins, a sufficient cause of §. *
condemnation.—The Amiable Isabella—6 PP heaton, 1. Sup. y.
court, U. S. 1821.
476. Where a capture is made under the commission of Admiralty.
a foreign country, the captors have a right, which no other Prize.
nation, neutral to them, has a right to impugn, unless for the Neutrals.
purpose of vindicating its own violated neutrality.—La Ne-
reyda–8 Wheat, 108. Sup, court, U. S. 1823.
477. In cases of restitution upon re capture, damages Admiralty.
may be awarded against the re-captors for embezzlement.— Embezzlement
The Dove—1 Gall. 585. C. C. Mass. 1813.
478. The admiralty has cognizance of all foreign mari- Admiralty.
time contracts.-De Lovio v Boit–2 Gull. 444. C. C. Mass. Jurisdiction.
1815.
479. A wharfinger has a lien on a oreign ship for Admiralty.
wharfage.—Baparte Lewis, 2 Gall. 483. C C. Mass. 1815. Wharfage,
480. Where the proceedings are in rem, all the world Admirally.
become parties to the sentence, as far as the right of property Sentence in
is involved, and of course all persons interested in the pro- 7°émº,
perty in question, are admissible to claim and defend their
interests—U. S. v. Anthony Mangen–2 Peters’ Admiral.
Becisions, 452. District Court Penn. 1802,
326 points or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. COURTS,
Treason.
Admiralty.
Alien.
Prize.
Alien Enemy.
Alien Enemy.
Foreign Corpo-
ration.
Alien Enemy.
Alien Enemy.
Id.
Enlistment.
Alien Enemy,
ld.
481. Treason against the United States cannot be com-
mitted by a person not a citizen of the United States, out of
the territory of the United States.—U. S. v. Vilatto—2 Dal-
las, 370 C. C. Penn. 1797.
482. The fact that a commander of a private armed ves-
sel was an alien eneity at the time of capture, does not in-
validate such capture, nor affect the rights of the owners and
crew of the privateer; all that could result from it would be
the cundemnation of his interest to the Government, as a
droit of admiralty.—The Mary and Susan—1 PM heat, 46.
Sup. Court, U. S. 1816.
483. An alien enemy cannot sustain any suit in the
Courts of this country.—Mumford v. ...umford—1 Gall 366.
C. C. Rhode Island, 1812.
484. An alien enemy cannot be permit:ed to make the
declaration required by law, preparatory to naturalization.
— Baparte Mewman—2 Gall 1 1. C. C. Mass. I 813.
485. If a foreign corporation. established in a foreign
country, Sue in our courts, and war intervene between the
countries, pending the suit, this is not sufficient to defeat the
action, unless it appear, upon the record, that the plaintiffs
are not within any of the exceptions which enable an alien
enemy to sue.—Soc. for prop. Gospel v. 14 heeler—2 Gall.
105. C. C. Wew Hampshire. 1814.
486. A neutral, or a citizen of the United States, domi-
ciled in an enemy’s country, is incapacitated to sue in our
courts.-lbidem.
487. Alien enemies enrolled as volunteers, and accepted
by the President of the United States, are not entitled to
discharge on the ground of such alienage.— Milson v. Izard
— 1 Paine, 68. C. C. Wew Pork, 1820.
488. The general rule of the Common Law of England
is, that an alien enemy cannot maintain an action in the
courts of that country, in his own name, nor in the name of a
trustee, who is not an alien enemy, unless it be upon a con-
tract, arising out of a trade, licensed by the Government in
whose courts redress is sought.
But the rules of the common law, in cases of alien enemy,
do not apply with the rigor, in courts acting under the gene-
ral law of nations.—Crawford v. the William Penn—1 Pe-
ters’ C. C. R. 106, New Jersey, 1815.
489. If the pleadings aver the Plaintiff to be an alien
enemy, it is incumbent on him to show a special exemption
from the general rule, if he has any—whether the Court
CoNNECTED WITH our FOREIGN RELATIONS. 327
proceeds under the law of nations, or the common law.-
Johnson v. Merchandize–6 Hall's Law Journal, 97 District
Court. Mew Pork, 1817.
490. It seems that the judgment of the court, admitting
the alien to become a citizen, is conclusive that all the requi-
sites have been complied with, or that parol proof may be
received in aid of the record.—Stark v. Ches In. Co.—7 Cr.
420. Sup Court United States, 1813.
491. A citizen of the United States, fitting out a vessel Forei
º o e o oreign Com-
in the ports of the United States, to cruize against a power mission.
in amity with the United States, is not protected by a com- Admiralty.
mission from a belligerent, from punishment for any offence
committed against vessels of the United States.—The Dos
Hermanos—2 Wheat, 76. Supreme Court United States,
1817.
492. A native citizen of the United States cannot throw º
ſº e - Allegiances
off his allegiance, unless authorised by a law so to do.— U. Expatriation.
S. v. Gillies––1 Peters’ C. C. R. 159. U. S. v. Williams—4
Hall’s Law Journal, 461. C. C. Conn 1799
493. When a government becomes a partner in any
trading company, it divests itself, so far as concerns the
transactions of that company, of its sovereign character, and Sovereign,
takes that of a private citizen — Bank United States v. Plant-
er’s Bank of Georgia—9 Wheaton 904, 1824.
494. A corporation established by a foreign Government, e e
º • e * g Foreign Cog.
in a foreign country, is an alien corporation, whoever may poſſion.
be its members, and if the country become hostile, it may, Alien Enemy.
for some purpose, at least, be clothed with the same charac-
ter.—Society for propagating Gospel v. Wheeler—2 Gall.
105. C. C. New Hampshire, 1814.
495. A ship is deemed to belong to that country where Admiralty.
her owners reside.— The San Jose Indiano—2 Gall. 268. Domicil.
C. C. Massachusetts, 1814.
496. By the general maritime law, a bill of sale is neces. Maritime Law.
sary to pass the title of a ship.–PFatson v. Penniman—1 Sale of Ship.
Mason, 306. |
497. The lien on vessels for material-men and ship-wrights Admiralty.
exists only in a foreign port. The sea ports of the several **
states of this union, are, in this respect to be considered Lien.
foreign ports, in relation to each other. Woodruff v. The Foreign ports,
Levi Dearborn—4 Hall's Law Jour. 88, Luis court, Ga. 1811.
498. The article of the British treaty, which provides that *i.e.,
a neutral vessel sailing ignorantly for a blockaded port, may Blockade.
be turned away, and shall not be detained, nor her cargo, if
Alien.
Naturalization.
328 points of PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. courts,
Tºlockade.
Cº., traband.
N, 1; rais.
Aſi: niralty.
British debts.
Confiscation.
Treaty.
British treaty.
Capitulation.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
Neutrals.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Prize
Jurisdiction.
Search.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Admiralty.
P, 12e.
Trespass.
Marine tres-
Pass.
Admiralty.
Marine tres-
pass.
Privateers.
Marine tres-
pass.
Admiralty.
not contraband, confiscated, unless after notice she shall again
attempt to enter; but shall be permitted to go to any other
port, is a correct exposition of the law of nations. Fitzsim-
mons v. Veſoport Ins, co.—4 Cranch 185, Sup. court, United
States. 1808,
49%. In cases of breach of blockade and of contraband of
war, the doctrine is established that the vessel must be cap-
tured in delicto, otherwise the offence is purged The Saun-
ders—2 Gall 210, C. C. Mass., 1814.
500. Debts due to British subjects during the revolutionary
war, although paid into the state treasury, under the authºri-
ty of an act of the Legislature, may be sued for and recover-
ed after the peace. Hamilton v Eaton, W. Car. cases, 77.
501. On surrender by capitulation, all the property of the
inhabitants protected by the articles. is considered, by the
law of nations as neutral, and not subject to capture on the
high seas, by the belligerent or its allies. Miller v. The Res-
olution—2 Dall. 1. Fed. court of Appeals, 1781.
502. Neutral property is not liable to condemnation; but
on a violation of the duties of neutrality, it is in the predica-
ment of enemy’s property, and subject to seizure and con-
demnation. Darby v The Erstern—2 Dall. 34, Fed. court
of Jìppeals, 1782.
503. The courts of the captors have, by the law of nations
the exclusive jurisdiction of the question of prize. United
States v. Peters—3 Dall. 129, Sup. court, United States, 1795.
504 The right of search grows out of, and is auxiliary to
the greater right of capture. The Nereide, 9 Cranch 388,
Supreme court. United States, 1815.
505. Where the captor transcends his powers and rights,
he becomes guilty of a marine trespass, and is amenable in
damages for the injury sustained; and where the vessel has
been lost by such illegal acts, the value of the vessel, the
prime cost of the cargo, with all charges and the premium of
insurance are to be allowed in ascertaining the damages —
The Anna Maria–2 Wheaton 327, Sup. court U. S., 1817.
506. The commander of a squa, iron is liable to individuals
for the trespasses of those under his command, in case of posi-
tive or permissive orders, or of actual presence and co-opera-
tion. The Eleanor—2 Wheaton. 345 Sup. court, U. S. 1817.
507. Owners of privateers are liable for the acts of the com-
manders; and the commander ºf a single ship is liable for
the marine tre-passes ºf his su; alterns, when acting within
the scope of his command. Ibid.
goNNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 329
508. By the general maritime law, a sentence of condem A^*}.
ination completely extinguishes the title of the original pro- i. C tº a
prietor. The Star—3 Wheaton, 78, Sup. court, U. S. #818. Maritime law.
509. Whoever sets up a title to property under a decree of \"mi".”y.
condemnation is bound to show that the conrt had jurisdiction º Scº Iles
of the caſse, and that the decree of the court has been rightly Jurisdiction.
pronounced, upon the application of parties competent to ask
it. La Vereyda–8 Wheaton, 108, Sup. court, U. S., 1823.
510. Where the capture is made by capto s acting under a Admiralty.
foreign commission, such capture gives then a right which no "?"
other nation, neutral to them, has a right to impugn, unless Neutrals.
for the purpose of vindicating its own violated neutrality, or Fºreign com-
unless by the assent, or voluntary submission of the captors. IIllSS10I).
Ibid.
511. All captures made by non-commissioned captors are sºlº.
made for the government. The Dos IIermanos—10 PPheat. tº
306, Supreme court, United States, 1825
512. It is sufficient to constitute a capture if there be a Admiralty.
deditio, or submission, on one side, and an asserted possession Prize.
on the other. although no prize crew he put on board. The Capture.
.#learander—l Gallison, 532, C. C., Massachusetts. 1813.
513. All captures in war enure to the sovereign. and can he. Almiralty.
- º Prize.
come private property only by his grant. The Emulous—I
Gallison, 563, C. C., Massachusetts. 1813.
514. Probable cause, exempts the captors from damages — #ºnly.
The Rover—2 Gallison, 240, C. C., Massachusetts. 1814. Damages.
515. What constitutes probable cause may depend on the or- A ſimiralty.
dinances of the sovereign of the captors. as well as on the Fºl. cause
law ºf nations The Invincible—2 Gallison, 29, 41, C. C.
Massachusetts. 1814.
516. The protection afforded to the captors by probable Admiralty.
cause may be forfeited by subsequent misconduct or negii. Pºle Caugé.
gence. The George—l Mason 24, C. C. Massachusetts, 1816.
517. The attempt by the captain of a neutral ves-el, to Admiralty.
rescue her from the captor, is contrary to the law ºf nations, N.”
and a sufficient cause of condemnatiºn. Dederer v. Delawa e Rescue-
Ins. Co.—2 ashington, C. C. R. 61. C C. Penn., 1807.
518. A capture is complete befºre the property is carried Admiralty
infra præsidia. Moxon v. the Fanny—2 Peters’ Adm. Dec. tº-
309, District court, Pennsylvania, 1793.
519. All contracts made for fitting and equipping a carfel Admiralty.
are to be considered as contracts mia!... between friends, and Cºtel.
•ught to be enforced in the tribunals having jurisdicuon there- º*
42
330 PoſNTs or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. courts,
Neutrals.
Confiscation.
Maryland.
Confiscation.
War.
Confiscation.
War.
Conquest.
id.
id.
Importation.
War.
Conquest.
British treaty.
Confiscation.
of. It is pro hac vice neutral. But she cannot carry on coma-
merce under the orotection of her flag. Crawford v. 7%.e.
William Penn—1 Peters' C. C. R. 106. C. C. N. Jersey. 1815.
520. By the confiscating acts of the state of Marvland, the
equitable interests of British subjects were confiscated with-
out office found, or entry, or other act done, althou h such
equitable interests were not discovered until long after the
peace with Great Britain. Smith v. state of Maryland—6
Cranch, 286, S. C., U. S., 1810.
521. By the law of nations, and by the common law, the
sovereign may lawfully confiscate the debts of his enemy
during war, or by way of reprisal. 7"he Emulous—l Gall.
563. C. C., Massachusetts, 1813. Hamilton v. Eaton, N. C.
cases. 79.
522. That such confiscations have fallen into disuse, has
resulted, not from the duty which one nation, independently of
treaties, owes to another, but from commercial policy.
Civil war which terminates in a severance of empire, does,
perhaps, less than any other. justify the confiscation of debts,
because of the special relation and confidence subsisting
at the time they were contracted. Hamilton v. Eaton N. C.
cases, 79.
523. By a conquest, the conquerer acquires only a tempo-
rary right of possession and government. Clark v. U. S.–3
Washington. C. C. Reports, 101, C. C. Penn. 1811.
524. By the conquest and military occupation of a portion
of the territory of the United States by a public enemy, that
portion is to be deemed a foreign country so far as respects our
revenue laws. U. S. v. Itice—4 Wheaton, 246, Sup. court
U. S. 1819.
525, Goods imported into it, are not imported into the U.
States, and are subject to such duties only as the conqueror
may impose. Ibid.
526. The subsequent evacuation of the conquered territory
by the enemy, and resumption of authority by the U. States,
cannot change the character of past transactions. The jus
postliminii does not apply to the case, and goods previously
imported do not become liable to pay duties to the U. States.
Ibid.
527. The British treaty of 1783, repealed all the state laws
inconsistent with its provisions. Ware v. Hylton–3 Dallas,
199. Sup, court U. S. 1796.
528 An act of a State Legislature, banishing the person,
and confiscating the property, of certain individuals, therein
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 331
#amed, as traitors, passed before the establishment of the fe-
deral constitution, is not void. Cooper v. Telfair—4 Dallas,
44. Shºp. court U. S. 1800.
529. Under the power “to make rules concerning captures confiscation.
on land and water,” Congress has power to confiscate ene-
y’s property found within the territory at the declaration of
war. Brown v. U. S.--8 Cranch, 110, Sup, court U S. 1814.
531). Whenever a right grows out of, or is protected by, a Treaty.
treaty, it is satictioned against all the laws and judicial deci- *"
sions of the states; and whoever may have this right it is pro-
tected. But if the person’s title is not affected by the treaty,
if he claims nothing under the treaty, his title cannot be pro-
tected by the treaty. Owings v. Norwood’s lessee—5 Cranch,
348, Sºp. court U. S. 1809.
531. Congress has power to provide for the punishment of crimes,
offences committed by persons serving on beard a ship of war
of the United States, wherever that ship may be: but Con-
gress has not exercised that power in the case of a ship lying Ship of war.
in the waters of the United States. U. S. v. Bevans—3 fºſtea-
tom, 335, &c.,). court U. S. 1, 18.
532. The act of Congress of 34 arch 34, 1819, c. 76, §. 35,
referring to the law of nations for a definition of the crime of
piracy, is a constitutional exercise of the power of Congress
to define that crime. U. S. v. Smith—5 #3 hegton 153, Sup.
court U. S. 1820.
533. The Supreme Court of the tinited States has, consti- jurisdiction.
tutionally, appellate jurisdiction under the 25th section of the -
judiciary act of September 24, 1789, ch. 20, from the final
judgment or decree of the highest court of Haw or Equity of a State courts.
state having jurisdiction of the suit, where is drawp in ques-
tion the validity of a treaty, or statute of, or an authority ex-
ercised under the United States, and the decision is against
their validity; or where is drawn in question the validity of a
statute of, or an authority exercised under any state, Gn the
ground of their being repugnant to the constitution, treaties
or laws of the United States, and the decision is in favor of
their validity, &c. Cohens v. Virginia–6 tº heaton 264, Sup.
court U. S. 1821. -
534. The power to regulate commerce extends to e
species of commercial intercourse between the Unit
and foreign nations, and among the several sta
v. Ogden–9 Wheaton, 193, Sup. court U. S. 1
535. A foreign consul is not exempt from cri
tion by virtue of his appointment. U. S. v. Ra
297, C. C. Pennsylvania, 1793.
Jurisdiction.
Piracy.










332 Points of PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
Consul. 536. A consul, though a public agent, is supposed to be
clothed with authority only for commercial purposes. He has
Law of nations, a right to interpose claims for the restitution of property be-
longing to subjects of his own country; but he is not entitled
...sº * to be considered as a minister, or diplomatic agent of his sove-
reign, intrusted, by virtue of his office, with authority to re-
present him in his negotiations with foreign states, or to win-
dicate his prerogative. The lune—3 Wheaton, 485-446, Sup.
court U. S. 1818.
Consul. . 537. A consul is authorised to claim in behalf of subjects
Lºw f nations. of his courtry. The London Packet––1 Mason, 14, C. cºurt
Admiralty.
JMassachusetts, 1816. Gernon v. Cochran—-Bee, 209, District
cottrf South Carolina. 1804.
High seas. 538 0n an indictinent for murder founded on the 8th S. of
the Act of Congress of April 30, 1790. chapter 36, the death,
*"er. as well as the mortal stroke must happen on the high seas.-
U. S. v. McGill–4 Dallas. 426, C. C. Penn. 1806.
Jurisdiction. 539. The courts of the United State have not jurisdiction
of murder committed by one foreigner on another foreigner,
on board a foreign vessel on the high seas. U. S. v. The Pi-
rates–5 PP'heaton, 184. Sup. court U. S. 1830.
Foreign courts. 540. A condemnation of a foreign court, whose origin is
no shewn, must be presumed to be that of a legitimate tribu-
* nal. But when the source of its authority and constitution
appear, it ought to be examined; and if it be contrary to the
usual mode of constituting courts, it shifts the burden of proof
upon the party who would support the condemnation, particu-
larly as it is more easy to prove than to disprove, the legiti-
macy of a court. Snell v. Foussat-C. C. U. S Penn 1805.
8 Binney, 239, (n, ) S C.—l Washington, C. C. Rep. 271,
1805. *
foreign courts, 541. A condemnation of neutral property by an unauthor-
ised tribunal, is not to be regarded by the courts of other na-
tious. Id. ib. -
COITlsº 542. A citizen of the United States fitting out a vessel in
a port of the United States to cruize against a power in amity
with the United States, is not protected, by a commission from
lligerent, from punishment for an offence committed against
tel of the United States. U, S, v. The Pirates—5 Pł hea-
k Kup, court U. S. 1820.
he courts of the United States, have jurisdiction of
ommitted, on the high seas, from a vessel of the U.
a foreigner being on board such vessel, upon an
Foreign vessels









connecTED WITH our roREIGN RELATIONs. 333
other foreigner being on boat d of a foreign vessel. U. S. v . Jurisdiction.
the Pirates—5 PP heaton, 184, Supreme Court United States,
1830.
544. The courts of the United States, have jurisdiction, *.
under the act of 30th April 1790, ch. 36, of murder or robbery Murd."
committed on the high seas, although not committed on board
a vessel belonging to citizens of the United States as: if she
had no national character. but was held by pi ates, or persons
not law fully sailing under the flag of any foreign nation. U.
S. v. Holmes & al—5 Wheat, 4 2 Sup. Corut, U. S. 1820.
545. Murder or robbery on the high seas, is cognizable by ºl.
the courts of the United States, when committed on board of Piracy.
a foreign vessel, by a citizen of the United States, or on
board of a vessel of the United States, by a foreigner or by
a citizen or a foreigner, on board of a piratical vessel; and it
is immaterial whether the offence was committed on board of
a vessel, or in the sea, by throwing the deceased overboard
and drowning, or by shooting him in the sea, though he was
not thrown overbºard. li. ib.
546 A vessel lying on the sea, outside of a harbour of the High seas.
United States, within three miles of the shore, is on the high
seas. United States, v. Smith–1, Jhason, 147, C. C. JMassa-
chusetts. 1817.
547. Larceny committed on board of an American ship in Jurisdiction.
an enclosed dock in a foreign port, is not punishable under the
16th section of the act of the 30th of April 1790. C. C.
Massachusetts 1817. United States v. Hamilton–1, Mason.
152.
548. The waters of havens, where the tide ebbs and flows, High seas.
are not properly the high seas, unless without low-water mark.
Id, ib
549. On an indictment for an endeavor to make a revolt in Mariners.
a ship, founded on the 12th section of the act of 30th April Revolt.
1790 chapter 36, it is not necessary to prove that it was com- High seas.
mitted on the high seºs. 1d. 443.
550. An endeavor to make a revolt, is an offence within the Revolt.
12th section of the act of 30th April, 1790, c. 36, if commit- Mariners.
ted in a foreign port. The section does not confine the penalty
to offences committed on the high seas. United States v. Keefe High seas.
–3 JMason, 475, C. C. Mass. 1824.
551. If the force of a foreign armed belligerent vessel be
increased here, by preparing for use guns brought with her, it
is an offence against the 4th section of the act of 5th June,
1794, c. 226. United States v. Grassin—3 Washington C. C.
Rep. 65, C. C. Penn. 1811. -
Foreign vessels
334 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S COURTs,
Mariners.
Revolt.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
TJerelict.
Limitation.
Admiralty.
Neutrals,
Domicil.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Thomicil.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Domicil.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Tºrize.
Domicil.
Domicil.
Prize.
Alien.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Domicil.
Neutrals.
Admiralty.
Prize.
552. The endeavor to make a revolt in a ship within the
mouth of a foreign river, which is a mile and an half wide,
is an offence within the act of 30th April, 1790, ch. 36, sect.
12. –United States v. Smith & al.-3 Wash. C. C. R. 78.
C. C. Pennsylvania, 1811.
558. It is a violation of the act of 5th June, 1794, c. 226,
to concert an expedition from the United States, to commit
hostilities against a power at peace with the United States;
and it is unimportant that the expedition originated beyond
seas, if carried on from this country.—Exparte Needham &
al.—l Peters’ C. C. R. 487. C. C. Pennsylvania, 1817.
554. No length of time shall divest the original owner of
property found derelict at sea.--Wilkie et al v. 205 boaes of
sugar.—Bee, 82. District Court of South Carolina. 1796.
555. The subject of a neutral power, residing and car-
rying on trade in the enemy’s country, loses his neutral
character.—Chester v. The Eaperiment—2 Dallas, 42. Fede-
ral court of Appeals, 1787.
556. Goods, the property of a person actually domiciled
in the enemy’s country, at the breaking out of the war, are
subject to capture and condemnation as prize.—The JMary &
Susan. 1 PWheaton, 46. Supreme court United States, 1816.
The Francis—1 Gall. 614- C. C. Rhode Island, 1813.
557. If a party put himself in itinere to return to his na-
tive country, he is already deemed to have re assumed his
native character.—The St. Lawrence—1 Gall, 467. C. C.
Massachusetts, 1813. The Francis—1 Gall. 614. C. C
Rhode Island, 1813. -
558. Citizens, domiciled in the enemy’s country, must
actually remove before the breaking out of hostilities, other-
wise their property, then afloat, will be liable to capture.—
The Francis—1 Gall. 614. C. C. Rhode Island, 1813.
559. A neutral, or a citizen of the United States, domi-
ciled in the enemy’s country, not only in respect to his pro-
perty, but also as to his capacity to sue, is deemed as much
an alien as a person actually born under the allegiance, and re-
siding within the dominions of the hostile nation.—Soc. for the
Propagation of the Gospel v. Wheeler & al-2 Gall. 105.
C. C. New Hampshire, 1814.
560. In general, the national character of a person is to
be decided by his domicil—The San Jose Indiano. 2
Gall, 268. C. C. Massachusetts, 1814.
561. But the property of a person may acquire a hos-
tile character, altogether independent of his own peculiar
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 335
character, derived from residence. The origin of the pro- *
perty, or the traffic in which it is engaged, may stamp it with Trade.
a hostile taint, although the owner may happen to be a neu- Neutrals.
tral, domiciled in a neutral country. Such are the cases of
of engagement in the colonial, coasting, fishing, or other
privileged trade, of the enemy.
The general principle is, that where a person is engaged
in the ordinary, or extraordinary, commerce of an enemie’s
country, upon the same footing, and with the same advanta-
ges as native resident subjects, his property, so employed,
is to be deemed incorporated into the general commerce of
that country, and subject to confiscation, be his residence
where it may.—id. ib.
Every man is viewed, by the law of nations, as a member
of the society where he is found.
Residence is prima facie evidence of national character;
susceptible, however, at all times, of explanation. If it be
for a special purpose, and transient in its nature, it shall not
destroy the original, or prior national character. But if be
taken up animo manendi, then it becomes a domicil, super-
adding to the original or prior character, the rights and
privileges, as well as the disabilities and penalties of a citi-
zen or subject of the country in which the residence is es-
tablished.—Johnson v. sundry articles of merchandize. 6
Hall’s American Law Journal, 68. District court, New
York, 18 3.
562. An inhabitant, or resident, is a person coming into a Admiralty.
place with an intention to establish his domicil or permanent Domicil.
reidence, and in consequence thereof, actually residing.
The time is not so essential as the intent, executed by making
or beginning the actual establishment, though it is abandoned
in a longer or shorter period.—United States v. The Pene-
lope—2 Peters’ Admiralty Decisions, 438. District Court
Pennsylvania, 1806.
563. An exemplification of the condemnation of a vessel in
a foreign court of Vice Admiralty, reciting the certificate of Fº Seº-
surveyors, that the vessel was unworthy of being repaired, tº
and unsafe, and unfit ever to go to sea again, and produced
in evidence by the insured, to prove the loss, is evidence of a Evidence.
regular survey.—Dorr v. Pacific Insurance Company—7
Pheaton, 581. Supreme court United States, 1822.
564. The record of condemnation of a vessel in a court of Forei
vice admiralty, is not evidence per se. The seal does not ºn en-
prove itself, but must be proved by a witness who knows it; Evidence.
Inhabitant.
Prize.
Neutrals,
336 points or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
Consul.
Admiralty.
Evidence.
Admiralty.
Survey-
Foreign survey.
Evidence.
Consul.
Foreign record.
Evitience.
Seal.
Embargo.
Consul.
Evidence.
Foreign survey.
Evidence.
Foreign min-
ister.
Secretary of
State.
Evidence.
Foreign sen-
tence.
Evidence.
Foreign [jeńs
tence,
or the hand-writing of the judge, or clerk, must be proved;
or that it is an examined copy. The certificate of the Ameri-
can Consul is not sufficient to authenticate it. Catlett & al.
v. Pacific Ins, com , C. C., N. P. 1 Paine 194.
565. A certificate from the register of a vice admiralty
court, that a warrant of survey of a vessel was lost, is not
evidence of the loss. It should be proved under a commis-
sion. Robinson v. Clifford—2 Wash. C. C. R. p. 1, C. C.
Pennsylvania, 1807.
566. The report of surveyors in a foreign port, upon a sur-
vey ordered by the American consul, is not evidence; it not
being a judicial act; but the facts stated in the repºrt must
be proved as in ordinary cases. It might be otherwise, if
there were no tribunal at the place competent to issue a regu-
lar order of survey. Cort et al v. Del. Ins. com.–2 /Wash.
C. C. Rep. 375, C. C. Penn. 1809.
567. A copy of the record of a foreign court cannot be read
in evidence, without the sanction of the seal of the officer by
whom it was made out; there being no proof that he had, or
had not, a seal. Talcot v. Delaware Ins. com.–2. Washington,
C. C. Rep. 449, C. C. Pennsylvania. 1810.
568. The certificate of an American Consul, at a foreign
port, under his seal of office, stating that the ship’s papers
were lodged with him, agreeably to the requisitions of the em-
bargo law, is good evidence of that fact; but not of other
facts contained in the certificate. U. S. v. Mitchell—2 Wash.
C. C. Rep. 478, C. C. Pennsylvania, 1811.
569. The report of surveyors appointed in a foreign coun-
try, to examine a vessel, is only evidence that a survey was
ordered and made, but not of the facts stated in it. Watson
et al. v. Ins com. of Worth America—3 Washington, C. C. R.
1, C. C. Pennsylvania. 1811
570. The certificate of the Secretary of State of the United
States, is the best evidence to prove that one has been re-
ceived and accredited by our government, as a minister ºf a
foreign nation. U S v. Liddle—2 ti ashington, C. C. Rep.
205, C. C. Pennsylvania. 1808.
571. Where the sentence of a foreign court of admiralty
is full, and shews clearly the ground of condemnation, no
other part of the record need be produced. Hourquibee v.
Gerard’s Adm.–2 Wash. C. C. Rep. 164, 212, C. C. Penn-
sylvania. 1808,
572. When a party alleges a decree and sale by a foreign
government, the presumption is, that it was in writing; and a
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 337
copy of it should be produced; but if this presumption is re. **
butted. evidence of an inferior character is admissible. PWood
v. Pleasants—3 Wash. C. C. Rep. 201, C. C. Penn. 1813.
573. The comity of civilized warfare requires that the of War.
ficial assertions of a commanding officer, as to a fact within
his knowledge, should be regarded as evidence, even by his
enemy. An official letter therefore from a British Adumiral
that a certain vessel, sailing from his squadron, carried a flag
of truce, is evidence to establish that fact. U. S. v. Pryor– Evidence.
3 Washington, C. C. Rep. 234, C. C. Penn., 1814.
574. The written laws of foreign countries must be proved
by the laws themselves, if they can be procured; if not in-
ferior evidence may be admitted.
The unwritten laws and usages of such countries may be
proved by parol, and when proved, the court has a right to
construe them and decide on their effect. Consequa v. Will-
ing et al— 1 Peters’ C. C. Rep. 225, C. C. Penn., 1816.
575. In two cases only can foreign laws affect the contracts Foreign law,
of American citizens—1st. When they reside or trade in a ſeºlogi.
* ſº Evidence.
foreign country; and 2dly, When the contract plainly re-
ferring to a foreign country for its execution, adopts and re-
cognises the lea, loci. Searight v. Calbraith— 4 Dallas, 325,
C. C. Pennsylvania, 1796.
576. The bankrupt law of a foreign country cannot oper- Foreign laws.
ate a legal transfer of property in this country. Harrison v. ſº
Sterry et al—5 Cranch, 289, Supreme court, U. S., 1809. ankrupt.
577. A discharge under a foreign bankrupt law, is no bar Foreign law.
to an action in the courts of this country, on a contract made ſº.
here. JMcMillan v. McNeil–4 Wheat. 209, Sup. C. U. S. 1819.
578. Courts will not enforce the municipal regulations of Foreign laws.
a foreign country, or take cognizance of any frauds attempted JLea; loci.
upon them. The flmne—1 Mason, 508, C. C. Mass. 1818. -
579. The laws of one country cannot have any extra-ter. Foreign laws.
ritorial force; and whatever force they are permitted to have Leº locł.
in foreign countries, must depend upon the comity of nations,
regulated by a sense of their own interests and public con-
venience. Le Roy et al v. Crowninshield—2 Mason, 151,
161, C. C. J.Massachusetts, 1820. -
580. Where an outrage has been committed upon the dwell- Foreign min-
ing house of a foreign minister, to constitute it an offence “”
against the law of nations, and the 27th section of the act of Law of nations.
Foreign laws
Evidence.
43
338 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Foreign min-
itser.
Law of nations.
Foreign min-
iSter.
Law of nations.
Foreign sen-
tence.
Admiralty,
Admiralty.
Foreign sen-
tence.
Prize.
Foreign terri-
tory.
Foreign laws.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Freight.
Neutrals.
High seas.
High seas.
High seaa.
Congress of April 30th, 1790, c. 36, it must be made to ap-
pear that the party knew the house, on which the attack was
made, to be the domicil of the minister; otherwise it is, mere-
ly an offence against the municipal law. U. S. v. Hand—2
Washington, C. C. R. 435, C. C. Pennsylvania, 1810.
581. In an indictment for assault and battery on a foreign
minister, the first assault by the minister will excuse the de-
fendant, as much as in an ordinary case. U. S. v. Liddle—
2 Washington, C. C. R. 205, C. C. Pennsylvania, 1808.
582. An assault upon a foreign minister, not known as
such to the aggressor, is not a violation of the law of nations,
under the act of Congress. Id. ib.
583. Though an American court will not examine a foreign
adjudication, with any view to controvert it, yet it will sup-
port and carry into effect a sentence of a foreign court.—
JMcGrath v. The Candalero—Bee, 60, Dis. court, S. C., 1794.
584. The courts of the United States will not question a
condemnation, in a French court of admiralty, of property
carried into a port of an ally. Sheaffet al. v. 70 Hogsheads
sugar—Bee. 163, District court. S. C., 1800.
585. If a merchant vessel of the U. States be seized by the
naval force of the United States within the territorial juris-
diction of a foreign friendly power, for a violation of the laws
of the United States, it is an offence against that power,
which must be adjusted between the two governments: a court
can take no cognizance of it. The Richmond v. The U. S.
9°6'ranch, 102, Supreme court, U. S., 1815.
586 It is a general rule that captors are not entitled to
freight, unless the goods are carried to their original destina-
tion, within the intent of the contracting parties. The Ann
Green—1 Gall... 274, 289. C. C., Massachusetts, 1812'
587. A vessel within a marine league of the shore, at anchor,
in an open roadstead, where vessels ride under shelter of the
land, is upon the high seas. U. S. v. The Pirates— 5 Wheat.
184, Supreme court. U. S., 1820.
588. The high seas do not extend to a river in the interior
of the country. U. S. v. Wiltberger—5 Wheaton, 94, Sup.
cowrf. U. S., 1820.
589. All waters, below the line of low water mark, on the
sea coast, and, where the tide flows, the waters to high water
mark also, are properly the high seas. The ſibbey-1 Mason,
360, C. C. J1assachusetts, 1817.
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
339
590. The belligerent right of search draws after it a right
to the production and examination of the ship's papers.-
Livingston v. The Maryland Ins. com.—7 Cranch, 506, 544
Supreme court, U. S., 1813.
591. An attempt by the master of a neutral vessel captured
by a belligerent, to rescue her, is contrary to the law of na-
tions, and a sufficient cause of condemnation; and if the at-
tempt has been caused by any misinformation given by the cap-
tors, it will not, as between the insurer and insured, excuse
the act Dederer v. Delaware Ins. com.—2 Washington, C.
C. R., 61, C. C. Pennsylvania, 1807.
592. If, after a contract is made for freight to a foreign
country, a war breaks out with that country, the parties are
discharged from the obligation of that contract. The rule
is different in case of embargo. Odlin v. Pennsylvania Ins.
•om.—2 Washington, C. C. Rep. 312, C. C., Penn., 1808.
593. An individual is not so identified with his government,
as that the act of his government, which vacates or suspends
the contract, shali be imputable to him. Id. ib.
594. The law of nations does not forbid a neutral to carry
belligerent goods; and if the goods are condemned, the neu-
tral carrier is entitled to freight. Schwartz v. Insurance
company of North America—-3 PPash. C. C. Rep. 170, C. C.
Pennsylvania, 1812.
595. If a decree of condemnation, as prize, be passed by
a court of competent jurisdiction, all courts and parties are
estopped to deny the legality of the capture. JMiller et al v.
The Resolution—2 Dallas, 1 Federal court of Appeals, 1781.
596. A decree of a court of admiralty in rem, is conclusive
every where; nor can the grounds of such decree be enquired
into, in another court of admiralty, on a libel to carry it into
effect. Penhallow v. Doane’s flam.–3 Dallas, 54. Supreme
court, U. S., 1795.
597. Questions of prize are exclusively of admiralty juris-
diction. Bingham v. Cabot—3 Dall. 19, S. court U. S. 1795.
2
Search.
War.
Brize.
Rescue.
Neutrals.
War
Contract.
Alien enemy.
Einbargo.
Wars
Contract.
War.
Law of nations.
Neutrals.
Freight.
Foreign sen-
tence.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Admiraltv.
Foreign sen-
tence.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Jurisdiction of prize belongs exclusively to the courts of Jurisdiction.
the captors. U. S. v. Peters—–3 Dallas, 129, S. court, U. S.
1795. The Invincible—2, Gallison, 29, C. C., JMassachusetts,
1814. Castello v. Bouteille—Bee, 29, Dist. court, S. C. 1794.
598. An officer of a belligerent vessel of war cannot be
arrested or tried in a neutral nation for a capture made on
War.
Neutrals.
340 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S. courts,
High Seas.
Prize.
Jurisdiction.
High seas.
Jurisdiction.
Murder.
Admiralty.
Murcier.
Jurisdiction.
High seas.
Admiralty.
Tºrize.
Jurisdiction.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Jurisdiction.
Seizure.
Jurisdiction.
IForeign term i-
tory.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Jurisdiction.
the high seas, as prize of war, and carried for adjudication
into a belligerent port.—United States v. Peters—3 Dallas,
129, Sup, court U. S. 1795.
599. The federal courts have no jurisdiction of a case where
the mortal stroke was given on the high seas, and the death
occurred on shore in a foreign country. U. S. v. McGill—
4 Dallas, 426, C. C. Penn 1806.
600. Although a murder committed in the waters of a state
where the tide ebbs and flows, may be a case of admiralty and
maritime jurisdiction, exclusively vested in the courts of the
United States, yet Congress have not provided for the exer-
cise of the jurisdiction in such a case. U. S. v. Bevans—
3 Wheaton, 3:36, Sup. court U. S. 1818.
601. The District Courts of the United States have juris-
diction of questions of prize and its incidents, independently
of the provisions of the prize act of 26th June, 1812, chapter
430. The Jimiable Wancy—3 #Pheaton, 546—Sup, court Uni-
ted States, 1818. 1 Paine, 11 ſ.
602. Whatever may be the exemption of a public ship her-
self, and of her armament and munitions of war, from being
amenable to the jurisdiction of our courts, the prize property
which she brings into our ports is liable to such jurisdiction,
for the purpose of examination and enquiry; and for restitu-
tion in case of a violation of our neutrality. The Santissima
Trinidad—7 Wheaton, 283, Sup. court United States, 1822–
The Invincible—2 Gallison, 29, C. C. Mass. 1814. Contra—
Findlay v. The Pilliam—1 Jldam. Dec. 12, District court,
Penn. 1793.
603. If a seizure be made in the waters of a foreign nation
the cognizance of the cause belongs to the court of the dis-
trict into which the property is brought. The Merino et al.—
9 H'leaton, 391, Sup. court U. S. 1824.
604. Condemnation may take place in a prize cause, even
when the prize is lying in the port of an ally, or a neutral, and
this right of jurisdiction and condemnation equally applies to
municipal seizures, in the name of the sovereign while the pro-
perty is in a neutral port. U. S. v Mann—1 Gallison, 3, 177,
C. C. New Hampshire, 1812. The Jirabella v. The Madeira
2 Gallison, 368, C. C. A/ass. 1815.
605. In case of a recapture, escape, or voluntary discharge
of a captured vessel, the right of the courts of the belligerent,
to adjudicate upon the property as prize, is completely gone;
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 34 {
but it does not thence follow that such courts are deprived of Admrality.
the authority to award damages to the injured party where the Prize.
capture has been unlawful, and thereby indirectly entertain Jurisdiction.
the question of prize. The Invincible—2 Gallison, 29, C. C.
./Hass. 1814.
606. No suit can be sustained, in a neutral tribunal, against Admiralty.
a lawfully coininissioned cruiser, which is brought within its
jurisdiction, to recover damages for a supposed illegal cap-
ture. Id. ib.
607. The admiralty has cognizance of foreign maritime con- Admiralty.
tracts. De Lovio v. Boit et al.–2 Gallison, 398, C. C. Jias. "
sachusetts, 18 l j.
608 The District Courts of the United States will not as- Admiralty
sume jurisdiction of questions of prize between foreign na- º
tions, occuring upon the high seas, flagrante bello. Herman- Neutrals,
dez v. Jiury—1 Jour. of Jurisprudence, 131.
609. The Courts of the United States cannot question the Admiralty.
validity of the commission of a French privateer whose prize Prize. .
is brought into our ports. Itamon de Salderondo v. Nostra ſº
Senora del Canino, et al. — Bee, 43, HBistrict court, South Car-
olina, 1794.
610. The Courts of the U. States bave jurisdiction where Admiralty,
American citizens capture the property of a friend; where a Neutrals.
belligerent captures American property and brings it into an Prize.
American port; where a capture is made within our neutral
limits; where the capturing vessel has been equipped in our
ports, contrary to the rights and duties of neutrality. Id. ib.
611. The Courts of the United States have jurisdiction of Admiralty.
captures made within a marine league from our shore, calcu- Territorial ju-
lating from low water mark; but shoals covered with water, S.
are no part of the coast or shore. Soult v. L'Africaine—Bee,
204, District court S. C. 1804.
612. The jurisdiction of a nation within its own territory, º ju-
is exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation
not imposed on itself. Any restriction, deriving its validity
from an external source, would imply a diminution of its sove-
reignty to the extent of that restriction, and an investment of
that sovereignty, to the same extent, in that power which
could impose such restriction. All exceptions to the full and
complete power of the nation within its own territories must
be traced up to the consent of the nation itself. The Ea:-
change v. McFaddon—7 Cranch, 116-1S6, Sup, court United
States, 1813.
Neutrals.
Jurisdiction.
Neutrals.
342 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Territorial ju-
risdiction.
Law of nations.
Neutrals.
it!.
Foreign terri-
tory.
Law of nations.
Foreign Minis-
ter.
Jurisdiction.
Law of nations.
613. A nation would be justly considered as violating its
faith, although not expressly plighted, which should suddenly,
and without previous notice, exercise its territorial power in a
manner not consonant to the usages and received obligations
of the civilized world. , d. 137.
614. The full and absolute territorial jurisdiction being
alike the attribute of every sovereignty, and being incapable
of conferring extra territorial power, does not contemplate for-
eign sovereigns, nor their sovereign rights, as its objects. One
sovereign can be supposed to enter a foreign territory, only
under an express license, or in the confidence that the immu-
nities belonging to his independent sovereign station, though
not expressly stipulated, are reserved by implication, and will
be extended to him. Ibid.
615. A sovereign entering a foreign territory, with the know-
ledge and license of its sovereign; that license, though con-
taining no stipulation exempting his person from arrest, is uni-
versally understood to imply such stipulation. Ibid.
616. A foreign minister is considered in the place of
his sovereign, and, therefore, not, in point of law, within the
jurisdiction of the sovereign at whose court he resides.—Id
Territorial ju-
risdiction.
Right of pas-
sage.
Law of nations.
Territorial ju-
risdiction.
Law of nations.
Territorial ju-
risdiction.
Law of nations.
Territorial ju-
risdiction.
t Admiralty.
Prize,
138.
617. When a sovereign allows the troops of a foreign
prince to pass through his dominions, he waives his jurisdic-
tion over the army to which the right of passage has been
granted, without an express declaration to that effect.—Id.
139.
618. If there be no prohibition, the ports of a friendly na-
tion are considered as open to the public ships of all powers,
with whom it is at peace; and they are supposed to enter
such ports, and to remain in them, under the protection of
the Government of the place.—Id. 141.
691. If there be no treaty applicable to the case, and the
sovereign permits his ports to remain open to the public
ships of foreign friendly powers, they virtually enter by his
assent. If they enter by an assent thus necessarily implied,
their case cannot be distinguished from that of vessels enter-
ing by express assent.—Id. ib.
620. The implied license under which a public armed
ship enters a friendly port, ought to be construed as contain.
ing an exemption from the jurisdiction of the sovereign
whose territory she enters.--1d. 144,
621. A private armed vessel of 'a foreign friendly power
may claim the same immunities, and is as much exempted
connecTED WITH our FOREIGN RELATIONS. 343
from the jurisdiction of our courts, as if she were a national Privateer.
vessel.—L’Invincible—1 PP'heaton, 238, 252. Supreme court Jurisdiction.
United States, 1816. -
622. The real ground on which the exclusive cognizance Admiralty.
of prize causes is yielded to the courts of the capturing power, ".
is, that it results from the equality and absolute independence Jurisdiction.
of sovereign states, on the one hand, and the duty to ob. Law of nations.
serve uniform impartial neutrality, on the other.—Id. 254. Neutrals.
It is therefore immaterial, whether the corpus continue
sub potestate of the capturing power or not.—Id. 256.
An injured neutral may receive indemnity in the courts of
a captor, for an illicit capture, notwithstanding a re-capture
has intervened, depriving the captor of the property seized-
—Id. ib.
623. Every violent dispossession of property on the ocean
is, prima facie, a maritime tort, as such it belongs to the *
admiralty jurisdiction; but the moment it is ascertained that *
the seizure was made by a commissioned vessel of war in Prize.
the exercise of belligerent rights, the courts of the neutral
are ousted of jurisdiction. They may determine whether Jurisdiction.
the capturing vessel was, in fact, the commissioned cruiser
of a belligerent; but, that fact being ascertained, their pro-
gress is arrested.—Id. ib.
624. In case of a revolution in a foreign state or portion New States.
of country, it rests with the government of this country to Law of nation,
decide whether it is, or is not, an independent state; and un-
til its independence is recognized by this government, the
ancient state of things is supposed to remain unaltered.
Clark v. United States—3 Washington C. C. Reports, 101,
C. C. Pennsylvania, 1811.
625. On surrender by capitulation, all the property of the capitulation.
inhabitants protected by the articles, is considered by the
law of nations, as neutral, and not subject to capture on the Neutrals.
high seas, by the belligerent, or its allies. Miller & al. v.
The Resolution—2 Dallas. 1 Federal court of Appeals, 1781.
626. The municipal law of one country cannot change Municipal law.
the law of nations, so as to bind the subjects of another Law of nations.
country. Id. ib.
627. The articles of the treaty with Great Britain, by .
* - * 9 * º, British treaty.
which a neutral vessel, sailing ignorantly to a blockaded Blockade.
port, is to be turned away, and her cargo not coufiscated,
unless contraband, or unless she shall again attempt to enter
the port, but shall be permitted to depart, is a correct expo-
Maritime forts.
344
POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
Law of nations.
Confiscation.
Law of nations
Admiralty.
Prize.
Law of nations,
Treaty with
Enemy.
Neutrals.
Prize.
Law of nations.
Search.
VWar.
Disguise.
Law of nations.
Slave trade.
Law of nations.
Slave trade.
Piracy.
Law of nations.
Slave trade.
Law of nations.
Law of nations.
Sea laws.
sition of the law of nations. Fitzsimmons v. The Wewport
Insurance Company—4 Cranch 185–199. Supreme court
Onited States, 1808.
628 The modern usage of nations is, to abstain from
confiscating the debts due to an enemy, or his property,
found within the territory at the breaking out of war. This
usage does not constitute a rule acting on the thing itself
by its own force, but onlv through the sovereign power. It
is a rule which the sovereign follows or abandons at his will;
but unless it be abandoned. the right to the debts, and the
property, is only suspended during the war, and revives
with the return of peace. Brown v. United States—8 Cranch,
110. Supreme Court United States, 1814.
629. The law of prize is part of the law of nations.
The trade may be hostile, whatever may be the character of
the trader. It may not only consist in negotiation and con-
tract, but in intercourse with the enemy, inconsistent with a
state of hostility. The Rapid—8 Cranch, 155. Supreme
Court United States, 1814.
630. The flag does not, by the law of nations, protect the
cargo. The Wereide—9 Cranch, 388, Sup, court, U. S., 1815.
631. The right of search grows out of, and is auxillary to
the greater right of capture. Id. ib.
632. The assumption of the disguise of a friend or an ene-
my, is a lawful stratagem of war; and he who resorts to it is
not liable for the loss of the vessel occasioned by the crew,
in consequence of the stratagem, refusing to perform their
duty. The Eleanor—2 Wheaton. 345, Sup. court, U. S. 1817.
633. The slave trade remains lawful to the subjects of those
governments which have not forbidden it. The ſintelope—10
Wheaton, 66. Supreme court, U. S., 1825.
634. The slave trade, if not repugnant to the law of na-
tions, cannot be piracy unless so declared by statute, and the
obligation of such statute cannot transcend the legislative
power of the state by which it is enacted. Id. ib.
635. A foreign vessel, engaged in the African slave trade,
captured on the high seas, in time of peace, by an American
cruiser, and brought into the ports of the United states, will
be restored even where the vessel belongs to a nation which
has prohibited such trade; but the captured Africans will not
be so restored without full proof of proprietary interest. Id. ib.
636. The law of nations, does not require that the exhibi-
tion of a ship's national flag, at sea, should be affirmed by
firing a gua. Id. ib.
connecTED WITH our Foreign RELATIONs. 345
637. Although the property may belong to a neutral, yet T. ade with
if engaged in a trade which can only be carried on by a bos. i.
tile subject, it is liable to confiscation as the property of an Neutrals.
enemy. although the shipment be previous to the war. 7 he
Jìnn Green—l Gallison, 274, 289, C. C., Massachuset, s. 1812.
638. In time of war, property will not be permitted to Admiralty.
change character in its transit, nor shall property consigned "*
to become the property of the enemy, on arrival, be protected Transit.
by the neutrality of the shipper. Id. ib. Neutrals.
639 Every vessel, whether armed or not, has a right of self- Ad miralt
defence against hostile attacks, and the master has a large dis- Sºce,
cretion on this subject. He is not bound to attempt an es-
cape in the first instance, and only to repel an attack when
made. He is, on the other hand, at liberty to lay to, or attack
the enemy ship, or chase her, if he deems that the best means
of self-defence, and is not bound to waif until a direct attack
is made on his own vessel; for self-defence may then be fruit-
less by his being crippled. Haven et al v. Holland—2 Mason,
230, C. C., Massachusetts, 1820.
640. If a vessel capture a hostile vessel in self-defence, she Admiralty.
has a consequent right to take possession of the prize; and to *
put a crew on board, for she has a right to make her victory
effectual. Id. ib.
641. Where there is no exclusive occupation of a river or Law of nations.
bay, the law of natious gives to the nations inhabiting the op- *
site sides, the right to go to the middle of the stream, calcu-
lated from low-water-mark. The Fame—3 Mason, 147, C. C., Boundary,
Maine, 1822.
642. But although the territorial line of a nation, for the Law of nations.
purposes of absolute jurisdiction, may not extend beyond the
middle of the stream, yet the right to the use of the whole River.
river, or bay, for the purposes of trade, navigation and passage,
may be common to both nations. Id ib.
643. The law of the place, where a contract is made, is Ler foci.
generally speaking, the law by which the contract is expounded
but the right of priority forms no part of the contract; it is rather
a personal privilege dependent on the law of the place where Foreign laws.
the property lies, and where the court sits, which is to decide
the cause. Harrison v. Sterry –5 Cranch, 289, 298, Supreme
court, United States, 1809.
644. in the administration of the estate of a deceased per- Lex foci.
son, the assets are always distributed according to the digni
ty of the debt as regulated by the laws of the country where Foreign laws.
44
346 points or PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. Courts,
Administration.
1.ex loci.
Foreign laws.
Bills of ex-
change"
Leac loci.
Foreign laws.
Land.
Bankrupt laws.
Leac ſoci.
Foreign laws.
Leac loci.
Administration.
Foreign laws.
Foreign laws.
Leac loci.
Foreign laws.
Bankrupt.
Lea, loci.
Foreign laws.
Leac loci.
the representative of the deceased acts, and from which he
derives his powers; not by the law of the country where the
contract was made. Id., 299.
645. In an action by the endorsee against the endorser of
a foreign bill of exchange, the defendant is liable for damages
according to the law of the place where the bill was endorsed.
Slacum v. Pomeroy—6 Cranch, 221, Sup. court U. S., 1810.
646 The title to land can be acquired and lost only in the
manner prescribed by the law of the place, where such land
is situated. United States v. Crosby—7 Cranch, Supreme C.
U. S., 1812. Clark v. Graham–6 Wheaton, 577, Supreme
court, U S , 1821. Robinson v. Campbell—3 Wheaton, 212,
Supreme court, United States, 1818. Kerr v. JMoor’s devisees—
9 Wheaton, 565, Supreme court, United States, 1824. McCor-
nich v Sullivan—10 Wheaton, 192, Supreme court United
States, 1825. Darby’s lessee v. Mayer—10 Wheaton, 465.
647. A discharge under a foreign bankrupt law is no bar
to an action in the courts of this country, on a contract made
here. McMillan v. McNeill–4 Wheaton, 209, Supreme court,
Onited States, 1819.
648. A person claiming under a will proved in one state
cannot intermeddle with, or sue for, the personal or real ef.
fects of a testator in another state, unless the will be proved
and letters testamentary be obtained in that other state, or
unless he be permitted to do so by some law of that other
state. Kerr v. Moore’s devisees—9 Wheaton, 565, Supreme
court U. S., 1824.
649. In a contract for the loan of money, the law of the
case where the contract was made, is to govern, and it is im-
material that the loan was to be secured by a mortgage on lands
in another state. De Polf v. Johnson—10 Wheaton, 367, S.
court United States. 1825.
650. Independent of the constitution of the United States,
a discharge under the laws of a state may perhaps be a good
bar, even as to foreign contracts of an action brought in the
courts of that state; because the courts are bound by such
laws, and the party seeking remedy in such courts must do it
according to the laws of such state. Babcock v. Weston—
1 Gallison, 168, C. C., Rhode Island, 1812.
651. So also in case of a contract made in a state between
citizens of that state, a discharge, good by its laws, may be
good every where. The general rule is, that a contract is go-
verned as to its construction and efficacy, by the law of the
place where it is made, and a discharge, good there, would
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 347
te º tº tº * > . e. º • ... Bankrupt.
be sufficient in every jurisdiction. But this rule dºes not ex-
tend to support a bar to the contract where such bar happens "
to be good, merely by the law of the place, where the action
is brought, and the party is found, unless the courts within
that state, where the remedy is sought, are exclusively bound
by its regulations. Id. ib.
652. The discharge of an insolvent, under the laws of one Foreign laws.
of these United States, is no discharge of a contract made, ãº.
and to be executed, in a foreign country. Van Reimsdyk v.
Åane et al–1 Gallison, 371, C. C. Rhode Island, 1812.
553. Upon a foreign contract, between foreigners, the Foreign laws.
remedy in a suit in this country, must be such as the court
can judicially give, according to its course of practice, and
the laws of this country, although a different and more speci-
fic remedy might have been had in the courts of the country
where the contract was made. Courtois v. Carpentier—1
Washington Circuit Court Reports, 376. C. C. Pennsylvania,
1806.
654. Interest is to be given according to the laws of the
place of contract. Cowqua v. Landerbrun—1 Washington
Circuit Court Reports, 521. C. C. Pennsylvania, 1806.
655. The law of the place of contract, is the law of the
contract, as well as of its discharge. The laws of a country *
cannot operate upon persons not within the jurisdiction of ****
the country, nor upon contracts made and to be executed in Bankrupt.
another country. Green v. Sarmiento–3 Washington’s
Circuit court Reports, 17. C. C. Pennsylvania, 1811.
656. The laws of a foreign country, where a contract is Foreign laws.
made, will be regarded by the tribunals of another country;
and so will the same laws which discharge the debtor from the Ler loci.
obligations of his contract —But as to the mere forms of
proceedings, the laws of the country, to whose tribunals the
appeal is made, must govern. Webster v. JMassey—2 Wash-
ington's Circuit court Reports, 157. C. C. Pennsylvania,
1808.
657. A commission of Bankruptcy, issued in England, Foreign laws.
cannot affect the operation of the attachment law of one of Lena.
these United States. Harrison v. Sterry & al. Bee, 244. Bankrupt.
District court South Carolina, 1807.
658. When a voyage ends in a foreign country, or is
broken up there, and no treaty or compact designates the
mode of proceeding, suits may be prosecuted there; and the
determination should be according to the law of the country to
a loci.
Foreign laws:
Lex loci.
Leac loci.
Bankrupt:
Foreign laws.
Lea leci,
348 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS
Mariners.
Law of nations.
Consul.
Admiralty.
Prize
N. : t: als.
Jurisdiction.
Law of nations.
Admiralty.
Law of nations.
Neutrals.
Jurisdictid,'.
War.
Neutrals.
Law of nations.
Admiralty.
Prize.
War.
Neutrals.
Freight.
which the vessel belongs. 7"hompson & al. v. The Catha-
ºrine - "eters’ ºffilmiralty Decisions, 104. District court
Pennsylvania, 1795.
639. S. men, by the laws and usages of all countries,
belºng to the nation. In other countries, the courts would
assisi tºur consuls in restoring American seamen to their
OW" country, and our courts should perform the same good
office tºwards foreign Consuls, endeavouring to send home
their seatner, from this country; always under the superin-
tendence of the courts, to see that no hardship or imposition
is practised on the seamen. Robinson & al. v. The {'acique.
District court Pennsylvania, 1823. Cowe's Digest. Tit.
Mariner, $ 159. -
660. A capiure made by a vessel, owned and fitted out in
a neutral country, is unlawful; and the captured vessel will
be restored by the courts of the neutral nation. La Concep-
tion—6 PłTheaton, 235, Supreme court, U. S., 1821. The
Fanny—9 }}]eaton. 658. Supreme court, U. S. 1824.
661. A neutral nation may, if so disposed, without a breach
of neutrality, grant permission to both belligerents to equip
their vessels of war within her territories. But without
such permission, the subjects of such belligerent powers have
no such right; and such unauthorised acts violate the sove-
reignity and rights of such neutral nations. All captures
made by means of such equipments are illegal, in relation to
such nation: and it is competent for her courts to punish the
offenders, and, in case the prizes are brought infra præsidia,
to order them to be restored.
If such equipment be by taking persons on board in the neutral
port: it is immaterial whether they are subjects of the neutral
nation, or foreigners domiciled therein. Neither the law of
nations, nor the laws of the United States recognize any dis-
tinction, except in respect to the subjects of the state, in
whose service they are enlisted, transiently within the neu-
tral country. The .4lerta v. Blas Moran—9 Cranch, 359,
Supreme court, U. S., 1815.
662. A neutral may lawfully put his goods on board of a
belligerent ship for transportation, and the hostile character
of the vessel will not condemn the goods. The Wereide—
9 Cranch, 388, Supreme court, U. S. 1815.
663. The neutral carrier of enemy-goods, captured and
condemned, is entitled to his freight, if his conduct be fair
and not unneutural, and the goods be not contraband, and he,
be not carrying on a colonial trade of the enemy, not open to
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.
349
him in time of peace; and if he be not guilty of spotiation of
papers, or carrying dispatches to the enemy, or engaging in
the transport service of the enemy, or breaking blockade, &c.
The Commercen—–1 Wheaton, 382, Supreme court, U. S. 1816.
664. In cases of violation of our neutrality by any of the
belligerents, if the prize come voluntarily within our terri-
tory, it is restored to the original owners by our courts; but
their jurisdiction for this purpose, under the law of nations,
extends only to the restitution of the specific property, with
costs and expenses during the pendency of the suit, and does
not extend to the infliction of vindictive damages, as in ordi-
nary cases of marine fort. La ſimistad de Rues—5 Wheaton,
385, Supreme court, U. S., 1820.
665. Shipments made by an enemy’s house, on account
and risk, exclusively and bomá ſide, of a neutral partner, or
house, are not subject to confiscation as prize of war. The
San Jose Indiano—-2 Gallison. 268. C. C., Mass., 1814.
666. The liberty of selling prizes, taken by a belligerent in
a neutral territory, is not a perfect right, but may be regulated
by the neutral government. The William—1 Jidin. Pescis-
ions, 12. District court Penn. 1793. Jºaun v. Sacks—ſee,
202, District court South Carolina, 1804.
667. The rights of neutrals were not established for the be
nefit of belligerent parties. An invasion of these is an of-
fence to the neutral only, and not to the belligerent. Moazon
et al. v. The Fanny—2 Adm. Decisions, S09, District court
Penn. 1793.
668. The laws of neutrality, and of nations do not forbid
neutral vessels to go to sea armed and fitted for defensive war.
British consul v. The Mermaid—Bee, 69, District court South
Carolina, 1795.
669. The commission of a privateer who seizes a vessel
animofurandi will not protect him from the charge of piracy.
O. States v. Klintock—5 Wheat. 144, Sup. court U. S. 1820.
670. A port of the United States captured and occupied by
the enemy during the war, was not, while so occupied, a port
of the United States whose sovereignty over it was by such
occupation suspended;—nor was it a port within the domin-
ions of Great Britain, for it had not permanently passed under
her sovereignty. United States c. Hayward—2 Gallison, 485,
C. C. Mass. 1813.
671. Remitting, in satisfaction of debts, to subjects of a na-
tion at war, is no violation of the duties of a citizen.
et al. v. The Resolution—2 Dallas, 1–10, Federal court ºp-
peals, 1781.
Miller E
Admiralty.
Prize.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutral.
Jurisdiction. '
Law of nations.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Law of nations.
Admiralty.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Law of nations.
Neutrals.
Law of nations,
Id.
Id.
Piracy.
Privateer.
Wal'.
Conquest.
Trade with
nemy.
850 POINTS OR PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U.S courTS,"
Trade with
Enemy.
id.
Ransons.
Treaty.
British treaty.
Treaty.
Constitution.
Treaty.
British treaty.
Forts.
Jurisdiction.
Treaty.
Treaty.
Gonstitution.
Treaty.
Id.
British treaty.
Treaty.
Spanish treaty.
Piracy.
672. A neutral may lawfully draw a bill on a belligerent,
It is not a trading with the enemy, United States v. Barker
—l Paine, 157, C. C. Mew-Fork, 1820.
673. All contracts with an enemy are not necessarily void.
Cases of extreme necessity are excepted. So also contracts
made by license of the government, ransom bonds, con-
tracts by prisoners of war for their subsistence, &c. The Wil-
liam Penn—3 Washington C. C. Rep. 484, C. C. N. J. 1819.
674. The treaty of peace of 1783, with Great Britain, was
a mere recognition of pre-existing rights as to territory, and
no territory was thereby acquired by way of cession from G.
Britain. Harcourt et al. v. Gaillard—12 Wheaton, 523, Sup.
contrf United States, 1827.
75. The adoption of a treaty, with the stipulations of
which the provisions of a state law are inconsistent, is quiva-
lent to the repeal of such law. Den eac dem, Fisher v. Ham-
den—l Paine. 55, C. C. JVew-Pork, 1812.
676. Under the 2d article of the treaty with Great Britain
the precincts and jurisdiction of a fort are not to be consider-
ed three miles in every direction, by analogy to the jurisdic-
tion of a country over that portion of the sea surrounding its
coasts, but they must be made out by proof. Jackson v. Porter
—1 Paine, 457, C. C. JVew-Fork, 1825.
677. A treaty goes into operation from the date of its sig-
nature, if no other period is agreed upon between the parties.
Hylton's lessee v. Brown—1 Washington, C. C. Reports, 343,
C. C. Pennsylvania, 1806.
678. When a treaty has been ratified according to the pro-
visions of the constitution it becomes the law of the land, and
it is perfectly immaterial whether or not the persons, who
signed it, did or did not transcend their instructions. Hamil-
ton v. Eaton—North Carolina cases. 79.
679. A treaty does, of necessity, annul any prior statutes
so far as there is interference. Id. ib.
680. Debts due to British subjects during the revolutionary
war, although paid into a state treasury under the authority
of an act of the legislature, may, nevertheless be sued for
and recovered after the peace. Id ib
681 To bring a case within the 9th article of the treaty with
Spain, so as to entitle a Spanish owner to entire restitution,
free of salvage, of his property captured as prize of war at
sea, by a vessel professing to be an enemy of Spain, and res-
cued, it is incumbent upon the party to show, that the captors
were pirates and robbers. The Tigre—1 Journal of J&ris-
prudence, 105,
CoNNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 351
682. A capture of her enemy by a belligerent vessel is le.
gal. although she had no commission; the only effect of the
want of a commission would be, that the condemnation would
be to the government, and not to the captors. Id. ib.
683. Under the 27th article of the treaty of amity with G.
Britain, a person who has committed murder on board a Bri-
tish ship of war on the high seas, is to be delivered up to the
government of Great Britain. United States v. Nash alias
Robbins—Bee, 266, Distruct, court South Carolina, 1799.
684. Every contention by force between two nations, in ex-
ternal matters, under the authority of their respective govern.
ments, is not only war, but public war. If it be declared in
form, it is called solemn, and is of the perfect kind. But hos-
tilities may subsist between two nations, more confined in its
nature and extent, being limited as to places, persons and
things: and this is more properly termed imperfect war, be.
cause not solemn; and because those who are authorised to
commit hostilities, act under special authority, and can go no
further than to the extent of their commission; still, however,
it is public war. Bas v. Tingey—4 Dallas, 37, Supreme court
United States, 1800.
685. The object of the treaty with Spain, which ceded Flo-
rida to the United States, dated 22d May, 1819, was to invest
the commissioners with full power and authority to receive,
examine, and decide upon the amount and validity of asserted
claims, by citizens of the United States upon Spain, and it is
wholly immaterial who is the legal or equitable owner of the
claim, provided he is an American citizen. The decision of
the commissioners, within the scope of their authority is con-
clusive. A rejected claim cannot be again brought under re-
view in any judicial tribunal. After the validity and amount
of the claim has been ascertained by the award of the commis-
sioners, the rights of the claimant to the fund which has pas-
sed into his hands, and those of others, are left to the ordin-
ary course of judicial proceedings in the established courts of
justice.
That treaty recognized an existing right, in the aggrieved
parties, to compensation; and did not in the most remote de-
gree turn upon the notion of donation, or gratuity. It was
demanded by our government as matter of right, and as such
was granted by Spain. Comegys et al. v. Wasse—1 Peters,
212, Sup, court United States, 1828.
686, The constitution of the United States confers, abso-
lutely, on the government of the Union, the power of making
Admiralty.
rize.
Capture.
Treaty,
British treaty,
Murder.
Fugitives.
War.
Public war.
Treaty.
Spanish treaty.
War.
Treaty.
Cºlouest.
Aſſicgistice.
352 POINTS AND PRINCIPLES DECIDED IN U. S. COURTS,
War.
Treaty.
Conquest.
Allegiance.
High seas.
Jurisdiction.
war and of making treaties. Consequently that Government
possesses the power of acquiring territory, either by conquest
or by treaty.
The usage of the world is, if a nation be not entirely sub-
dued, to consider the holding of conquered territory as a mere
military occupation, until its fate shall be determined at the
treaty of peace. If it be ceded by treaty the acquisition is
confirmed, and the ceded territory becomes a part of the na-
tion to which it is annexed, either on the terms stipulated in
the treaty of cession, or on such as its new master shall im-
pose. On such transfer of territory, it has never been held
that the relations of the inhabitants to each other undergo any
change. Their relations with their former sovereign are dis-
solved, and new relations are created between them and the
government which has acquired their territory. The same
act which transfers their country, transfers the allegiance of
those who remain in it, and the law which is denominated
political, is necessarily changed, although that which regu-
lates the intercourse and general conduct of individuals re-
mains in force until altered by the newly created power of
the state. The Amer. In. Co. v. 356 bales of cotton. 1 Pe-
ters, 549. Sup court. U. S. 1828.
687. The words “High seas” in the act of Congress of
1825 ch. 276, §. 22, for the punishment of assault with intent
to kill, upon the high seas, mean the uninclosed water of the
ocean on the sea coast, outside of the fauces terræ. The state
courts have jurisdiction of offences committed on arms of the
sea. creeks, havens, basins and bays within the ebb and flow
of the tide, when those places are within the body of a county;
and in such cases the courts of the United States have no
jurisdiction under that statute. U. S. v. Grush--5 Mason
290. C. C. ..?fass. 1829.
688. The distinction between the obligation of contracts,
**śn laws and the mode of applying remedies thereto, is well established.
lear foci.
Bankrupt.
Ship.
Vessel.
Domicil.
The former is universally recognized according to the place
where the contract is made; the latter is bounded by the ter-
ritorial limits. The effect of a discharge of the person from
imprisonment, by the insolvent law of the state where the con-
tract was made, is purely local; and if the debtor be sued in
the courts of another state the judgement must be general,
and not merely against the estate or effects of the debtor.—
Titus v Hobart–5 Mason, 378. C. C. Mass. 1829.
689. An open boat is not a “ ship or vessel” within the pur-
view of the statutes of 1820, ch. 122, and 1823, ch. 150, which
prohibit commercial intercourse from the British Colonies; but
CONNECTED WITH OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. 353
Non-inter-
such open boat may visit the United States, if not destined for .
trade. The prohibition extends only to ships or vessels owned
by British subjects, having a British domicil. U. S. v. Jin
open boat—5 JMason, 120. C. C. JMaine, 1828. \
690. The Circuit Courts of the United States have not Alien.
jurisdiction of a suit brought by an Alien against a citizen of Jurisdiction.
the United States resident abroad, and not having any inhabi.
tancy in any State in the Union, although he may have pro-
perty, within the district, liable to attachment, Piquot v
Swann–5 Masbm, 35. C. C. Mass. 1828.
691. It is no breach of our neutrality, to suffer a belligerent A**w.
to sell his prizes in our port, provided the permission be equal-
ly extended to both belligerents; nor can the purchaser legal-
ly refuse to pay the purchase money upon the ground that the
sale was made by the captor, in fraud of the laws of his own
country, in which fraud the purchaser himself was a partaker.
Hopner v Appleby—5 JMason, 71. C. C. Rhode Island, 1828.
692. The notion, so commonly entertained, that a master
of a ship or vessel may, at his pleasure, for slight offences im-
prison his seamen in a foreign gaol, is utterly unfounded in
law, and they are criminally liable for such wanton abuses of
authority. Cases of flagrant offences only can justify such im-
prisonment; and only where there is a positive necessity for
the removal of the offending party from the ship to some place
of safety on shore. U. S. v. Ruggles—5 JMason, 192. C. C.
Rhode Island, 1828.
Prize.
Neutrals.
Mariners.
INDEX
TO T H E PR E C F D IN G A B S T R A C T OF CAS E. S.
Note.—The numbers refer to the cases, Not to the pages.
ADMIRALTY, Jurisdiction, 12, 13, 262,
263,264, 266, 277, 278, 280, 284, 285,
290, 296, 301, 302, 306, 309, 312, 313,
314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 320, 321, 322,
324, 325, 326, 327, 528, 330, 338, 343,
350, 355, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362,
363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 372,
380, 382, 384, 387, 388, 389, 395, 396,
397, 399, 400, 401, 404, 405, 406, 407,
408, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417,
432, 454, 463, 464, 469, 470, 471, 472,
473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480,
482, 491, 495, 497, 499, 501, 503, 504,
505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 512,
513, 414, 515, 516, 517, 518, 519, 537,
554, 455, 556, 557, 558, 560, 561, 562,
564, 565, 583, 584, 586, 595, 596, 597,
600, 601, 602, 604, 605, 606, 607, 608,
609, 610, 611, 621, 622, 629, 638, 639,
640, 660, 661, 662, 663, 664, 665, 666,
682, 691.
Further Proof, 314, 469.
JMariners, 317,323,328, 549,550,552,659,
692.
Wharfage, 479.
ALIENS, 328, 331.
ALIENS, Enemy, 94, 103, 209, 275,276, 277,
342, 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488,
489, 494, 592.
Expatriation, 25.
JLands, 27, 36, 37, 54, 117, 125, 132, 133,
134, 135, 136, 150, 154, 155, 193, 218,
220, 224, 237, 299, 300, 353, 420, 421,
422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429,
430, 431, 434, 438, 441 .
JVaturalization, 124, 274, 300, 424, 440,
400, 434.
Suits between, 290, 305, 308, 311, 394,
435, 436,437, 439, 559, 627, 690.
ALLEGIANCF, 492, 686.
BANKRUPT, 385, 650, 652, 655, 656, 657.
BANKRUPT LAWS, 647.
BLOCKADE, 38, 40, 49, 145, -238, 382, 403,
498,499.
BOTTOMRY, 96,262, 277.
BOUNDARY, River, 216, 641.
IBRITISH ORDERS in COUNCIL,44,95,110.
BRITISH DEBTS, 500.
CAPTURES ON LAND, 281, 398, 458, 470.
CARTEL, 277, 278.
COLONIES, 32, 44, 161, 180,188, 197.
COMMERCE, 534.
COMMERCE, Congress, 219,534.
CONFISCATION, 15, 45, 46, 58, 64, 77,
246, 247.
CONSTITUTION, 675, 678.
CONQUEST, 158, 210, 213, 259, 343, 523,
626, 670, 686.
CONSULS, Powers, 8, 12, 17, 147, 184, 191,
223, 288, 355, 535, 536, 537, 564, 566,
568, 659.
Prosecutions against, 7, 303.
CONTINUITY OF VOYAGE, 95.
CONTRABAND, 99, 100, 101, 198,258.
CONTRACT, 593.
CONTRACTS, War, 250.
Ilex loci, 248,249, 297.
CONVOY, 475.
COURTS, Duties of 20, 32, 84, 131, 142, 160.
Foreign Sentence, 29, 31, 35, 50, 51, 53,
84, 130, 206, 215.
Jurisdiction, 7, 12, 13, 28, 31, 33, 34, 42,
43, 45, 47, 52, 53, 88, 98, 107, 141, 161,
162, 164, 169, 170, 176, 177, 178, 185,
189, 190, 204, 206, 209, 215, 231, 232,
241, 255, 200, 264, 266, 280, 284, 290,
295, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308,
309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 318, 503, 509,
597, 598, 600, 601, 602, 603, 604, 605,
606, 607, 608, 600, 621, 622, 624, 660,
661, 664, 676, 687, 690.
Practice, à1, 92, 139, 183, 199.
ANDEX TO THE ABSTRACT OF CASES.
355
CRIMES, 531.
DAMAGES, 514,
DERELICT, 554.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 270.
DISCOVERY, 210, 212,
DOMICIL, 24, 56, 57, 65, 67, 82, 82, 69, 86,
102, 105, 126, 137, 138, 157, 267, 467,
495, 555, 689.
DUTIES, 269, 272.
Embezzlement, 477.
EMBARGO, 568, 592.
ENEMY-LICENSE, 60, 61, 109, 119, 140,
159, 192,271.
£NEMY-TRADE, 59, 62, 63, 73, 74, 75,
80, 109, 114, 243, 265, 273.
ENLISTMENT, 487.
ESCHEAT, 328.
EXPATRIATION, 18, 25, 201.
FOREIGN COURTS, 540, 541.
FOREIGN TERRITORY, 585, 603, 615.
FOREIGN SURVEY, 566, 569.
FOREIGN PORTS, 497.
FOREIGN CORPORATION, 485.
FOREIGN COMMISSION, 491, 510, 542.
FOREIGN LAWS, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 28,
319, 335, 336, 337, 373, 375, 376, 378,
383, 385, 386, 448, 461, 574, 575, 576,
577, 578, 579, 585, 643, 644, 645, 646,
647, 648, 649, 650, 651, 652, 653, 654,
655, 656, 657, 658.
.Administration, 319, 644, 648.
£OREIGN JUDGEMENTS, 442, 444,
FOREIGN MINISTER, 2, 3, 7, 8, 12, 231,
295, 338, 341, 351, 359, 536, 570, 580,
581, 582, 583, 616.
FRANCE, 5, 14, 16, 19, 23, 32, 47, 125, 224,
282, 285, 304.
FRAUI), 142.
FREE SHIPS FREE GOODS, 90.
FREIGHT, 100, 104, 244, 316, 328, 343, 663.
FUGITIVES FROM JUSTICE, 450, 451.
GREAT BRITAIN, Treaty of Peace of 1783,
1, 15, 26, 27, 36, 39, 45, 155, 194,
209, 211, 235, 294.
Orders in Council, 44, 95, 110.
Treaty of 1794, 39, 41, 42, 117, 132,133,
134, 136, 150, 156, 169, 194, 195, 209,
218, 307.
Treaty with Portugal, 267.
Treaty with Russia, 192.
HIGH SEAS, 168, 175, 254, 321, 330, 538,
546, 548,549, 550, 587, 588, 589, 598,
£00, 687.
IMPORTATION, 525.
INDIAN TITLE, 210, 211, 214.
INHABITANT, 562.
INQUEST OF OFFICE, 329.
JURISDICTION, JMunicipal, 47, 79, 168,
251, 286, 331, 332, 388, 394, 478, 531,
533, 540, 541, 543, 544, 545, 547, 599,
603, 616, 617, 676.
3 US POSTLIMINII, 152, 259.
LAND TITLES, 210,211,214.
LAW OF NATIONS, 2, 3, 4, 15, 30,
227, 233, 240, 242, 248, 249,298, 323,
338, 343, 351, 352, 379, 411, 416, 474,
535, 536, 537, 580, 581, 582, 594, 613,
615, 616, 617, 618, 619, 622, 624, 626,
627, 628, 629, 630, 632, 633, 634, 635,
636, 641, 659, 660, 661, 662, 664, 665,
666, 667.
Blockade, 38, 40, 49, 145, 238.
Boundary, 216, 641.
Capitulation, 501, 625.
Cartel, 277,278, 519.
Colonies, 32, 44, 161, 180, 188, 197.
Common Right, 349.
Confiscalion, 15, 45, 46, 58, 64, 77, 246,
247, 500, 520, 521, 522,528,529,628.
Conquest, 158, 210, 213, 259,345,523,526
670, 686.
Consul, 8, 12, 17, 147, 184, 191, 223, 288,
355, 535, 536, 537, 564, 566, 568, 659.
Contraband, 99, 100, 101, 198, 258, 499.
Contracts, 248, 249.
Courts, 12, 30, 31, 94, 130, 131, 160, 161,
162, 164, 169, 170, 176, 177, 190, 231,
232, 255, 260, 264, 280, 284, 295, 302,
303, 305, 306, 308, 309, 310, 311.
3Discovery, 210, 212.
Evidence, 41, 320,329, 335, 340, 341, 383,
389, 417, 418, 419, 442, 443, 444, 445,
446, 461, 462, 463, 563, 564, 566, 567,
568, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 575.
Expatriation, 18, 25, 201, 492.
False Papers, 401.
Fishing, 349.
Foreign JMinisters, 2, 3, 7, 8, 12,
231, 295, 338, 341, 351, 359, 536, 570,
580, 581, 582, 583, 616.
Foreign States, 331, 332.
Foreign Records, 340, 355, 462, 567.
Foreign Vessels, 350, 352, 539, 543, 545,
551.
Foreign Contracts, 374.
Æwnting, 349.
3.
356
INDEX TO THE ABSTRACT OF CASES.
LAW
OF NATIONS (continued).
Indian Title, 210, 211.
Intercourse with the Enemy, 347.
Jus Postli:rinii, 152, 259.
JMariner’s Revolt, 552.
JMunicipal Jurisdiction, 47, 48, 55, 168,
217, 251, 286.
JWeutral Rights, 21, 88, 93, 106, 108, 110,
JVew States, 32, 129, 121,
113, 116, 145, 146, 147, 160, 161, 162,
177, 178, 180, 186, 189, 199, 202, 203,
204, 205, 206, 208, 215, 222, 229, 238,
257, 268, 270, 272, 285, 287, 292, 306.
328, 343, 344, 358, 359, 361, 362, 865,
381, 382, 401, 404, 405, 407, 410, 411,
413, 464, 474, 490, 501, 502, 510, 519,
555, 561, 562, 586, 591, 594, 598, 602,
606, 603, 609, 610, 61 1, 613, 614, 615,
616, 517, 618, 619, 620, 621, 622, 623,
624, 625, 660 661, 662, 663, 664, 665,
666, 667, 691.
142, 160, 165.
JVotice of Seizure, 471.
Hypothecation, 399.
Piracy, 141, 166, 168, 170, 173, 174, 175,
Prize,
176, 227,
316, 669.
24,
57,
65,
74,
83,
96,
106,
114,
126,
144,
228, 232, 234, 253, 254, 315,
34,
59,
67,
50,
60,
68,
51,
61,
69,
52,
62, 63,
70, 71,
76, 77, 78, 80, 81,
86, 87, 88, 89, 92,
100, 101, 102, 103, 104,
108, 109, 110, 111, 112,
116, 118, 119, 120, 121,
130, 137, 138, 139, 140,
145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 151,
157, 159, 162, 167, 177, 178, 179,
183, 185, 186, 187, 189, 196, 202,
204, 205, 206, 208, 215, 223, 225,
239, 241, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247,
256, 257, 258, 260, 265, 267, 268,
270, 272, 273, 280, 281, 283, 284,
287, 289, 291, 292, 296, 301, 302,
309, 310, 315, 324, 326, 327, 359,
362, 363, 364, 365, 367, 400, 404,
406, 407, 408, 411, 412,413, 414,
433,458, 467, 469, 470, 473, 475,
482, 501, 502, 503, 504, 508, 510,
512, 513, 514, 515, 516, 518, 555,
557, 558, 559, 560, 561, 562, 584,
591, 595, 597, 598, 601, 602, 604,
605, 608, 609, 610, 621, 622, 623, 629,
630, 637, 638, 640, 660, 662, 663, 664,
,665, 666, 682,.691.
33, 53,
58,
66,
75,
85,
99,
107,
115,
127,
56,
64,
73,
82,
93,
105,
113,
122,
143,
152,
181,
203,
226,
255,
269,
285,
306,
361,
405,
432,
476,
511,
556,
586,
e
LAW OF NATIONS (continued).
Right of Search, 121,217, 222, 229.
Slave Trade, 221, 222.
St. Domingo, 345, 460.
Treaty, 209.
Treason, 347, 481.
LETTER OF MARQUE, 324.
LEX LOCI, 30, 248, 249,297, 319, 336, 337,
374, 375, 378, 386, 448, 449, 575, 576,
577, 578, 579, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647,
648, 649, 650, 651, 652, 653, 654, 655,
656, 657, 658, 688.
Bills of Exchange, 645.
LICENCE, from the Enemy, 60, 61, 109, 119,
140, 159, 192, 271.
LIEN, 497.
LIMITATION, 554.
MARINE TRESPASS, 227, 309, 505, 506,
507.
MARITIME LAW, 496.
MARYLAND, 520.
MARITIME TORTS, 633.
MATERIAL MEN, 350, 395, 396, 472, 497.
MEXICAN REPUBLIC, 100.
MURDER, 538, 543, 544, 599, 600, 683.
MUNICIPAL LAW, 626,
MUNICIPAL, Jurisdiction, 47, 79, 168, 251,
286.
Laws, 2, 4, 30, 48,79, 168, 217, 228, 239,
286.
Seizure, 227, 318, 322, 603.
NATURALIZATION, 124, 274, 390.
NATIONAL SEAL, 462.
NEUTRAL RIGHTS, 6, 21, 88, 93, 106,
108, 110, 113, 116, 145, 146, 147, 160,
161, 162, 177, 178, 180, 186, 189, 199,
202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 215, 257,
270, 272, 285, 287, 292, 306, 328, 343,
344, 358, 359, 361, 362, 381, 382, 401,
404, 405, 407, 410, 411, 413, 464, 474,
490, 501, 502, 510, 519, 555, 561, 562,
586,591, 594, 598, 602, 606, 608, 609,
610, 611, 613, 614, 615, 616, 617, 618,
619, 620, 621, 622, 623, 624, 625,660,
661, 662, 663, 664, 665, 666, 667, 691.
JBlockade, 38, 40, 49, 145, 238
Right of Search, 121, 217, 222, 249.
NEW STATES, 32, 129, 131, 142, 160, 165,
345, 460, 624.
NON-INTERCOURSE, 689.
PASSPORTS, 192.
PIRACY, 141, 166, 168, 170, 173, 174, 175,
176,227, 228, 232, 234, 253, 254, 315,
316, 532, 669. -
INDEX TO THE ABSTRACT OF CASES.
357
*ORTUGAL, 267.
Practice, 112, 118 183,283.
President’s Instructions; 72, 95.
Jluthority, 171, 172, 242, 276.
PRIVATEERS, 507.
PRIVATEER'S BOND, 346,621, 669.
PRIZE, Blockade, 38, 40, 49, 145, 238.
Capture, 89, 103, 118, 193, 257, 315, 317,
512, 518, 682.
on land, 281, 393, 458, 470.
Commander, 127.
Confiscation, 58,64, 77,239, 247,520, 522,
528, 529.
Contrabrand, 99, 100, 101, 191, 198, 258.
Domicil, 24, 56, 57, 65, 67, 69, 82, 86, 102,
105, 126, 137, 138, 157, 267, 467, 495,
555, 557, 559, 560, 561, 562.
I)uties, 167, 186, 269,272,
Enemy’s Wessel, 320.
Enemy-License, 60, 61, 109, 119, 140,159,
192, 271, 465, 466.
Enemy Trade, 59, 62, 63, 73, 74, 75, 80,
109, 114, 143, 265, 273, 342, 356, 402,
452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 519, 637,
671, 672, 673.
False papers, 287.
Foreign Sentence, 29, 31, 33, 34,35, 50, 51,
52, 84, 130, 151, 152, 204, 206, 215,
289, 333, 334, 357, 368, 369, 370, 371,
372, 384, 387, 389, 415, 416, 417, 418,
419, 444, 445, 446, 463, 509, 563, 564,
571, 572, 583, 584, 595, 596.
Freight, 101, 104, 243.
French Treaty, 16.
Jurisdiction, 33, 34, 43, 47, 52, 53, 76, 83,
88, 106,107, 108, 130, 147,148, 161,162,
164, 168, 176, 177, 179, 185, 189, 204,
206, 208, 215 255, 260, 264, 270, 280,
284, 285, 301, 302, 303, 306, 308, 309,
310, 311, 318.
JMunicipal Forfeiture, 70.
Officer, 459.
Possession, 97.
Practice, 112, 118, 147, 179, 183,223, 225,
226, 268, 283, 296.
President’s Iustructions, 72.
Probable Cause, 234, 245, 256, 315, 515,
516.
Property unclaimed, 87.
Proprietary Interest, 66, 68, 71, 91, 96,
111, 115, 122, 128, 146.
Ransom, 263, 273, 673.
Recapture, 21, 139, 291.
PRIZE (continued).
Reciprocity, 86, 92, 139.
Itescue, 78,464, 517.
Right of Search, 121, 217, 222, 229,
322, 468, 504, 590, 631.
Salvage, 21, 64, 85, 152, 153, 226, 291.
Spoliation of Papers, 120, 144,449.
PROBABLE CAUSE, 234,245,256,315, 515,
516,
PROPRIETARY INTEREST, 66,68, 81, 96,
111, 115, 122, 128, 146, 166, 182.
PUBLIC WAR, 684.
RANSOM, 263,273, 673.
RECIPROCITY, 86, 92, 139.
RESCUE, 78,464, 517.
REVOLT, 549.
RIGHT OF SEARCH, 121, 217, 222, 229.
RIVER, 641, 642.
RIVER-BOUNDARY, 216,641.
RULE OF 1756, 113, 116.
RUSSIA, 192.
SALWAGE, 21, 64, 85, 152, 153,226,291, 325,
365, 366,400, 473.
SEA LAWS, 636.
SEA-LETTER, 122, 282.
SEARCH, 121, 217, 222, 229, 322,458, 504,
590, 631.
SECRETARY OF STATE, 570.
SELF DEFENCE, 324, 639.
SENTENCE in em., 480.
SHIP OF WAR, 531.
SHIP, 689.
SLAVE TRADE, 221, 222,323,633, 635.
SOWEREIGN, 493.
SPANISH TREATY, 681, 685.
SPAIN, 32, 91, 122 123, 128, 160, 165, 180,
182, 187, 188, 197, 200, 207,235,236.
SPANISH COLONIES, 160, 165, 180, 188,
197.
SPANISH GRANTS, 235, 236.
SPOLIATION OF PAPERS 120, 14-i; #49.
STATE DEPARTMENT, 279.
STATE COURTS, 533.
ST. DOMINGO, 345, 460.
SURVEY, 565.
TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION, 611, 612,
613, 617, 618, 619, 620.
TORTS, 326, 623.
TRADE, 561.
TRANSFER IN TRANSITU, 243.
TRANSIT, 638.
TREASON, 347, 481.
TRFSPASS 505.
358
INDEX TO THE ABSTRACT OF CASES.
TREATY, 20,90, 98, 169, 209, 293, 353, 391,
392, 393, 403,409, 410, 451, 498, 500,
627, 676, 630, 674, 675, 676, 677, 678,
679, 680, 681, 683, 685, 686.
British-Jättainder, 1.
Blockade, 38,498, 627.
Confiscation, 15, 30, 45* .
TREATY (continued).
Portugal, 267.
Privateers, 16,507.
Prize, 19, 91, 122, 123, 165, 182, 187, 188,
200, 270, 285.
Russia-Great Britain, 192,354, 391, 392,
393, 403, 434, 436, 450, 451, 500, 526,
Creditors, 15, 26, 39.
Courts, 12, 314.
Deserter, 14.
Dominica, 5.
Evidence, 41.
Fugitives, 169, 683.
French—Consuls, 12.
Lands, 27, 36, 39, 42, 117, 135, 132, 133,
134, 136, 150, 155, 156, 193, 194, 192,
627, 674, 676, 680, 683.
Spanish–France, 32,409, 410, 681.
Sea Letter, 282.
Spain, 32,681, 685.
VESSEL, 689.
WAR, 356, 398, 402, 437, 452, 453, 457, 458,
459, 521, 523, 526, 573, 590, 593, 594,
209, 211, 218, 224, 235,294, 307.
598, 632, 662, 663, 676, 684, 686
Disguise, 625,632.
NAMES OF T H E CAS ES
REFERIEEI) TO IN THE A PSTRACT.
Nore.—The numbers refer to the cases, as they are printed, and NoT to the pages of the work.
A.
Abby 318, 591
Adventure 64
Africaine, Soult v. 612
Alerta Blas Moran v 88, 664
Alexander 59, 512
Alexander, McCreery v 420
Allen Buttrick v 444
American In. Co. v. Cotton 689
Amiable Isabella 181,475
Amiable Nancy 603
Amory v McGregor 45.4
Ann 251
Anna Maria 121, 505
Anne 147, 313, 536, 579
Anonymous 274
Antelope, 221, 634, 635, 636,
637
Ann Green 588, 638, 639
Anthony Manquin, U.S. v 480
An Open Boat, U. S. v 692
Appleby, Hopner v 694
Apollon 216
Arabella & Aldeira 606
Arnold, Del Col v 360
Ariadne 119
Armistad de Rues 474, 667
Armroyd, Williams v 50,333,
334
Arrogante Barcelones 206
Astrea 97
Atalanta 146
Aurora, 61,472
Aury, Hernandez v. 609
Avery, 268
B.
Babcock, v Weston 653, 63%
Baily, v S. Car. In. Co. 418
Banks, Carneal v 224.
Bank U. S v. Planter’s Bank of
Georgia 493
Barber, U. S. v 675
Bark, U. S. v 356
Bas, v Tingey 687
Bas, v Steele 344
Baxter, v N. Eng. Marine Ins.
Co. 389
Bayes, v Hogg 423
Beach, v Kezar 452
Bell, Hopkirk v 26
Lello Corrunes, 184
Bertrandt v Gautier 304
Betty Cathcart, Moodie v 285
Bevans, U.S. v. 531 602.
Bingham, v Cabot 599
Bissell, v Briggs 443
Blacreau, Mason v 366
N AMES OF THE CASES.
359
}lacklock, v Stewart 416
Blagge v N. Y. Ins Co. 115
Blake, Hayward v 465
Blas Moran, Br Alverta v 88,
664
Blight v Rochester 193
Boit, De Lovio v 264,478,690
Boreal, vºſheGolden Rose,399
Boston, Manchester v 440
Booth, v The Esperanza 400
Boutaille, Castello v 284, 599
Bradwell v Weeks 441
Brailsford, Georgia v 15
Brig Alerta 88
Brig Ann 251
Brig Antelope, White v 291
Brig Lear, Dennis, v 289
Brig President 350
Brit. Con, Span. Con v 292
Brit. Consul, v Thompson 404
Brit. Consul, v Mermaid 409
672
Brit. Consul, v The Nancy 411
Briggs, Bissel v 443
Brown, Hylton v 294
Brown v U. States 58,470,529
629
Brown, v Union In. Co. at N.
London 389
Brock, Hutchinson v 436
Brown, Den v 439
Brown, Hylton’s lessee v 680
Bronson, v Woolsey 459
Burnell, Camfranque v 297
Burnes, Jackson v. 299
Burke, v Trevitt, 312
Buttrick, v Allen 444
Buchannan, v Curry 455
Bunell, Conframp v 374
Burnham, Weddoms v 442
C.
Cabrera, eac parte 295
Cabot, Bingham v 599
Cacique, Robin v 662
Caledonian 159
Calbraith, Searight v 576
Camfranque v. Burnell 207
Campbell, v Williamson 416
Campbell Robinson v 649
Candalero, McGrath v 585,
408
Carneal v Banks 224
Carson v Jennings, 296, 380
Carmichacl, Elmendorf v 413
Carpenter, Courtois v 656
Castelle v Boutaille 284, 599
Catharina, Thompson v 661
Catlett, v Pacific In. Co. 355,
365
Catharines 325
Charm. Betsy, Murray v 24
Chandler, Chamberlain v 326
Chamberlain v Chandler 326
Chester, v The Experiment
556
Ches. In Co. Stark v 400
Cherriot v Foussat 301
Chirac v Chirac 124
Church v Hubbart 8
Clarke v Jackson 150
Clarkson, Kenny v 379
Clark, v Graham 649
Clark, v Morey 437
Clark v U.S. 345, 519, 523,
625
Clifton, v Haig 427
Clifford, Robinson v 335, 340,
560. º
Cobbett, Rush v 305
Cochran, Gernon v 288, 537
Coheur v Virginia 533
Colquhoun, v N. Y. Firemen
466
Columbian In. Co. Gardere v
384
Commercen 99,666
Commonwealth, v Sheafe 393
Comegys, v Vasse 688
Conframp v Bunell 374
Consul of G. Britain, Consul
of Spain v 405
Consul of Spain v Consul of
G. Britain 405
Consul of Spain, Consul of G.
Britain 405
Consequa, v Willing 575
Corfield, v Corryell 349.
Cort, v Del. In Co. 567
Corryell, Corfield v 349
Cotton, American In. Co. v.
689
Coolidge, v Poor 447
Cook, v Howard 458
Cooper v Telfair 528
Courtois v Carpenter 656
Cowqua v Lauderbrun 657
Craig v Leslie 135
Crawford v the William Penn.
277, 342, 488
Crosby, U. S. v 649
Crowninshield, Le Roy v 580
Croudson v Leonard 35
Cury, Buchannan v 455
Coxe, McIlvaine v 25
D.
Darby v The Eastern 502
Davis v Hall 425
Dawson v Godfrey 27
Dawes, Stokes v 329
TJecker, Jackson v. 134
Decouche v Savatier 4.48
Dederer v Del. Ins. Co. 517,
592
Delaware Ins. Co, King v 44
Delaware Ins. Co. v. Dederer
517, 593
Delaware Ins. Co, Corto 566
Delaware, Talcot v. 568
Del Col v Arnold 360
Dennis v Brig Lear 289
Den v Brown 439
Den eac dem Fisher v Hamden
678
Depeyster, Wheelright v 306,
364,
Dewolf v Johnson 652
De Lovio v Boit 264, 478, 609
Dias v Privateer Revenge 346
Diana 265
l)ivina Pastora, 160
Dixon v Ramsay 28, 378
Doane, Penhallow v 357, 598
Doe v Horniblea 422
Dorr v Pacific Ins. Co. 564
Dorr, Willard v 327,328
Dos Hermanos 118, 491,511
Dove 255,477
E.
Eagle 395
Eaton, Hamilton v 500, 521,
522, 681, 682, 683
Edwards, Hughes v 218
Elbert v U. States 467
360
NAMES OF THE CASES.
Eleanor 121, 506, 507,633
Ellison v Ship Bellona 285
Elmendorf v Carmichael
Emerson v Howland 317
Emulous 239, 470, 513, 521
Erstern, Darby v 502
Esperanza, Booth v 400
Estrella 162
Exchange v Mc Faddon 613,
614, 615, 616, 617, 618,
619, 620 621
Experiment, Chester v 556
F.
Fairfax v Hunter 54
Fame 644, 645
Fanny 361, 362, 663
Fanny Moxon v 518, 670
Findlay v The William 604
Firemen N. Y., Colquhoun v
Fish v Stoughton 390
Fisher, Harden v 117 353
Fitzsimmons v N. P. Ins. Co.
38, 387, 498,628
Flying Fish 268
Fortuna, 143
Foussat, Cheriot v 801
Foussat, Snell v 540, 541,589
Fox v Southack 434
Frances 67, 559
Friendship, Stannick v 409
Friendschaft 137
Frith v Sprague 461
Fry, Yeaton v 40
Furlong, U. States v 173
Furse, Suckley v 456
G.
Gailard, Harcourt v 677
Galbraith, Searight v 373
Gardner v Thomas 308
Gardere v Columbian In. Co,
384
Gautier, Bertrandt v 304
Gelmour v Kay 421
Gelston v Hoit 129, 460
Georgia v Brailsford, 12
George 315, 516
Gernon v Cochran 288, 537
Gerrards adm., Hourquibee v
572
Gibbons v Thomas 72
Gibbons v. Ogden, 219, 534
Gillies U. S. v 492
Glass v Sloop Betsy 12
Godfrey, Dawson v 37
Golden Rose, Boreul v 399
Goix v Low 372
Gordon, Goodrich v 457
Gordon, Respublica v 1
Gordon v Kerr 203
Goods, Sheaff v 413
Goodrich v Gordon i97
Governeur v Robertson 230
Gran Para 205
Gray, Trustees v 430
Graham, Clark v 649
Grassin, U. S. v. 552
Green v Sarmiento 655
Griswold v Waddington 453
Griswold v. Pitcarin 462
Groning v Union In Co. 419
Grush, U. States v 690
Guestier, Hudson v 33, 379
H.
Haig, Clifton v 427
Hallet v. Novion 309, 453
Hall, Davis v 425
Haley, Sloan v 399
Hamilton, U. S. 548, 549,
550
Hamilton, v. Eaton 500, 521,
522,681, 682, 683
Hamden, Den v 678
Hand, U. S. 338, 581
Hannay, Owens v 94
Harcourt, v. Gaillard 677
Harrison, v. Sterry 385, 577,
646, 647, 660
Harnden v. Fisher 117, 353
Harrison 111
Harrison, Kelly v 132
Harvey, v. Richards 319
Haven, v. Holland 324, 640,
641
Hayward, v. Blake 465
Hayward, U. States v 259, 673
Henderson v. Poindexter 235
Hernandez, v. Aury 609,
Higgingson v. Mein 39
Himely, Rose v 31, 388, 406,
414
Hiram, 63
Hobart, Titus v. 694
Hodgson, Orr v. 154
Hogg, Bayes v 423
Holmes, United States v 176,
545, 546
Holland, Haven v 324, 640,
641
Hopkirk v. Bell 26
Hopner, v. Appleby 694
Horatia, Pritchard v 396
Horniblea, Doe v 422
Hourquibee, v Gerard’s adm.
572
Howard, Cook v 458
Howland, Emerson v 317
Hoyt, v, Gelston 460
Hubbard, Church v 8
Hudson v Guestier 33, 379
Hughes v. Edwards 218
Hunter, Fairfax v 54
Hunter, Martin v 98
Hunt, v. Warnicke 429
Hutchinson, v. Brock 436
Hylton v. Brown 294, 680
Hylton, Ware v 15, 391, 527
I. & J.
Indians 267
Invincible 106, 473, 515, 599,
607, 608, 622, 623, 624
Insurance Co. N. America
Watson v 570
Insurance Co. N. Amer. Sch-
wartz v 343 596
Isaacs, McGrath o 402
Izard, Wilson v 487
Jackson v. Burnes 299
“ v. Clarke 150
** v. Decker 134
‘‘ v. Lunn 133
“ v. Wright 307
Jackson v. White 438
Jackson, Porter v 554, 679
Jansen, Talbot v 18, 358
Janson v. Vrow Christiana
Magdalena 285
Jenkins v. Putman 280
Jennings, Carson v 296, 380
& 4 Sasportas v 280,412
Jerusalem 262
Jeune Eugenie v 322, 323
NAMES OF THE CASES.
361
Johnson v. McIntosh 210
Johnson v Ludlow 369
Johnson, v Merchandize 489,
562,
Johnson, De Wolf v 652
Jones, Robinson v 464, 466
Jones v. Le Tombe 17
Jonathan Robbins 168
Josefa Segunda, 166
Joseph 74
Judge Lawrence 14
Judge Peters, U. S. v 43
Julia, 60
K.
Kane, Van Reinsdyk v 248
655
Kay, Gilmour v 421
Keating, Maisonaire v 256
Keafe, U. S. v 551
Kelly v. Harrison 132
“ v. Sch. Prosperity 285
Kenny, v. Clarkson 377
Kerr, Gordon v 293
Kerr, v. More's devisees 649,
651
Ketcham, Thompson v 386
Kezav, Beach v 452
King of Spain, v. Oliver 331,
332
King v. Del. Ins. Co. 44
Klintock, U. S. v 173
L.
Laing, v. United In. Co. 389
Lambert v. Paine 27
Lauderbrun, Cowqua v 657
Lay Roy, v. Crowninshield
580
La Africaine, Soult v 286, 612
La Amistad de Rues 474, 667
La Conception 189, 663
LaINereyda 215,476,509, 510
La Jeune Eugenie 322, 323
Lee, Sewall v 435
Lenox, Page v 432
Leonard, Croudson v 35
Leslie, Craig v 135
Levi Dearbon, Woodruff v.
497
Lewis, eac parte 266, 479
Le Tombe, Jones v 17
Liddle, U. S. v 339, 341, 351,
352, 571, 582, 583
Liverpool Hero 269
Liverpool Packet 245
Livingston v. Md. Ins. Co. 56
383, 468, 469; 592
Lockington v. Smith 276
Longchamps, Respublica v 2
I,ondon Packet 314, 320, 537
Lord Wellington, 273
Low, Goix v 372
Ludlow, v. Wan Rensselaer
376
Ludlow, Johnston v 369
Lunn, Jackson v 133
L’Invincible, 106, 473, 515
M.
Maisonaire v. Keating 256
Maine, Sawyer v 445
Maine, Richardson v 381
JMaley v. Shattuck 29, 367
Manchester v. Boston 440
Mannhardt v. Soderston 303
Mann v. Sacks 287,401, 669
Mann, U. S. v. 606
Marianna Flora 227
Martin v. Hunter 98
1Mary, 95, 471
Mary & Susan 482, 557
Mary Ford, McDonough v
359
Mary, Tunno v 399
Massey, Webster v 336, 337,
659
Mason v. Blaircau 366
McCreery v. Somerville 220
McCreery v. Alexander 420
McCormick v. Sullivan 649
McDaniel v. Richards 428
McDonough v. Mary Ford
359
McFadon, Schr. Ex. v. 55,613
621
McGrath v. Sloop Candalero
408
McGrath v. Hand 581
McGrath v. Isaacs 402
McGregor, Amory v 454
|McGill, U. S. v 538, 601
McIlvaine v Coxe 25
McIntosh, Johnson v 210
McMillan v. McNeil 578,
650
McNeil, McMillan v 578,
650
Md. Ins. Co., Livingston v
56, 383, 468, 469, 593
Md. Ins. Co., Smith v 45
& 6 v. Wood 49
Mead, Smith v 448
Meeks v Richburg 426
Mein, Higginson v 39
Merino 605
Mermaid, British Consul v
409, 672
Merchandize, Johnson v 489,
562
Miller v. Ship Resolution 4
501, 596, 626, 627, 674
Mitchell, U. S. v. 569
Montalet v. Murray 311
Moodie v. Bet. Cathcart 385
“ v. Ship Phebe Ann 16
Morey, Clark v 437
More’s devisees, Kerr v 649,
651
Moxon v. The Fanny 518,
670
Mumford v. Mumford 483
Murray, Montalet v 311
Murray v. Charm. Betsey 24
N.
Nancy 411
Nanny 394
Nash, U. S. v 451, 686
Nash v. Tupper 375
Needham, eac parte 554
Nereide 90, 504, 631, 632,
665
Nereyde 215, 509, 510
Neustra Senora 165
Newman, eac parte 484
New York Firemen, Colqu-
houn v 466
New Eng. Marine Ins. Co.
Baxter v 389
Newport I. C., Fitzsim. v 38,
387, 498, 628
N. Haven, S. prop. Gos. v.
209
N. Y. Ins. Co., Blagge v 115
46
562
NAMES OF THE CASES.
Nieholson, Patton v 140
Norwood's, Less. Owens v 42,
392, 530
Nostra Signora 410
Nostra Senora del Camino
Ramond de Salderondo v
610, 611
Nueva Anna & Liebre 190
Novion, Hallet v 309, 433
O.
Odlin v. Penn. Ins. Co. 594,
595
Ogden, Gibbons v 219, 534
Olivera v. Union Ins. Co. 145
Oliver, King of Spain v 331,
332
Orr v. Hodgson, 134
Ortega, United States v 231
531
Owens v. Hannay 94
Owens v. Norwoods lessee
42, 392, 530
O’Neal, Scheaffe v. 237
P.
Page v. Lenox 432
Pacific Ins. Co. Dorr v 564
Pacific Ins. Co. Catlett v 355
565
Paine, Lambert v 27
Palmer, United States v. 141
Palmyra, 234
Tatton v. Nicholson 140
Penelope 563
Penn, Crawford v 275, 442,
488
Penn. Ins. Co. Odlin v 594,
595
Penniman, Watson v 496
Penhallow v. Doane 357, 598
beters, U. S. v. 503, 599, 600
Pirates, U.S. v. 539, 542, 543,
544, 589
Pitcairn, Griswold v 462
Piquet v. Swann 693
Pizarro 120
Planter’s Bank of Georgia
Bank U. S. v 493
Pleasants, Wood v 573
Poor v Coolidge, 447
Poindexter, Henderson v 235
Polly, Putnam v 399
Pomeroy, Slacum v 648
Porter, Jackson v 354
Porter, Jackson v 679
Pratt, Phenix Ins. Co. v. 115
Preary, Tunno v 282
Prince v. United States 272
Pritchard v. The Horatia 396
Prior, U. S. v 348
Privateer Revenge, Dias v 346
Pryor, U. S. 574
Putnam v. The Polly 399
Putnam, Jenkins v 280
R.
Radcliff v. United Ins. Co.
382, 389
Radford, Craig v 135
Rainbow 397
Ramsay, Dixon v 28, 378
Ramond De Salderondo v.
Nostra Senora de Carmi-
no 610, 611
Rapid 59, 630
Ravara, United States v 7
535
Reed V. The Weere 407
Resolution, Miller v 501, 597,
626, 627, 674
Respublica v. Gordon 1
& & Longchamp 2
Rice, United States v 158, 524
525, 526
Richards, Harvey v 319
Richards, McDaniel v 428
Richardson v. Maine 381
Richburg, Meeks v 426
Richmond v. U. S. 587
Robbins, U. S. v 451, 686
Robbins, Jonathan 168
Robertson, Governeur v 230
Robinson v. Clifford 335, 340,
566
Robinson v. Jones 446, 464
Robinson v. Campbell 649
Robin v. Cacique 662
Robinson, U, S. v 330
Rochester, Blight v 193
Ross, Turnbull y 281, 398
“ United States v 234
Rose, The Golden 399
Rose v. Himely 31, 888, 406,
414
Ruggles, U. S. v 595
Rugen 114
Rush v. Cobbet 305
S.
Sacks, Mann v 287, 401
Sacks, Mann v 669
Sally, 70
Salderondo v. The Nostra
Senora 410
Salderondo v. ship N. Sen.
285
Salter v. Sampago 310
Sampago v. Salter 316
Santissima Trinidad 196, 604
604
San Jose Indiano, 495, 561,
562, 668
Sarmiento, Green v 658
Sasportas v. Jennings 280,413
412
Saunders 271, 499
Savatier, Decouche v 449
Sawyer v. Maine 445
Schwartz v. Ins. Co. North
America 343, 596
Sch. Adeline 85
Sch. Exchange v. McFad 55
Sch. Peggy, U. S. v. 19
“ Prosperity, Kelly v 285
Searight v. Galbraith 373,576
Seeman, Talbot v 9, 363, 365
Sewall v. Lee 435
Shattuck. Maly v 29, 367
Sheaffe v. O’Neil 237
Sheafe, Commonwealth v 393
Sheaff v. Sugar 586
Sheaff v. Goods 413
Ship William 361
Ship Bellona, Ellison v 285
“ Friendship, Stan. v .285
“ Nancy, Thomp. v. 290
** Nostra Senora 285
“ Phebe Ann, Moo. v 16
* Resolution, Miller v &
“ Richmond, 79
Short Staple 78
Slacum v. Pomeroy 648
Sloop Betsy, Glass v 12
“ Rambler, v Teas. 283
NAMES OF THE CASES.
363
Siocp candalero, McGrath v
408
Sloan v. Haley 399
Smith, Lockington v 276
Smith v. Md. Ins. Co. 45
Smith, United States v 174,
321, 532, 347, 553
“ Williams y 238
mith v. State of Maryland
520
Smith v. Williams 370
Smith v. Meade 448
Snell v. Foussat 540, 541, 584
Soc. for prop. Gospel v.
Wheeler 485, 466, 494,
560.
Soc. prop Gos. v. N. Hav.
209
Soderstrom, Mannhardt v.
303
Somerville, McCreery v 220
Soult v. L'Africaine 286, 612
Southack, Fox v 434
Span. Con. v. Brit. Con. 292
Sprague, Frith v 461
Stannick vShipPriend.285,409
Star 139, 508
Stark v. Ches. Ins. Co. 490
State of Marylaud, Smith v
520
Steele, Bas. v. 344
Sterry, Harrison v 385, 377,
646, 647, 660
Stewart, Blacklock v 416
Stewart, Thompson v 463
Stokes v. Dawes 329
Stoughton, Fish v. 390
Stwart v. Warner 368
St. Lawrence 73, 558
St. Nicholas 115
Suckley v. Furze 456
Sugar, 30 hlids., v. Boyle 82
Sugar, Wilkie v 555
“ Sheaff V 586
Sullivan, McCormick v 649
Swann, Piquet v 693
8. Car. In . Co. Bailey v $18
T.
Talbot v. Yanson 18, 358
“ v. Seeman 9, 363, 365
Taleot v. Del, In, Co, $68
Tavel, Young v 289
Teasdale v. slp. Rambler 283
Tease y White 424
Telfair Cooper v 528
Thomas, Gardner v 308
Thompson v. ship Nancy 290
Thompson v. The Catharina
661
Thomposn. v. Katscham 386
Thompson v Stewart 463
Thompson, British Consul v
404
The Catharina, Thompson v
661
The Eagle 395
The Emulous 470, 513, 521
The Erstern Darby v 502
The Fanny, Moxon v 518
The Francis 559
The Friendship 469
The Golden Rose 399
The Horatia 396
The Levi Dearborn, Wood-
ruff y 497
The Mary 399
The Mermaid, Brit. Consul v
409, 672
The Nanny 394
The Nancy, British Consul v
411
The Nostra Signora, Salder-
ondo v. 410
The Penelope 663
The Pirates, U. S. v. 539, 542
543, 54%, 549
The IPolly 399
The Santissima Trinidad 604
The Union In. Co. N. London,
Brown v. 389
The Weere, Reed v 407
The William 604
The William Penn, Crawford
Tigre 684,.685
Tinney, Bas v 687
Titus v Hobart 691
Trevitt, Burke v 312
Trustees v Gray 430
Tully, United States v 253
Tulip 347
Tunno, Williamson v 493,417
v 342, 488, 519
T'unno v. Preary, 282
Tuano v. The Mary 399
Turnbull v. Ross 281, $93
Tupper, Nash v 375
Two Catharines 325
U.
Union Ins. Co., Olivera v 145
{ % Wilcox v 298
C & Groning v 419
Union Ins. Co. New London,
Baxter v 389
United In Co., Vandenheuve
v 371, 389
United In. Co. Radcliff v 382
389 -
United In. Co, Laing, v 389
University v 421
U. S. In. Co., Blbers v 467
U. S., Brown v. 58, 470, 529*
629
U. S. v An open Boat 692
“ v Barber 675
“ y Barker 356
“ v Bevans 531, 602
“ v Clark 345, 523, 625
“ v Crosby 649
“ v Furlong 173
“ y Gillies 492
* V Grassin 552
** v Grush 690
“ v Hamilton 548,549,550
“ v Hand 338 581
“ v Hayward 259, 673
“ v Holmes 176,545, 546
y Judge Lawrenee 14
“ v Judge Peters 43
“ y Keefe 551
“ v Klintock 173
“ v Liddle 339, 341, 352,
571, 582, 583,
“ v Mann 606
“ y Mitchell 569
“ v McGill 358, 601
* y Nash 451 686
“ v Ortega 231, 351
‘‘ v Palmer 141
“ v Peters 599, 600
“ v Peters 503
v Pirates 539, 542, sås,
“ v Prior 348, 574
y Prince 272
v Iławara 7, 533
y Riee 158,521,325,526
364
NAMES OF THE CASES.
U. S. v Richmond 587
“ v Robinson 330
« v Robbins 451 686
“ v Ross 254
“ v Ruggles 695
“ v Schr Peggy 19
“ v Smith, 174
<< v Smith 321
“ v Smith 532,547, 553
544, 589
“ v The Anthony Mangin
480
“ v Tully 253
44 y Vilatto 481
** v Williams 492
“ v Wiltberger 590
V.
Wantelenger's claim 103
Vanreinsdyk v Kane 248,655
Vandenheuvel v United In.co.
371, 389
Van Rensselaer Ludlow v 376
Vasse, Comegys v 688
Venus 65
Vilatto U. S. v. 481
Virginia, Cohens v 533
Vrow Christiana Magdalena,
Janson v 285
W.
Waddington, Griswold v 453
Ware v Hylton 15,391, 527
Warnicke, Hunt v 429
Warner Stewart v 368
Washburn’s case 450
Watson v In. Co. N. America
570
Watson v Penniman 496
Weeks, Bradwell v 441
Webster v Massey 336, 337,
659
Weddams v Burnham 442 --
Weston, Babcock v 653, 654
Wheelright v Depeyster 306,
364 .
Wheeler, Soc. prop. Gospel v
485, 486, 494, 560
White v Brig Antelope, 291
White, Tease v 424
White, Jackson v 438
Willard v Dorr 327, 328
• Wilcox v Union Ins. Co. 298
Wilkie v Sugar 555
Williams v Armroyd 50, 333,
334
Williams v Smith 238, 370
Williamson v Tunno 403,417
Wilson v Izard 487
William, Findlay v 604, 669
Williams, U. S. v 492
Williamson, Campbell v 415
Willing, Consequa v 575
Wiltberger, U. S. v 590
Wm. Penn, Crawford v 519,
676
Woolsey, Bronson v 459
Wood v Pleasants 573
Woodruff v The Levi Dear-
born 497
Y.
Yeaton v Fry 40
Young v Tavel 289
Z.
Zane v Brig President 350
A CONCISE
D IPL O M AT I C M A. N. U A L.
AUTHORITIES
FROM
THE LAW OF NATIONS,
AND orhER sourcES,
TOUCHING MATTERS IN REFERENCE TO THE DIPLOMATIC
CHARACTER
OF A.
33tttalit iſłłittigtet,
A N D H I S O F F I C I A L ID U T I E S.
CHAP. I. Of the Rights of Embassy.
[From Martens’ Law of Nations.]
Sect. 1. However simple a negotiation may be, it would be
very difficult, now-a-days, to bring it to a conclusion by a written cor-
respondence between the sovereigns. A verbal communication is absolutely
necessary; and, as it would be impossible for sovereigns to negociate,
themselves, they must commission others, furnished with instructions and
full powers, to do it in their stead. Hence the origin of embassies.
SEc. 2. Of a Public Minister. By Public Minister is commonly meant,
the person whom the state has charged with its public affairs: in a more
particular sense, the person who is at the head of some department of the
government; and, in a still more confined sense, the person whom the
sovereign has appointed to superintend his affairs at some foreign court.
This last sort of minister (Embassador in a general sense, Legatus) is that
of which we are to speak here. The sending of this sort of ministers being
a necessary means of treating of state affairs, the right to send them becomes
one of the natural rights of sovereignty. These ministers are now employ-
ed, not only to negociate the affairs of the sovereign by whom they are sent,
(though all their rights are grounded upon their acting in that capacity,)
but on points of ceremony also; and, since the introduction of perpetual
embassies, sometimes the principal business of such a minister is to watch
over the interests of his master, and give him an exact account of every
thing that passes, and of which it imports him to be informed. Whatever
difference a rigorous attention to theory might make, as to prerogatives, &c.
between negociators and other ministers, in the practice, the same prerog-
atives that are enjoyed by negociators, are also enjoyed by embassies of
ceremony, perpetual embassies, and embassies in ordinary.
368 RIGHTS OF EMBASSY.
SEor. 3. Of the right of sending Ministers. The primitive and princi.
pal object of sending embassies proves clearly, 1. That the right of sending
ministers, belongs to all those states, which have a right to treat with foreign
powers in their own name. Consequently, all states that are entirely free
(notwithstanding vassalage, protection, and tribute), as well as all the
demi-sovereign states, that have the right of making war and peace, and
of forming foreign alliances, have a right to send ministers to foreign courts.
Hence it comes that the states of the Empire, as well as many other demi-
sovereign states, enjoy this right. 2. In monarchies this right may belong
solely to the sovereign, or it may so happen that the state participates in it.
This depends on the internal constitution of each state in particular.
But, 3. No subject part of a state, no person, however distinguished by his
rank and dignities, that has not a right to treat with foreign nations in his
own name, has a right to send embassies. In the communications between
sovereigns and their subjects, the former sends commissaries and the latter
deputies; but neither of the two have the prerogatives of ministers. The
latter have them not, for want of authority in those by whom they are sent,
and the former, for want of the consent of the sovereign; and, besides,
neither of them stand in need of such prerogatives. 4. A sovereign may,
however, authorize other persons to exercise the rights of appointing
embassies in his name; thus, the princes of the blood, governors of provin-
bes, vice-roys, generals, and even ministers, send persons vested with the
tharacter, essential rights, and authority of ministers.
SECT. 4. The right of sending ministers making part of the
rights of sovereignty, it returns, in case of a vacancy of the throne,
into the hands of the people, or of those who are authorised to exercise the
sovereign power in the interim. A sovereign who abdicates his crown,
loses with it his right of sending ministers; but the simple loss of possession,
when involuntary, does not always carry in it the loss of right. A prince,
by being held in captivity, or by being driven from his throne, or even from
his dominions, does not, on that account, lose at once the right of sending
ministers; neither does he who has usurped his throne, or power, acquire
this right by his mere momentary possession. It is the justice or injustice
of the cause that ought principally to decide, which of the two is entitled
to exercise this right. The conduct of foreign powers on such occasions
ought to be conformable to what has been already said, with respect to the
acknowledgement of general sovereignty.
SECT. 5. Of the right of receiving Ministers. Those, and those only;
who have a right to send ministers, have a right to receive them. They
may even be obliged, imperfectly, to receive them, or at least not to refuse
them. But, except in the case of treaties, no state is under a perfect obliga-
tion to receive them, and still less to permit their constant residence at its
ORIGIN OF THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF MINISTERS. 359
court. Every sovereign may, then, dictate the conditions on which he will
receive them, and fix the manner of their reception. Nevertheless, 1. A
refusal to receive ministers would be attended with serious consequences;
2. Once admitted, there are certain rights which are perfectly their due;
3. There are others, which are so well established by custom, that they
cannot now be refused; 4. There are many rights, particularly those belong-
ing to the ceremonial, concerning which, one court differs from another;
and, indeed, generally speaking, the positive rights of a foreign minister
depend, in great part, on treaties, and on law; all the rest are founded
On custorm.
6. Of the Origin of the different Orders. The universal law of
nations acknowledges but one order of ministers. It considers them all as
public mandatories of the state which they represent, as far as relates to
the business with which they are charged, and entitled to the rights essential
to that quality, and to no other rights whatever. But the modern law of
nations has established several orders of public ministers, or ambassadors,
which differ essentially in whatever concerns the ceremonial.
Formerly there was but one class of public ministers, who were all called
Ambassadors. On their private affairs sovereigns sometimes sent agents;
and on missions of ceremony, or of little importance, they sent gentlemen
of birth, but neither of these enjoyed the rights, or were honored with
the ceremonial, due to ministers. In the fifteenth century ministers began
to be received as the representatives of their sovereigns; but the disputes
resulting from their rights in that capacity, and the expense, which became
more considerable, as the perpetual embassies grew more customary, gave
rise to an order of ministers under the title of Residents, much inferior to
ministers representing their sovereigns. These latter now took, exclu-
sively, the title of Ambassadors. Residents were considered as above
agents, even when the latter were charged with affairs of state. These
agents were afterwards called Chargés des Affaires, and the title of agent
sunk into disuse, except for those who were charged with the private affairs
of the sovereign only, or as a mere empty title.
In time it became customary to grant to the gentlemen of birth, a certain
ceremonial, which, though very vague in the beginning, sometimes came
nearly to that of Ambassadors, but oftener resembled the ceremonial of resi-
dents. The custom of the present century has raised them above residents,
and they now form a separate order, between ambassadors and residents,
called Envoys. Many causes gave rise to a multiplication of the qualities
of ministers, particularly of the second and third orders: Ministers Pleni-
potentiary, Ministers, Ministers Resident, Residents, Ministers Chargés
d’Affaires.
47
370 FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD ORDERS.
7. Of Ministers of the First Order. Being the representative of the
sovereign forms the characteristic mark of ministers of the first order, among
which are, 1. The Cardinal Legates, the Nuncios of the Pope, Ambssadors
properly so called, the Bailo of Venice and Constantinople. The Nuncios
and Ambassadors are divided into ordinary and extraordinary. This division
served originally to distinguish perpetual ambassadors, from such as were
sent on some particular business; but, at present, there are perpetual Am-
bassadors, who are also vested with the more distinguished character of
extraordinary. º
With respect to precedence,” 1. The character of representative, which is
common to them all, raises all the ministers of the first order above those of
an inferior order, without respect to the rank or dignity of the states they
are sent from. 2. Among the ministers of the first order, the Cardinal
Legates and the Nuncios of the Pope, take the lead of all the Ambassadors
of Catholic states; but those of Protestant states do not yield to them in
this point. 3. The extraordinary Ambassador takes the lead of the Embas-
sador in ordinary, when they are both from the same state; but, 4. Among
Ambassadors of different courts, no regard is paid to this distinction; they
all claim a right to precedence, or yield it to others, as it is claimed or yield-
ed by their sovereigns.
8. of the Ministers of the Second Order. Ministers of the inferior or-
ders are not looked upon as the representatives of their sovereign. They do
represent him, however, with respect to the affairs they are sent to transact
in his name; and even with regard to precedence among themselves; so
that they ought to be looked upon as representatives in an inferior degree.
Again, though the manner of representation is the same among ministers of
the inferior orders, yet, the degree of dignity with which they are vested by
their sovereign, and the honors by which they are commonly distinguish-
ed, has given rise to the division of them into ministers of the second and
third order.
Among ministers of the second order are, the Envoys, the Ministers
Plenipotentiary, the Inter Nuncios of the Pope, and the Emperor. With
respect to precedence, there is no distinction made between Envoys and
Plenipotentiaries. Every one claims what is due to him according to the
rank of his sovereign.
9. Of Ministers of the Third Order. The third order of ministers
is composed of Ministers Resident, Residents and Ministers Chargés d'Af-
faires. Now-a-days, the ceremonial, almost everywhere, of ministers
of the third order, differs greatly from that of ministers of the
second order. The former yield to the latter in points of precedence,
claiming among themselves the rank that is due according to the dignity,
&c. of their sovereigns.
*See “Precedence.”
DEPUTIES, AGENTS, &c. 37 I
It seems that we ought to reckon among the ministers of the third order,
the simple Chargés des Affaires, as well as those who are appointed per
interim, as those who are permanent. They have not, however, the title of
ministers, and are generally introduced and admitted through a verbal
presentation of the minister, at his departure, or through letters of credence
addressed to the minister of state of the court to which they are sent. The
ceremonial observed towards them is very arbitrary. They have the essen-
tial rights of ministers, and do not yield the precedence to ministers,
residents, &c., if their court does not yield in this point. Martens.
10. Deputies and Commissioners. Sometimes the name of Deputies is
given to ministers sent to congress, or accredited on the part of an assembly
of states, or of a corporation; and the title of commissioners, to those sent
by powers in order to regulate limits, terminate differences of jurisdiction,
or to put in execution some article of a treaty or convention. These titles
can neither confer nor take away from them the prerogatives and immunities
of ministers; they possess ordinarily those granted to ministers of the second
or third order. All however, depends on the question, to what point the
constituent has been able and willing to confer on them a ministerial charac-
ter. Martens’ Manual.
11. Agents. Mere Agents charged with the particular private affairs of
a state or sovereign, although they may be invested with the title of Resident,
Counsellors of Legation, or any other, cannot pretend to the rights of a
diplomatic agent, much less to the prerogatives, immunities, or ceremonial
of public ministers.
Privileges granted to them sometimes by states less powerful [feeble
states] suffice not to form a rule. Besides, such agents are never the
bearers of credentials, but merely of letters of Provision, or even of recom-
mendation. ib.
12. Of the Right of sending Ministers. The right of sending
ministers may be possessed in part. Either a state may have a right to send
ministers of all the orders, or of some only. All the crowned heads, the
Republic of Venice, the United Provinces, the Swiss Cantons, and to some
courts Genoa and the Order of Malta, possess the right of sending minis-
ters of the first order. The states of the empire have prevailed on the
Emperor to grant them the right of an embassy of the first order, and, as far
as relates to their ministers sent to the Diet, it is granted them by all the
foreign states. They demand it from all the courts of Europe, in alledging
many acts of possession in their favor, and, after their example, the German
Princes demand the same; but neither have been able, as yet, to obtain it.
They, as well as the other sovereign and demi-sovereign states, send
ministers of the second and third order. Ministers of the first are seldom
sent to courts from whence ministers of the same order are not received.
Martens’ Law of Nations.
S72 MINISTERS RECEIVED FROM, OR SENT TO, USURPERS.
13. Whether Ministers may be received from, or sent to, an
Usurper. It will be proper to examine a question, famous for
being often debated, whether foreign nations may receive ambassadors
and other ministers of an usurper, and send such ministers to him. Here
foreign powers, if the advantage of their affairs invites them to it, follow
possession: there is no rule more certain, or more agreeable to the law of
nations, and the independency of them. As foreigners have no right to
interfere in the domestic concerns of a people, they are not obliged to
canvass and inspect its economy in those particulars, or to weigh either the
justice or injustice of them. They may, if they think proper, suppose the
right to be annexed to the possession. When a nation has expelled its
sovereign, the other powers which are not willing to declare against it, and
would not draw on themselves, its arms or enmity, consider that nation as
a free and sovereign state, without taking on themselves to determine
whether it has acted justly in withdrawing from the allegiance of subjects
and dethroning the prince. Cardinal Mazarine received Lockhart, who
had been sent as ambassador from the republic of England, and would
neither see king Charles the Second, nor his ministers. If a nation, after
driving out its prince, submits to another, or changes the order of succes-
sion, and acknowledges a sovereign to the prejudice of the natural and
appointed heir, foreign powers may here likewise consider what has been
done as legal; it is no quarrel or business of theirs. At the beginning of
the last century, Charles duke of Sudermania having obtained the crown
of Sweden, to the prejudice of Sigismund, king of Poland, his nephew, was
soon acknowledged by most sovereigns. Villeroy, minister of Henry the
IVth, king of France, at that court, in a memoir of the 8th of April, 1608,
plainly said to the president Jeannin, All these reasons and considerations
shall not hinder the king from treating with Charles, if he finds it to be his
interest, and that of his kingdom.
This was arguing sensibly. The king of France was neither the judge
nor the guardian of the Swedish nation, that he should, against the good of
his own kingdom, refuse to acknowledge the king which Sweden had cho-
sen, under pretence that a competitor termed Charles an usurper. Had it
even been done with justice, it does not come under the cognizance of
foreigners.
Therefore, when foreign powers have received the ministers of an
usurper, and sent theirs to him, the lawful prince, on recovering his throne,
cannot complain of these measures as an injury, nor justly make them the
cause of a war, previded these powers have not gone farther, nor furnished
any succours against him. But to acknowledge the prince dethroned, or
his heir, after a solemn acknowledgement of him who fills his place, is doing
wrong to the latter, and declaring against the nation who has chosen him.
CHOICE IN THE PERSON OF A MINISTER. 373
Such a step which had been taken in favor of James the second son, king
William the third, and the English nation, alledged as one of ine principal
reasons of the war which England soon after declared against France. All
the blandishments, and all the protestations of Lewis XIV. were of no
weight: the English accounted the acknowledgement of James' son as king
of England, Scotland, and Ireland, by the title of James the Third; an
outrage and injustice, both to the king and the nation. Vattel.
14. Whether Usurpers, or Governors in Chief, can send ſlmbassadors. It is
sufficient, that the prince who causes his Ambassadors to be acknowledged,
be in possession of the sovereignty: hence we may conclude, that he has
been expelled by a superior force, or by the insurrection of his subjects has
been obliged to withdraw, retains possession, till by a formal treaty he has
renounced the countries which have been conquered or usurped from him,
or till success has justified the arms of the subjects : he retains also the
right of embassy, because the sovereignty remains in him. PWicquefort.
15. Of the Choice between the different Orders. A power, possess-
ing the right of embassy in its full extent, has a right to choose with respect
to the order and number of the ministers it sends. However, 1. It may be
looked upon as an established custom, to send ministers of the same order
and in the same number as those received. 2. There are some embassies of
ceremony that are not received but in the order and number established by
a particular custom. 3. Sometimes it has been insisted on as a right, to
send several embassadors to courts from whom more than one had not been
refused. On the centrary, it often happens, particularly in Germany, that
one minister has letters of credence to several courts at once. Martens.
16. Of Choice in the Person of a Minister. The choice of the person
to be sent as minister, depends, of right, on the sovereign, who sends him;
leaving the right, however, of him to whom he is sent, of refusing to
acknowledge any one, to whom he has a personal dislike, or who is inad-
missible, by the laws and usages of the country. ib.
17. Age. At a mature age, only, is a man qualified for an embassy.
Such employs ought not to be given to young men. Cool blood for counsel,
and the warm for execution. Wicquefort.
18. The Prince may employ Strangers in his Embassies.There is no being
subject to two sovereigns, nor accountable for our actions to two different
princes; but by taking an oath to the one, we get out of the obligation we
had to the other; for there is no serving two masters, whose interest may be
quite different and contrary. -
It is believed that a king who judges that a sovereign has not a right to
lay claim to a subject that serves in the quality of a public minister to a for-
eign prince in another court, would never injure in his own, a Frenchman,
that should be there employed by another sovereign: as in effect it is judged
374, CREDENTIALS.
in that kingdom, that the character carries it against birth, and that nei-
ther the civil laws,nor local customs, any more than the particular ordinances
of princes,can destroy a rightestablished by the general consent of all people.
After many examples, (Mazarine, a Sicilian, &c.) that have instances
to confirm it, because that in reference to the law of nations, it is sufficient
to know what is every where practised, without there being any necessity to
sift scrupulously into the reason thereof.
In England, the subjects have a stronger and more particular obligation
to their Sovereign than elsewhere ; by virtue of the right which they call
allegiance. But that does not hinder the English from venturing out of the
kingdom, without the king’s permission, and when they have settled thein-
selves there, neither the king's authority, nor the laws of the kingdom, have
any farther power over them.
Since there is no being the subject of two princes, as I before observed,
and that he that goes out of the place of his birth, goes at the same time out
of the subjection of his own sovereign, it follows, that he enters into that
of a new sovereign, whose subject being become, he is obliged to obey him,
and to serve him even against the person of him who was his sovereign; but
being so no longer cannot desire of him any duties to the prejudice of the last;
and consequently, he cannot hinder him from discharging the functions of
Ambassador, nor from enjoying all the advantages and prerogatives that
are dependant thereon. Wicquéfort.
19. Of the Despatch ºf the Diplomatic Agent, and of the Establishment
of his Public Character. All that relates to the despatch [or outfit, or mis-
sion] of the diplomatic agent, and to his public character, is comprised under
three heads: 1. The Credentials. 2. The Instructions. S. The Plenipo-
tence, [or full powers.]
20. Of the Credentials. In order to be received in the character of
diplomatic agent by the state to which he is sent, and to enjoy the privileges
and honors attached to his rank, and which are recognised by the law of
nations, he is to be furnished with credentials.
This document from the sovereign by whom he is sent, addressed to the
powers by whom he is to be accredited, confirms the general object of the
mission, which ordinarily consists in the keeping up of a mutual good under-
standing.
The declaration of these motives appears in the document, and is express.
ed in terms obliging, and suitable to the relations subsisting between the two
courts; with regard, also, to the ceremonial, as well as to the mutual con-
nexions of interest and friendship.
After this introduction the minister is named in designating the quality
with which he is invested, and in praying the sovereign to whom he is sent
to place confidence [ajouter foil in whatever he shall say, on the part of his
court.
CREDENTIALS. 375
If the minister is charged with any particular business, mention is made
of it, but only in general terms; and the letter concludes with assurances of
friendship, which vary according to the different relations which subsist
between the two sovereigns, and the degree of honor which they reciprocally
accord each other.
In order that the sovereign to whom the credential letters are addressed
may be aware of their contents before they are transmitted to him by the
foreign minister, and to enable him to decide upon the admission of such
minister, as well as upon the ceremonial to be observed towards him, it is
usual either to forward him the letters under a flying seal [cachet volant]
or to expedite from the department of state, besides the original with the royal
signature and the great seal, a legalized copy which the diplomatic agent
forwards, immediately on his arrival, to the minister for foreign affairs,
demanding an audience of the sovereign in order to exhibit the original.
Although credential letters for ministers of the first class are usually
expedited, in form of letters of ceremony or of chancery, they would not
however, be less available were they prepared in form of cabinet letters
[lettres de cabinet] which form is at present most used by sovereigns for
ministers of the second and third class.
The powers of the minister, according to WIcquEFoRT, ceases either,
on the death of the prince whom he serves, or on the demise of the prince
near whose court he resides.
It is therefore necessary that he be accredited anew (which frequently
happens,) in the first case, by the mere letter of notification, which the
successor writes to the sovereign, near whom his minister resides, of the
death of his predecessor.
In the second case, the non-remittance of new credentials would induce
the supposition, that the new sovereign would not be recognised by the
prince whom the minister represents.
One letter of credential may suffice for two ministers sent at the same
time, if they be of the same order, as one minister may be charged with
several credentials when he is accredited near several courts at once, or
near one prince, but in various qualities.
It is seldom that an answer is given to a letter of credential, as in order
to take such steps the sovereign must have particular motives, such as the
choice of the minister sent to him, or that he regards his mission as a particu-
lar mark of esteem and friendship.
We must not confound letters of credentials with simple letters of recom-
mendation, of which the minister is sometimes bearer, and which are
addressed by his sovereign to princes or princesses of the family, or to one
of the principal functionaries of the sovereign near whom he is accredited,
or finally, to the magistrate of the place where he shall fix his residence.
Martens’ Manual.
376 CEREMONY OF RECEPTION.
21. Ceremony of Reception, on presenting a letter of credence at the
Court of London. The master of ceremonies advanced with me to the door.
Opening it, he left me. I entered alone. The Prince was standing, with
Lord Castlereagh [Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs] by him. Holding
in my hand the letter of credence, I approached, and said, that it was,
“From the President of the United States, appointing me their envoy ex-
traordinary and minister plenipotentiary at the court of his royal highness;
and that I had been directed by the President to say that I could in no way
better serve the United States, or gain his approbation, than by using all
my endeavors to strengthen and prolong the good understanding that hap-
pily subsisted between the two countries.” The Prince took the letter,
and handed it to Lord Castlereagh. He then said, that he would “Ever be
ready on his part to act upon the sentiments I had expressed: that I might
assure the President of this; for that he sincerely desired to keep up and
improve the friendly relations subsisting between the two nations, which he
regarded as so much to the advantage of both. I replied, that I would not
fail to do so. Rush’s Memoranda.
22. When it [the ceremony of reception] was over, I called upon each
member of the royal family: a mark of respect omitted by no foreign minister
after being received by the sovereign. The call is made by inscribing your
name in books kept at their several residences. ib.
23. Under the federal constitution, the form of receiving and accred-
iting public ministers, is exceedingly simple: the individual is presented
by the Secretary of State to the President in his House, (without any other
ceremony than takes place on the occasion of a common visit) when his cre-
dentials are examined. The constitution directs the President to “receive
ambassadors and other public ministers,” but this government does not make
the distinction, which, we believe, is maintained by the European states in
relation to agents of the rank of Chargé d'Affaires, and under, who are ac-
credited only by the Secretary, or Minister of Foreign Relations; whereas
all public officers, above the rank of Chargé, are accredited by the sovereign
in person. Lyman’s Diplomacy.
24. When a Minister goes to a foreign Government, he presents his
credentials to the head of the Government, accompanied by a speech, if he
thinks proper—but this latter is discretionary. This, however, is not strict-
ly a public address. Whenever, afterwards, any interchange of letters
become necessary, an audience is demanded of the Minister for the purpose
of presenting the letter, &c. There is one other occasion when a Minister
has the right to present an address. If he thinks that that Minister of the
Government, who holds diplomatic intercourse with him, is actuated by an
unfriendly disposition, and manifests it, by unfair and improper treatment,
he may demand an audience, and make his appeal to the head of the Gov-
ernment. Forsyth's Speech, in House of Rep.'s, Mpril 3, 1826.
RECEPTION.—LETTERS OF CREDENCE, 377
25. Letters of Credence are, for the most part, despatched out of the
chancery; that is to say, they are sealed with the small seal or signet, and
countersigned by a secretary of state, or by some other minister who dis-
charges that function. However, that is not absolutely necessary; as well be-
cause in Germany and other places, where the princes sign the despatches
themselves, they very rarely let them be countersigned, as because, it de-
pends on the prince to whom the minister is sent, to content himself with
the form that is given them: and he may have the same consideration for a
letter of the cabinet, as for a chancery despatch. PPicquefort.
26. Form of a Letter of Credence:
“...[ANDREw JACKSON] President of the United States of America, to [His Majesty
the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland] Great and good Friend.
Ihave made choice of [Louis McLANE) to reside near [Your Majesty] in quality of Envoy
Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America. He is
well informed of the relative interests of the two countries, and of our sincere desire to
cultivate and strengthen the friendship and good correspondence between us; and from a
Knowledge of his fidelity, probity, and good conduct, I have entire confidence that he will
render himself acceptable to [Your Majestyl by his constant endeavors to preserve and
advance the interests and happiness of both nations. I, therefore, request [Your Majesty]
to receive him favorably, and to give full credence to whatever he shall say on the part
of the United States; and most of all, when he shall assure you of their friendship, and
wishes for your prosperity; and I pray God to have [Your Majesty] in his safe and holy
Jeeping.
“Written at the City of Washington, [the day of , ſlnno Domini, one
*housand eight hundred and thirty ..] By Your good Friend [ANDREw JAckson.]
“[EDw ARD Livingston,) Secretary of State.”
27. The Credentials of diplomatic agents, of the class of Chargé
d’Affaires, are to the secretary of state for foreign affairs, not the sovereign.
Rush’s JHemoranda. -
28. Having brought from my government a Letter of Credence to the
Queen, I was presented to her. It was called a private presentation, and
took place at Buckingham palace. An exchange of notes with the master of
ceremonies, had made me acquainted with the previous arrangements. He
conducted me to the audience room, which I entered alone. Immediately
before me was the Queen. On her right, was one of the princesses, her
daughter, &c. All were in full court dresses, and all standing. Approaching
the Queen, I said:—“Having been accredited by his royal highness, the Prince
Regent, as Envoy Extraordinary and minister Plenipotentiary from the
United States, I have now the honor to present this letter to your majesty.
In executing the duties of my mission, I have it in charge from the President
so to bear myself, as to give hope of gaining your majesty’s esteem; and this
I beg to assure your majesty will be my constant ambition.” She received
the letter. As she took it, she said, that the sentiments I expressed were
very obliging; and entered into conversation. Rush’s Memoranda.
48
378 RECEPTION.—[NOTES].
Nores. Franklin and his colleagues went to court in a public manner. . They
were presented by Count de Vergennes to the King, who received them graciously;
they were afterwards presented to the Queen, to Monsieur, then Count de Provence,
and to all the royal family, then at Versailles. They were afterwards introduced to
the Count de Maurepas, first minister, &c.—Dr. Franklin was presented to the
King in the gallery of Versailles, by the Count de Vergennes, Minister for Foreign
Affairs. His age, his venerable appearance, the simplicity of his dress on such an
occasion, every thing that was either singular or respectable in the life of this Amer-
ican, contributed to augment the public attention. Clapping of hands, and a variety
of other demonstrations of joy, announced that warmth of affection, of which the
French are more susceptible than any other people, and of which their politeness
and civility augments the charm to him, who is the object of it.
His Majesty addressed him as follows:
“‘You may assure the United States of America of my friendship. I beg leave
also to observe that I am exceedingly satisfied in particular with your own conduct
during your residence in my kingdom.”—When the new ambassador after this
audience, crossed the court in order to repair to the office of the Minister of Foreign
Affairs, the multitude waited for him in the passage, and hailed him with their
acclamations.”%
Ceremonial of reception of M. Gerard, appointed by his Christian Majesty Min-
ister Plenipotentiary to the United States in the beginning of the year ’78; and of the
address made by the President.
“In pursuance of the ceremonial established by Congress, the Hon. Richard
Henry Lee, Esq. one of the delegates from Virginia, and the Hon. Samuel Adams,
Esq. one of the delegates from Massachusetts Bay, in a coach and six provided by
Congress, waited upon the minister at his house. In a few minutes, the Minister
and the two delegates entered the coach, Mr. Lee placing himself at the Minister’s
left hand, on the back seat, Mr. Adams occupying the front seat, the Minister’s char-
iot being behind, received his secretary. The carriages being arrived at the state
house in Philadelphia, the two members of Congress, placing themselves at the Min-
ister’s left hand, a little before one o’clock, introduced him to his chair in the Con-
gress chamber, the President and Congress sitting.—The Minister being seated, he
gave his credentials into the hands of his secretary, who advanced and delivered
them to the President. The secretary of Congress then read and translated them;
which being done, Mr Lee announced the Minister to the President and Congress;––
at this time, the President, the Congress, and the Minister rose together; he bowed
to the President and the Congress, they bowed to him; whereupon, the whole seated
themselves. In a moment the Minister rose and made a speech to Congress, they
sitting. The speech being finished, the Minister sat down, and giving a copy of his
speech to his secretary, he presented it to the President. The President and the
Congress then rose, and the President pronounced their answer to the speech, the
Minister standing. The answer being ended, the whole were again seated, and the
President, giving a copy of the answer to the secretary of Congress, he presented it
to the Minister. The President, the Congress, and the Minister then again rose
together: the Minister bowed to the President, who returned the salute, and then to
Congress, who also bowed in return; and the Minister having bowed to the President,
and received his bow, he withdrew, and was attended home in the same manner in
which he had been conducted to the audience. Within the bar of the house the Con-
gress formed a semi-circle on each side of the President and the Minister: The Presi-
dent sitting at one extremity of the circle at a table upon a platform elevated two
steps—the Minister sitting at the opposite extremity of the circle in an arm-chair
upon the same level with the Congress. The door of the Congress chamber being.
thrown open below the bar, about two hundred gentlemen were admitted to the au-º
dience, among whom were the Vice President of the Supreme Executive Council,
* Franklin appeared at court in the dress of an American cultivator. His straight;
unpowdered hair, his round hat, his brown cloth coat, formed a contrast with the laced and
embroidered coats, and the powdered and perfumed heads of the courtiers of Versailles,
RECEPTION.—[NOTES]. 379
of Pennsylvania, the Supreme Executive Council, the Speaker and members of the
House of Assembly, several foreigners of distinction, and officers of the army. The
audience being over, the Congress and the Minister at a proper hour repaired to an
entertainment given by the Congress to the Minister, at which were present by invi-
tation, several foreigners of distinction and gentlemen of public character. The
entertainment was conducted with a decorum suited to the occasion, and gave perfect
satisfaction to the whole company.
- IN CoNGREss, Aug. 6, 1778.
According to order, the honorable the Sieur Gerard being introduced to an audi-
ence by the two members for that purpose appointed, and being seated in his chair,
his secretary delivered to the President a letter from his most Christian Majesty,
which was read in the words following:
“Very dear, great friends and allies—
“The treaties which we have signed with you in consequence of the proposals
your Commissioners made to us in your behalf, are a certain assurance of our affec-
tion for the United States in general and for each of them in particular, as well as of
the interest we take and constantly shall take in their happiness and prosperity. It
is to convince you more particularly of this, that we have nominated the Sieur Ger-
ard, Secretary of our Council of State, to reside among you in the quality of our Min-
ister Plenipotentiary. He is better acquainted with our sentiments towards you and
the more capable of testifying the same to you, as he was intrusted on our part to
negotiate with your Commissioners, and signed with them the treaties, which cement
our union. We pray you to give full credit to all he shall communicate to you from
us, more especially when he shall assure you of our affection and constant friendship
for you. We pray God, very dear, great friends and allies, to have you in his holy
keeping. Your good friend and ally. [Signed] LOUIS.
“Versailles, March 18, 1778.
[Undersigned] GRAVIER DE VERGENNEs.
[Directed]—“To our very dear, gaeat friends, the President and members of the
General Congress of North America.”
Omitting the speech of M. Gerard, the following was the answer of the President
on the occasion:
“ Sir, The treaties between his most Christian Majesty and the United States
of America, so fully demonstrate his wisdom and magnanimity as to command the
reverence of all nations. The virtuous citizens of America, in particular, can never
forget his beneficent attention to their violated rights, nor cease to acknowledge the
the hand of a gracious Providence in raising them up so powerful and illustrious a
friend. It is the hope and opinion of Congress, that the confidence his Majesty re-
poses in the firmness of these States, will receive additional strength from every day’s
experience. This assembly are convinced, sir, that if it had rested solely with the
most Christian King, not only the independence of these States would have been
universally acknowledged, but their tranquillity fully established. We lament that
łust of domination which gave birth to the present war, and hath prolonged and
extended the miseries of mankind. We ardently wish to sheathe the sword and
spare the further effusion of blood; but we are determined by every means in our
power to fulfil those eventual engagements, which have acquired positive and perma-
ment force from the hostile designs and measures of the common enemy. Congress
have reason to believe, that the assistance so wisely and generously sent, will bring
Great Britain to a sense of justice and moderation, promote the common inierests of
France and America,and secure peace and tranquillity on the most firm and honorable
foundation. Neither can it be doubted that those, who administer the powers of
government within the several states of this Union, will cement that connexion with
the subjects of France, the beneficial effects of which have already been so sensibly
felt. Sir, from the experience we have had of your exertions to promote the true
interests of our country, as well as your own, it is with the highest satisfaction Con-
gress receives, as the first Minister from his most Christian Majesty, a gentleman
whose past conduct affords a happy presage, that he will merit the confidence of this
body, the friendship of its members, and the esteem of the citizens of America.”
380 RECEPTION.—[NOTESj.
John Adams,of Massachusetts, was chosen in February, 1785, minister plenipoten-
tary to the court of St. James; the first envoy sent to Great Britain by the United
States. Mr Adams arrived in England in the spring of the same year, and his first
note, dated Bath Hotel, May 26, 1785, in these words:
“Mr Adams has the honor to acquaint the Right Honorable the Marquis of Caer-
marthem, that he is just arrived in town with credentials from the United States of
America and desires to be informed what hour he may have the honour of paying his
respects to his Lordship.”
“Grosvenor Square, May 27.-Lord Caermarthen presents his compliments to
Mr Adams; and shall be glad to see Mr Adams this day about one o'clock in Gros-
venor Square, or at the office in Cumberland Row about four o’clock, which is ever
most convenient to Mr Adams.”
These aotes were immediately succeeded by the following:
“ St. James, May 27, '85.-Sir, I forgot to mention to you to day, when you did
me the honour to call upon me in Grosvenor Square, that it is customary for every
minister to send the Secretary of State a copy of the credential letters, that are directed
by their sovereigns to present to his Masjesty and the Queen. With regard to the
supscription, I find the credentials of the ministers from the States' General of the
United Provinces are only addressed, “Au Roi de la G. B.’ I believe I did mention to
you, Sir, that credential letters are always delivered, sealed, into his Majesty's
hands. “I am, Sir, &c. “ CAERMARTHEN.
“JoHN ADAMs, Esq., &c. &c. &c.”
LoNDoN, May 28, '85.—My Lord, I have received the letter your Lordship did me
the honour to write me yesterday, and have enclosed a copy of the credential letter,
I am directed by my sovereign to present to his Majesty. I am so unfortunate as not to
have any for the Queen. But I know the sentiments of my country and of Congress
so well, as to be sure, that it is not owing to any want of respect to her Majesty;--
probable it was merely the want of information, that there ever had been a precedent
of it.
“I beg leave to propose to your Lordship, that the superscription should be, to
his Majesty George the 3d, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland, Defender of
the Faith, &c. If your Lordship should not disapprove of this, I should prefer it to
the address of the United States’ Provinces, as being more respectful.”
“May 29.-This morning Sir Clement Cotterel Dormer, master of the ceremonies,
called on me to inform me, that he was ordered to attend me to Court on Wednesday,
as he did all foreign ministers at their first presentation.” Agreeable to previous
arrangements, the master of ceremonies called on me at one, and accompanied me to
the Secretary’s office, whence Lord Caermarthen accompanied me to the Palace, and
was in a very short time introduced to the King's closet, when with the usual cere-
mony I presented my letter of credence to his Majesty, and after a few minutes con-
versation retired. I have only time to observe, that I was introduced with every
necessary formality, and received with some marks of attention.”
“The master of ceremonies attended me in the anti-chamber, while the Secretary
of State went to take the commands of his Majesty. While I stood in this place,
where, it seems, all ministers stand upon such occasions, always attended by the
master of ceremonies, the room, very full of ministers of state, bishops and all other
sorts of courtiers, as well as the next room, which is the King's bed chamber, you
may well suppose, that I was the focus of all eyes. I was relieved from the embar-
rassment of it by the Swedish and Dutch ministers, who came to me and entertained
me with a very agreeable conversation the whole time. Some other gentlemen,
whom I had seen before, also came to make their compliments to me, till the Mar-
quis Caermarthen returned and desired me to go with him to his Majesty. I went
with his Lordship through the Levee room into the King’s closet. The door was
shut, and I was left with his Majesty and Secretary alone. I made the three reveren-
ces,one at the door, another about half way, and the third before the presence, accor-
ding to the usage established at this and all the northern courts of Europe, and then
addressed myself to His Majesty in the following words:
*Sir—The United States of America have appointed me their minister plenipoten-
RECEPTION.—[NOTES].-VISITS. 381
tiary to your Majesty, and have directed me to deliver to your Majesty this letter,
which contains the evidence of it. It is in obedience to their express commands, that
I have the honour to assure your Majesty of their unanimous disposition and desire
to cultivate the most liberal and friendly intercourse between his Majesty’s subjects
and their citizens, and of their best wishes for your Majesty’s health and that of the
royal family. The appointment of a minister from the United States to your Majesty's
Court will form an epocha in the history of England and America. I think myself
more fortunate than all my fellow citizens in having this distinguished honour to ap-
pear in your Majesty’s presence in a diplomatic character, and shall esteem myself
the happiest of men,if I can be instrumental in restoring an entire esteem, confidence
and affection, or, in other words, the good old nature and the good old humour be-
tween people, who, though separated by an ocean and under different governments,
have the same language, a similar religion, and kindred blood. I beg your Majesty’s
permission to add, that, though I have some time before been intrusted by my coun-
try, it was never in my whole life in a manner so agreeable to myself.” The King
listened to every word ; and heard me with dignity, but with apparent emotion;—
whether it was the nature of the interview, or my sensible agitation (for I felt more
than I could express, that touched him, I cannot say, but he was much affected, and
answered me with more tremor than I had spoken with.”
“Sir—The whole of this business is so extraordinary, that the feelings you disco-
ver on the occasion appear to me to be just and proper. I wish, sir, to be clearly
understood, before I reply to the obliging sentiments you have expressed in behalf of
the United States. I am, you may well suppose, the last person in England, that
consented to the dismemberment of the empire, by the independence of the new states;
and while the war was continued, I thought it due to my subjects to prosecute that
war to the utmost. But, sir, I have consented to the independence, and it is ratified
by treaty, and I now receive you as their minister plenipotentiary; and every attention
respect, and protection, granted to other plenipotentiaries, you shall receive at this
court. And, sir, as I was the last person that consented to the independence of the
United States, so I shall be the last person to disturb, or in any way infringe upon,
their sovereign independent rights; and I hope and trust, that from blood, religion,
manners, habits of intercourse, and almost every other consideration, the two nations
will continue, for ages, in friendship and confidence with each other.”
29. Visits. Having mentioned the members of the diplomatic corps, I will
allude to some of the forms that regulated their intercourse. Once, the uncer-
tainty of these led to difficulties, even wars. The congress of Vienna in
1815 extirpated them all, as far as questions of precedence were concerned;
and these had ever been found the most serious. It declared, that every
question of that nature should be settled by the rule of time. He who has
been longest at a court or government, is to be first. The relative power of
the nation he represents, is to count nothing. This is a rule satisfactory
to small states, and it is to the praise of large ones, that they established it.
It applies to all intercourse where competition can arise, whether of busi-
ness or ceremony; and therefore regulates Visits. The member of the corps
last arriving, pays the first. The rule does not overleap classes, applying
only to those of the same class. Rush’s JMemoranda.
30. The visits between ambassadresses are performed on the same foot-
ing as those between their husbands, with the difference of some trifling
points of etiquette, which it would be impossible to reduce to general rules.
The wives of ambassadors, and ministers, claim, at least, the same honours
at court as are granted to those ladies whose husbands are of an equal rank
with theirs. Note to Martens’ Law of Nations.
382 PRECEDENCE, &c.
31. Precedence. Arrangement, signed by the eight powers, parties to the
treaties of 1814–1815, to wit: Austria, Spain, France, Great Britain, Por-
tugal, Prussia, Russia, and Sweden, on this subject: -*
ART. 1. Diplomatic agents are divided into three classes. 1. Ambassa.
dors, Legates, or Nuncios. 2. Envoys, Ministers, and other agents
accredited by the Sovereigns. 3. Chargés d'Affaires, accredited by the
Department of Foreign Relations.
A RT. 2. Ambassadors, Legates, or Nuncios, are alone invested with a
representatative character.
ART. 3. Diplomatic agents sent on a mission extraordinary, are not
entitled, on this account, to a superior rank.
ART. 4. Diplomatic agents of the respective classes take rank accor-
ding to the date of the official notice of their arrival, The representatives
of the Pope are not affected by this article.
A RT. 5. Each State shall determine upon an uniform mode of receiving
diplomatic agents of the different classes.
ART. 6. Neither relationship, nor family or political alliances between
courts, confer rank upon their agents.
ART. 7. The order in which the signatures of Ministers shall be placed
in acts or treaties between several powers, that allow of the alternat, shall
be determined by lot. *
32. The United States have never sent or received an ambassador, in
the usual diplomatic sense of that term. Indeed, the form of our govern-
ment appears entirely to forbid it, while we confine ourselves to the European
meaning of the rank. An ambassador has a representative character; he
represents the person and dignity of his sovereign. “The preeminence of
ambassadors manifests itself chiefly in the particular ceremonial of their
reception in the country, where they are appointed to reside. They are
entitled to speak at the audiences they obtain, with heads covered, to keep
a canopy or throne in their dwellings,” &c. An ambassador of course,
is often employed to manage the affairs of his nation, like other public
ministers; but his representative character of the honor and dignity of the
sovereign, constitutes in his particular case, a minister of the first rank.
This latter quality an American minister cannot well possess; for he
represents nothing but the nation. The government, it is true, has a right
to require that ministers shall be received from them of the rank of ambassa-
dors, but the distinction will obviously depend upon something different
from the representation of the person of the sovereign. The English, we
believe, are not much in the habit of employing ambassadors; most of their
ministers being envoys, with full powers. But there are certain courts in
Europe to which it seems to be a sort of etiquette to send an ambassador.
GENERAL MATTERS. 333.
During the confederation, the public officers of the United States abroad
were called, either Chargés d'Affaires, Commissioners, or Ministers
Plenipotentiary. We are not aware that the confederation ever received or
employed an Envoy Extraordinary. At present the government has estab-
lished, by its practice, three classes, viz: Chargé d’Affaires, Minister
Plenipotentiary and Envoy Extraordinary. The Corps Diplomatic of this
country in Europe now consists either of Chargés d'Affaires, or Envoys
Extraordinary, with full powers. Lyman’s Diplomacy.
33. Ambassadors form an exception to the general case of foreigners
resident in the country, and they are exempted absolutely from all allegi-
ance, and from all responsibility to the laws of the country to which they are
deputed. As they are representatives of their sovereigns, and requisite for
negociations and friendly intercourse, their persons, by the consent of all
nations, have been deemed inviolable, and the instances are rare in which
popular passions, or perfidious policy, have violated this immunity. Some
very honourable examples of respect for the rights of ambassadors, even
when their privileges would seem, in justice, to have been forfeited on ac-
count of the gross abuse of them, are to be met with in the ancient Roman
annals; notwithstanding the extreme arrogance of their pretensions, and the
intemperance of their military spirit. If, however, ambassadors should be
so regardless of their duty, and of the object of their privilege, as to in-
sult, or openly attack the laws or government of the nation to whom they
are sent, their functions may be suspended by a refusal to treat with them,
or application can be made to their own sovereign for their recall, or they
may be dismissed, and required to depart within a reasonable time. We
have had instances, within our own times, of all these modes of dealing
with ministers who had given offence, and it is not to be denied, that every
government has a perfect right to judge for itself whether the language or
conduct of a foreign minister be admissible. The writers on public law go
still further, and allow force to be applied to confine or send away an am-
bassador, when the safety of the state, which is superior to all other consi-
derations, absolutely requires it, arising either from the violence of his
conduct, or the influence and danger of his machinations. This is all that
can be done; for ambassadors cannot, in any case, be made amenable
to the civil or criminal jurisdiction of the country ; and this has been the
settled rule of public law, ever since the attempt made in the reign of Eliza-
beth to subject the Scotch ambassador to criminal jurisdiction, and the
learned discussions which that case excited.” By fiction of law an ambassa-
dor is considered as if he were out of the territory of the foreign power; and
it is an implied agreement among nations, that the ambassador, while he re-
* See “ Immunities of Public Ministers, ’’
384 POWER TO RECEIVE PUBLIC MINISTERS.
sides within the foreign state, shall be considered as a member of his own
country, and the government he represents has exclusive cognizance of his
conduct, and control of his person. The attendants of the ambassador at-
tached to his person, and the effects in his use, are under his protection and
privilege, and equally exempt from the foreign jurisdiction, though there
are strong instances in which their inviolability has been denied and invaded.
The distinction between ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary, and en-
voys extraordinary, relates to diplomatic precedence and etiquette, and not
to their essential powers and privileges.
A state may be divided and distracted by civil wars, so as to render it inex-
pedient to acknowledge the supremacy of either party. Bynkershoeck says,
that this right of sending ambassadors belongs to the ruling party, in whom
stet rei agendi potestas. This is placing the right where all foreign govern-
ments place it, in the government de facto, which is the actual exercise of
power; but the government to whom the ambassador is sent, may exercise
its discretion in receiving, or refusing to receive him.
It sometimes becomes a grave question, in national discussions, how far
the sovereign is bound by the act of his minister. This will depend upon
the nature and terms of his authority. It is now the usual course for every
government to reserve to itself the right to ratify or dissent from the treaty
agreed to by its ambassador. A general letter of credence is the ordinary
letter of attorney, or credential of the minister, and it is not understood to
confer a power upon the minister to bind his sovereign conclusively. To do
so important an act would require a distinct and full power, containing an
express authority to bind the principal definitely, without the right of review,
or the necessity of ratification on his part. This is not the ordinary or pru-
dent course of business. Ministers always act under instructions which
are confidential, and which, it is admitted, they are not bound to disclose;
and it is a well grounded custom, as Wattel observes, that any engagement
which the minister shall enter into is of no force annong sovereigns, unless
ratified by his principal. This is now the usage, although the treaty may
have been signed by plenipotentiaries. Kent’s Commentaries.
34. The Power to receive Ambassadors and JMinisters is always an im-
portant, and sometimes avery delicate function; since it constitutes the only
accredited medium, through which negotiations and friendly relations are
ordinarily carried on with foreign powers. A government may in its dis-
cretion lawfully refuse to receive an ambassador, or other minister, without
its affording any just cause of war. But it would generally be deemed an
unfriendly act, and might provoke hostilities, unless accompanied by con-
ciliatory explanations. A refusal is sometimes made on the ground of the
bad character of the minister, or his former offensive conduct, or of the spe-
cial subject of the embassy not being proper, or convenient for discussion,
p0WER TO RECEIVE PUBLIC MINISTERS. 383
This, however, is rarely done. But a much more delicate occasion is when
a civil war breaks out in a nation, and two nations are formed, or two par-
ties in the same nation, each claiming the sovereignty of the whole, and the
contest remains as yet undecided, flagrante bello. In such a case a neutral
nation may very properly withhold its recognition of the supremacy of either
party, or of the existence of two independent nations; and on that account
refuse to receive an ambassador from either. It is obvious, that in such cases
the simple acknowledgement of the minister of either party, or nation, might
be deemed taking part against the other; and thus as affording a strong coun-
tenance, or opposition, to rebellion and civil dismemberment. On this ac-
count, nations, placed in such a predicament, have not hesitated sometimes
to declare war against neutrals, as interposing in the war; and have made
them the victims of their vengeance, when they have been anxious to assume
a neutral position. The exercise of this prerogative of acknowledging new
nations, or ministers, is, therefore, under such circumstances, an executive
function of great delicacy, which requires the utmost caution and delibera-
tion. If the executive receives an ambassador, or other minister, as the
representative of a new nation, or of a party in a civil war in an old nation,
it is an acknowledgment of the sovereign authority de facto of such new
nation, or party. If such recognition is made, it is conclusive upon the na-
tion, unless indeed it can be reversed by an act of congress repudiating it.
If, on the other hand, such recognition has been refused by the executive, it
is said, that congress may, notwithstanding, solemnly acknowledge the so-
vereignty of the nation, or party. These, however, are propositions, which
have hitherto remained, as abstract statements, under the constitution; and,
therefore, can be propounded, not as absolutely true, but as still open to discus-
sion, if they should ever arise in the course of our foreign diplomacy. The
constitution has expressly invested the executive with power to receive am-
bassadors, and other ministers. It has not expressly invested congress with
power, either to repudiate, or acknowledge them. At all events, in the
case of a revolution, or dismemberment of a nation, the judiciary cannot
take notice of any new government, or sovereignty, until it has been duly
recognised by some other department of the government, to whom the power
is constitutionally confided.
That a power, so extensive in its reach over our foreign relations,
could not be properly conferred on any other, than the executive department,
will admit of little doubt. That it should be exclusively confided to that
department, without any participation of the senate in the functions, (that
body being conjointly entrusted with the treaty-making power,) is not so
obvious. Probably the circumstance, that in all foreign governments the
power was exclusively confided to the executive department, and the utter
49
$86 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.
impracticability of keeping the senate constantly in session, and the sudden-
ness of the emergencies, which might require the action of the government,
conduced to the establishment of the authority in its present form. It [the
power to receive public ministers] is not, indeed, a power likely to be abused;
though it is pregnant with consequences, often involving the question of
peace and war. And, in our own short experience, the revolutions in France,
and the revolutions in South America, have already placed us in situations,
to feel its critical character.
As incidents to the power to receive ambassadors and foreign minis-
ters, the president is understood to possess the power to refuse them, and to
dismiss those who, having been received, become obnoxious to censure, or
unfit to be allowed the privilege by their improper conduct, or by political
events. While, however, they are permitted to remain, as public functiona-
ries, they are entitled to all the immunities and rights, which the law of
nations has provided at once for their dignity, their independence, and their
inviolability. Story’s Commentaries.
35. Instructions. The instructions given by the sovereign to his
minister, are intended to instruct him in the course of conduct which he is
to observe, during the term of his mission, as well towards the court to which
he is sent, the members of the diplomatic corps, &c. as relatively to the
particular object of his mission. As these comprise, moreover, a collection
of designs, views and motives, calculated to shew the spirit and drift of the
cabinet, the following observations will not be deemed irrevalent:
The minister should require that his instructions be precise and detailed;
he should not forget, that the more general they are, the more responsible
he becomes for the consequences; and in order to avoid such a dilemma, he
should scrupulously examine all the points, require an explanation of what-
ever he may find obscure or ambiguous, to alter any article he may judge
hostile to the success of his negociation, to remove [or expunge] any arti-
cle which might render his conduct suspicious or odious, and to cause to
be inserted whatever might facilitate the negociation. He should, more-
over, endeavor to foresee the different situations in which he may be placed,
the different turns which the affairs with which he is charged may take: it
is only by proposing his doubts in this manner, that he can fully inform
himself, and fully supply what may have been overlooked, or have escaped
the closest attention of those who have drawn up his instructions. He will
find it also much his advantage to discuss, as we may say, with the Secre-
tary of State, the matters with which he is charged, in order the better to
become acquainted with their entire object and extent.
Independently of the first instructions received by the diplomatic agent
on reaching his destination, the letters transmitted to him by his sovereign
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS. 387
or the minister for foreign affairs, during the term of his mission, should be
regarded as new instructions, or the developement of the old ones.
The instructions are designed for the minister only, and consequently
are not to be communicated, without an order from his court, or, unless
from some particular motives, he believes himself authorised to communicate
some points of them. It often happens also, that two sets of instructions
are made out: one arranged for exhibition, in case of need, the other secret
and for the sole use of the minister.
It results from the very nature of the instructions, that they ought to be
of infinite diversity, according to the end and object of each mission. It
would, therefore, be impossible to enumerate all the points which should
enter into their composition. JMartens’ Manual.
36. Send an able man, and let him act as he shall think fit. Wicquefort.
37. The instructions are a secret instrument, which the Ambassador
is not obliged to communicate to the court where he negociates; nay, I
dare affirm, that he ought not to produce it, without a necessity, and an
express order. In the year 1560, Queen Elizabeth, sent into Scotland,
Robert Bowes, with orders to make pressing instances to have the Duke of
Lenox removed from the king’s person, who was at that time very young.
Those of the Council of Scotland said, that it was so severe and unjust a
thing, that not being able to believe the Queen had given him any such
orders, they desired to see them. Bowes said he would not shew them, and
that all he could do, was to let the king, and two or three of his confidants,
see them. The Scotch were not satisfied there with. But the queen was so
displeased at their procedure, that she recalled her ambassador, and refused
to give audience to him they sent to justify their actions.
In the year 1643, Walter Strickland, minister from the parliament of
London, presented a memorial to the states general, wherein he spoke of the
prince of Orange with little respect. He was urged to shew his orders; but it
was a kind of violence which could not well be justified. They that did it, either
did not reflect on what they did, or else they were very willing to offend his
master. We have seen within some years a minister, who having been sent
by a powerful state to one of the first princes of Germany, began his negotia-
tions, by laying his instructions on the table. But all that can be said of it
is, that it was the action of a fool, in the utmost extent of the signification
of that epithet. It is an unheard of thing, that a minister has been compel-
led to shew his orders, and they who force him to do it, offer violence to the
law of nations.
The ambassador after he has presented his letters of credence, and had
them approved, ought to enjoy the effect thereof, purely, and simply; and
has no farther occasion to fortify, or authorise, his negotiation by producing
388 PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS.
other instruments, unless he be invited, or that he himself desires to make
a particular treaty, for which he must necessarily have a special power. ib.
38. The instructions given to the minister contain the master’s secret
mandate: the orders to which the minister must carefully conform, and which
limit his powers. Vattel.
39. Personal Instructions to the Diplomatic Agents of the United States,
in Foreign Countries:
The following Regulations and Instructions have been adopted by the
Department of State, and are prescribed for the government of the Diploma-
tic Agents of the United States in Foreign Countries—
40. Presentation. On receiving his instructions from the Department of
State, the Diplomatic Agent will proceed, with as little delay as possible,
unless otherwise expressly directed, and by such route and conveyance, as
his own convenience, if not incompatable with the public interest, may
suggest, to the seat of the Government to which he is accredited, where he
will establish his residence, and where he will be put in possession of
the archives, papers, seals and books of the Legation, if a mission of the United
States, shall have previously existed there. On his arrival he will inform
the Minister of Foreign Affairs, or other official diplomatic organ of the
Government, of that fact, and request to be informed of the time, manner
and place, at which he may be admitted to present his Letter of Credence.
If the Diplomatic Agent be of the rank of Minister Plenipotentiary, and
bearer of a Letter of Credence addressed to the Chief of the Government,
he will, on asking an audience for the purpose of delivering the original to
him, in person, communicate to the Minister of Foreign Affairs the office
copy of such Letter, with which he shall have been furnished for that pur-
pose by this Department. In performing all the ceremonies connected with
his official reception, he will conform to the established usage of the Country
in which he is to reside, and with the rules prescribed for agents of his rank.
41. Uniform. From a proper degree of respect to what is understood to be
the usage adopted by some Governments, requiring the members of the Di-
plomatic Body accredited near them, to wear a court dress upon certain oc-
casions, such as their presentation to the Sovereign or chief executive officers.
The President has thought proper to adopt the following, as the dress to be
used by the Diplomatic Agents of the United States, upon all such occasions,
being recommended as well by its comparative cheapness as by its adaptation
to the simplicity of our institutions: viz.:-A black coat, with a gold star on
each side of the collar near its termination ; the under clothes to be black
or white, at the option of the wearer; a three-cornered chapeau de bras,
with a black cockade and gold eagle; and a steel-mounted sword with a
white scabbard. It is to be understood, however, that the use of this particu-
PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS. 389
lar dress is not prescribed by The President. It is barely suggested, by his
direction, as an appropriate and convenient uniform dress for the use of the
Diplomatic Agents of the United States residing near Foreign Governments.
42. Compensation. The compensation allowed to Ministers and other Diplo-
matic Agents of the United States, is fixed by law, and is intended to cover
all personal and other eapenses. Under this denomination are not included,
however, those incurred in the purchase of, or subscription to, gazettes and
pamphlets, transmitted to this Department; of postage, stationary, necessary
and customary presents to the menial attendants of Public Functionaries at
the presentation of the Diplomatic Agent, and on other established occasions
(usually the Christmas and New Year's days) but will form, under the
head of Contingencies of the Legation, a separate charge in his accounts.
For his compensation, actually due, and the contingent expenses of the Lega-
tion, actually incurred, the Diplomatic Agent is authorised, by special in-
structions, to draw either upon the Department of State, or upon the Ban-
kers of the United States designated in said instructions; but in availing
himself of this authorisation, he is to be careful not to exceed, in the amount
drawn, the sum to which he may be entitled, in account with the United
States, at the dates of his drafts. -
43. Accounts. No contingent expenses are to be incurred without ne-
cessity, unless in compliance with the established usages; and no charge of
any other description will be admitted, not warranted by express directions
from this Department. Exact vouchers, in all cases of expenditures, will
be necessary for the settlement at the Treasnry of the accounts of the Mis-
sion; and as some of the incidental charges, coming under this denomina-
tion, are of a nature scarcely admitting of any other sort of voucher for
every item, a separate account should be kept and certified, either by the
Secretary of Legation, or by the Chargé d'Affaires, himself. These particu-
lars are thus minutely stated in order to remove all doubts and uncertainty
on the subject of public accounts, which it is to be remembered, are to be
regularly transmitted, by duplicates, for adjustment at the Treasury, at the
close of every quarter, ending with March, June, September and December.
The foregoing directions, and particularly that of forbearing to draw for
any public money in advance, and that requiring the regular quarterly
transmission of the accounts of the Legation for settlement, are rendered
the more indispensable for the due observance of the act of Congress “con-
cerning the disbursement of public money,” approved the 31st of January,
1823, (see acts of the 2d Session 17th Congress. 7th vol. p. 113.)
44. Archives and Books of the Legation. All the printed books deliver-
ed at the Department of State to Diplomatic Agents, found by them at
the Legation, or procured for its use at the public expense, are the property
of the United States, and being intended for the special use of their several
Legations, are to remain permanently with their archives, and to be trans-
390 PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS.
mitted by each agent to his successor in office, or to such person as may be
designated by the Department of State to take charge of them at the termi-
nation of the Mission. All the records kept in the office of the Legation,
and all the original documents received and filed there, in the course of
business, 3 T€ likewise Public property, and constitute the archives of the
Mission. Particular care is therefore to be observed, that the papers of
every description, being of an official character and connected with public
business, be kept well arranged, so that easy reference may be had to them
in all future time: and that a record of the official despatches, letters and
notes written at the Legation, be carefully and punctually made and preser-
ved, as part of its archives.
45. Cypher. On taking charge of the Legation, the Diplomatic Agent
will either find amongst its papers, or be furnished by the Department of
State, with a Cypher to be used by him in his correspondence with his Gov-
ernment, or with other Agents of the United States in Foreign Countries,
on occasions when the confidential or secret nature of the information to be
communicated, shall render it proper.
46. Commercial Regulations. By resolutions of the Senate of the 3d,
of March, 1817, and the House of Representatives of the 21st January,
1823, The President was requested to cause to be collected, digested
printed, and laid before those Houses, respectively, so much of the treaties,
lawsand regulations of the different Foreign Countries with which the
United States have commercial intercourse, as relates to import, export,
tonnage, light-money, pilotage and port-duties; to bounties and drawbacks;
to colonial trade and navigation; to the national character of mariners; and
to the ship’s papers and navigation of such foreign countries, respectively
specifying the comparative footing of the national and foreign ships employed
in any branch of such commercial intercourse. In compliance with these
Resolutions, digests were prepared at this Department, and laid before
Congress in 1819 and 1824, of which copies will be found among the books
of all the missions of the United States abroad. Since their publication, the
laws and regulations from which they were compiled, have undergone and
are daily undergoing alterations and modifications consequent upon the
various changes in the commercial policy of nations. As it is interesting
that this Department should be kept acquainted with the subject, in all its
details, it is made the duty of the Diplomatic Agents of the United States to
communicate, from time to time, to their Government, such alterations and
modifications as may take place in the commercial legislation of the countries
in which they respectively reside, following, as their guide in the inquiries
and investigation necessary for that object, the parts already digested in the
publications referred to.
47. Information to be transmitted to the Department. Amongst the
most important general duties of a minister or other Diplomatic Agent of the
PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS. 391
United States in foreign countries, is that of transmitting to his own Gov-
ernment accurate information of the policy and views of that to which he is
ccredited, and of the character and vicissitudes of its important relations
with other Powers. To acquire this information, and particularly to dis-
criminate between that which is authentic, and that which is spurious, re-
quires steady and impartial observation, a free, though cautious correspon-
dence with the other Agents of the United States abroad, and friendly social
relations with the members of the Diplomatic Body at the same place.
In their correspondence with the Department of State, besides the cur-
rent, general and particular politics of the country where they are to reside,
the Diplomatic Agents of the United States will be mindful, as they may find
it convenient, to transmit information of every kind, relating to the Govern-
ment, finances, commerce, arts, sciences and condition of the nation, not
already known, and which may be made useful to the United States.
Books of travels containing statistical or other information of political im-
portance, historical works not before in circulation, authentic maps published
by authority of the State, or distinguished by extraordinary reputation, and
publications of new and useful discoveries, will always be acceptable acqui-
sitions to this Department. The expense of procuring and transmitting all
such books, maps, and pamphlets, are to form a separate charge to the De-
partmcnt; but none of any considerable amount is to be incurred in any one
account, without a previous express direction for it from this office.
48. Signing ºf Treaties, &c. It is the practice European Govern-
ments,in the drawing up of their treaties with each other, to vary the order of
naming the parties and that of the signatures of the Plenipotentiaries, in the
counterparts of the same treaty, so that each party is first named, and its
plenipotentiary signs first, in the copy possessed and published by itself.
And, in treaties drawn up between parties using different languages, and
executed in both, each party is first named, and its Plenipotentiary signs,
first, in the copy executed in its own language. This practice having, on
several occasions, been accidentally or inadvertently omitted to be observed
by the United States, the omission was followed by indications of a dispo-
sion in the negotiators of certain royal European Governments to question
its applicability to treaties between them and the United States. It became,
therefore, proper to insist upon it, as was accordingly done with effect. As it
is understood to involve a principle, it is to be considered as a standing
instruction to the Diplomatic Agents of the United States to adhere to this
practice, called “alternate,” in all cases where they shall have occasion to
sign, in their public capacity, any Treaty, Convention, or other document,
with the Plenipotentiaries of other powers.
49. Consuls. In the practice of the Government of the United States,there
is no immediate connexion or dependence between persons holding diplomatic
392 PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS.
consular appointments in the same country; but, by the usage of all the com-
mercial nations of Europe, such a subordination is considered as of course.
In the transaction of their official duties, the Consuls are often in necessary
correspondence with their Ministers, or Chargés d'Affaires, through whom
alone they can regularly address the Government of the Country in which
they reside, and they are always supposed to be under their direction. The
Diplomatic Agents will accordingly maintain such correspondence with the
Consuls of the United States in the countries to which they are accredited,
as they will think conducive to the public interest; and, in case of any va-
cancy in their offices, which may require the temporary appointment of a fit
person to perform the duties of the Consulate, such appointment will be made
by the Minister or Chargé d'Affaires, with the consent of the Government of
the Country in which he resides, he giving immediate notice thereof to this
Department.
50. Passports. Among the ordinary functions of an American Diplomatic
Agent abroad, is that of giving passports to Citizens of the United States
who apply for them. They sometimes receive applications for such pass-
ports from citizens of other countries; but these are not regularly valid, and
should be granted only under special circumstances, as may sometimes
occur in the case of foreigners coming to the United States. In times of
war and internal commotions, such passports are often solicited, and some-.
times sought, by fraudulent means, to be obtained, to favor the escape of
individuals having no right to such protection, and being in peril of their
persons. As such applications may be made to all our Ministers and Chargés
d’Affaires abroad, their vigilance should be exercised in guarding against
such impositions, and their firmness in resisting such solicitations. Respect
for the passport of an American Minister abroad is indispensable for the
safety of his fellow-citizens travelling with it; and nothing would be so fatal
to that respect as the experience that his passport had been abusively obtain-
ed by persons not entitled to it. All passports should be gratuitously given,
and a record or list of all those which may be delivered, containing the name
and voucher of American citizenship of the person to whom they are given,
should be kept in the office of the Legation. They may be refused even to
citizens of the United States, who have so far expatriated themselves as to
have become bound in allegiance to other nations, or who in any other man-
ner have forfeited the protection of their own. Protections to seamen are
not included under the denomination of passports, nor are they even granted
by Public Ministers, Seamen may, nevertheless, like other citizens, occa-
sionally want the passport of the Minister, and be equally entitled to it.
51. Presents. A custom prevails, among the European Sovereigns, upon
the conclusion of treaties, of bestowing presents of jewelry, or other articles of
pecuniary value, upon the minister of the Power with which they are nego-
PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS. 393
f
tiated: the same usage is repeated upon the Minister's taking leave, at the
termination of his mission. The acceptance of such presents by Agents of
the United States is expressly prohibited by the Constitution; and, even if it
were not, it can scarcely be consistent with the delicacy of intercourse with
foreign Powers, for our Ministers to receive from those Powers, or from the
persons administering their Governments, such favors as their own Agents
in the United States can never receive from our Executive in return. The
usage, exceptionable in itself, could only be tolerated by its being reciprocal.
It is therefore expected that every offer of such present, which may, in fu-
ture, be made to any Diplomatic Agent, or other officer of this Government,
in foreign countries, will be respectfully, but decisively declined. This hav-
ing already been a standing instruction to all our Agents abroad, for several
years, the rule is, probably, so well known as to prevent the offer of such
presents in future; but should there be any reason to expect it, informal no-
tice that it cannot be accepted, given in the proper quarter, by the Agent to
to whom it is to be made, would avoid the apparent harshness of declining
an intended favor, by anticipating the necessity of a refusal.
52. Forms of Despatches. It has been found highly convenient and
useful in the transaction of business in the Department of State, to have the
original despatches from our Ministers abroad bound up in volumes. For
this purpose, and with a view to uniformity, those despatches should be
regularly numbered; and, together with the copies made at the Legation of
all papers transmitted with them, should be written on paper of the same
dimensions, 13+ inches long, 83 broad, and a margin of at least 13 inch
around all its borders, for stitching, and cutting of the edges, without
injury to the text. A sample of the paper is furnished by this Department,
with a set of lines adapted to its size, and marking the margin within which
the manuscript should be confined; of which the instructions from this De-
partment also exhibit an example.
It would further conduce to the convenience of the Department, if short
marginal references were made in the official communications of the Agents
of the United States abroad, of the several subjects treated of by them, so
as to exhibit at once the parts of their despatches to which particular atten-
tion may occasionally be required. The marginal notes in these instruc-
tions may be followed as a guide in this respect.
Minute as these particulars appear, they are found to be very essential
to the good order and convenience of business in the Department of State; a
strict adherence to them is therefore enjoined upon the Diplomatic Agents
of all grades, representing the United States in foreign countries.
53. Ambassador's Powers. The powers with respect to an ambassa-
dor, are nothing else than what a letter of attorney is, in reference to a
private person.
S94 AMBASSADOR'S POWERS.
&
- The powers are an essential instrument of the embassy, when a treaty
is either to be made or concluded, or a particular affair of importance nego-
tiated: in which case it behoves each party to be sure of the other, as to the
execution thereof.
A general power of what extent soever, and whatever clauses may be
added thereto, is not sufficient for a particular treaty.
In ordinary affairs, the ambassador has no need of a special power. The
Portugal ambassador disputing the rank with that of Hungary at the council
of Trent, said this latter had no authentic powers; but the fathers of the
council declared, that the letters of credence were sufficient. And indeed,
there are a thousand occasions, and a thousand affairs, wherein powers are
not only unnecessary, but also where they would be altogether of no use;
and there are very few embassies where it is requisite to employ plenipo-
tentiaries.
Powers are not so necessary to the ministers who are the bearers thereof,
as to the commissioners or ambassadors that treat with them, and whom it
behoves to be well assured, that what they shall negotiate and treat of, with
the plenipotentiaries, shall be approved of and ratified, although the powers
how ample and absolute soever they may be, have always some relation to
the secret orders the ministers receive, which may be changed and altered,
and often are according to the conjunctures and revolutions of affairs.
The powers ought not to be limited at all, nor refer to the instructions;
because being conditional, they would no longer be a full power.
It is certain, that the powers are at least as necessary to him that treats
with the minister, as to the minister himself, as it will appear by the follow-
ing example : the invasion with which Philip the Bold, King of France,
threatened the kingdom of Arragon, in the year 1285, obliged the king,
Peter the Great, to send to Sancho the Brave, king of Castile, a gentleman
whose name was Peter de Bolea, to endeavor to bring him into his interest.
This gentleman, who for all powers had only a simple letter of credence,
was at a great loss, finding the king of Castile very little disposed to act for
the interest of the king of Arragon; insonuch, that being apprehensive least
he should declare in favor of France, he told him, that if he would but pro-
mise to remain neuter, the king of Arragon would give him the town of Cala-
tayud, after the war was at an end. Sancho remained neuter, and perceiving
that Peter had made an advantageous peace enough with France, he demand-
ed of him the town Bolea had promised him. The king of Arragon said,
that the gentleman he had sent him, had neither order nor power to promise
any thing; but that he might not be wanting in any thing he owed to a king
whose friendship was dear to him, he sent him back the gentleman, to be
disposed of by him, as he pleased. Bolea acknowledged to the king of Cas-
tile, that he had no orders to offer him any thing; but that it was the great
~
AMBASSAI) OR'S POWERS. S95
affection for the king his master, which had obliged him to make those offers;
thereby to put him out of those dangers, the junction of the arms of France
with those of Castile made altogether inevitable. The king of Castile com-
mended his zeal, and what he had done; treated him, and sent him back to
his master. He could blame nobody but himself, for having too lightly given
credit to the saying of a minister, who, according to the rules of his profes-
sion, did not scruple mingling a little artifice with his probity. Provided
ambassadors do but gain their point, they do not make much scruple about
the means. The king of Castile ought to have had this promise in writing;
and before he accepted of it, have had an authentic copy of the power by
virtue of which it was made. And the king of Arragon, on his side, who
would have the king of Castile give credit to what that gentleman should
say to him on his part, was not obliged to own all that his envoy had done
without orders; and he did more than he was obliged to do, in putting into
the hands of the king of Castile, the person of whom he might complain for
having cheated him; but who, however, had done a very signal service to his
imaSter.
Sometimes a minister may be treated with, although he may have no
powers, provided he be of quality sufficient to make what he does be approv-
ed, and that he hāve authority enough for that purpose.
Although there be no safety at all to conclude with a minister who has
no powers, and that there be none even to enter into a negotiation with him,
whose powers have not their due form, yet it is sufficient, however, that he
who, notwithstanding that, is willing to negotiate with a minister who has
no powers, or whose powers are imperfect, is contented there with.-
Wicquefort.
54. Every minister charged with a negociation, properly so called,
ought to be furnished with a full power indicating the degree of authority,
with which he is intrusted, and upon the faith of which a negociation can be
begunjwith him. It should be expressly mentioned, if the minister be only
authorised to hear propositions, to report, to propose, or to conclude them:
and when there are several ministers, if they are authorised to act separately.
The full power may be inserted in the credentials, but the more usual
method is to prepare one separately in form of letters patent. The minis.
ters sent to a congress, a diet, &c., are not usually furnished with creden-
tials; they have merely a full power which serves them for a legitimation,
and they interchange the certified copies, or place them in the hands of the
minister (directeur & mediateur) if there be one.
It is not much in usage at present to furnish a minister with a full power
to authorise him to treat with all foreign powers, and which is denominated
“actus ad omnes populos.” Martens’ Manual.
396 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES.
55. Ambassadors inviolable in their Persons.—Declaration of Hol-
land, in 1651:
(Extract.) Whereas, according to the law of nations, and even that of barba-
rians, the persons of ambassadors, residents, and the other like public ministers, of
kings, princes, and republics, are every where held in such esteem, that no person
whatever dare offend, injure or damnify them; but on the contrary, they are in posses-
sion of being respected, highly considered, and honored by every body; nevertheless,
forasmuch, as we are informed, that some insolent, outrageous, and dissolute per-
sons, have dared to undertake and act the contrary to what is above recited, in refer-
ence to some public ministers who have been sent to this Estate, and who reside in
our Province: we being willing to provide against the like ahuses for the future,
have thought fit to ordain very expressly by this our Declaration, and to prohibit
and forbid very seriously by the presents, That no person of what nation, state, qual-
ity, or condition soever, presume to offend, endamage, injure by word, deed, or look,
the ambassadors, residents, agents, or other ministers, of kings, princes, ropublics,
or others, having the quality of public ministers, or to offer them any injury or insult,
directly or indirectly, in any manner or kind whatsoever, in their persons; gentlemen
of their retinue, servants, houses, coaches, and other things that may belong to them,
or depend on them, under the penalty of incurring our utmost indignation, and of
being bodily punished, as violators of the law of nations, and disturbers of the public
quiet. The whole according to the nature and exigency of the case. Commanding
all the inhabitants of this province, and all those who shall there be present, that on
the contrary they shew all manner of honor, and pay all respect to this sort of min-
isters; and even to give them, as also to their domestics, and to those of their retinue,
all aid and assistance, and to contribute whatever may be serviceable to their honor,
and be aiding to their service and conveniency. Ordaining and commanding the first
and the other counsellors of the court of this province, as also all officers, justices and
magistrates, and all those to whom it shall belong, to proceed against the transgres-
sors by the execution of the penalties above mentioned, without any manner of conni-
vance or dissimulation whatever. Done at the Hague, under our Great Seal the 29th
of March, 1651. Wicquefort.
56. Of the Rights, Privileges and Immunities of Ambassadors, and
other Public Ministers. A respect due to sovereigns should reflect on their
representatives, and chiefly on their ambassadors, as representing his master’s
person, in the first degree. Whoever affronts or injures a public minister
commits a crime the more deserving a severe punishment, as thereby the
sovereign and his country might be brought into great difficulties and trouble.
It is just that he should be punished for his fault, and that the state should,
at the expence of the delinquent, give a full satisfaction to the sovereign af-
fronted in the person of his minister. If a sovereign minister offends a citizen,
the latter u,ay oppose him without departing from the respect due to the
character, and give him a lesson which shall both effice the stain of the out-
rage and expose the author of it. The person offended may further preſer a
complaint to his sovereign, who will demand of the minister’s master a just
satisfaction. The great concerns of the state forbid a citizen, on such occa-
sions, to entertain those thoughts of revenge which the point of honor might
suggest, though otherwise allowable. Even according to the maxims of the
world, agentleman receives no disgrace by an affront for which it is not in
his power, of himself, to procure satisfaction. Wattel.
57. Their Person sacred and Inviolable. The necessity and right of em-
bassies being established, the perfect security, the inviolability of ambassa-
PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES. 397
dors, and other ministers, is a certain consequence of it; for if their person
be not defended from violence of every kind, the right of embassies become
precarious, and the success very uncertain. A right to the end is a right to
the necessary means. Embassies then being of such great importance in the
universal society of nations, and so necessary to their common well being,
the person of ministers charged with this embassy is to be held sacred and
inviolable among all nations. Whoever offers any violence to an ambassador,
or any other public minister, not only injures the sovereign whom this minis-
ter represents, but he also hurts the common safety and well-being of na-
tions: he becomes guilty of an atrocious crime towards the whole world. ib.
58. Particular Protection due to them. This safety is particularly due
to the ministers, from the sovereign to whom he is sent. To admit a minister
to acknowledge him in such quality, is engaging to grant him the most par-
ticular protection, and that he shall enjoy all possible safety. A sovereign is
indeed to protect every person within his dominions, whether native or for-
eigner, and shelter him from violence; but this attention is in a higher degree
due to a foreign minister. A violence done to a private person is a common
trespass, which, according to circumstances, the prince may pardon: but if
done to a public minister, it is a crime of state, an offence against the law of
nations. A pardon of this does not depend on the prince in whose country the
crime has been committed, but on him who has been offended in the person
of his representative. However, if the minister has been insulted by persons
ignorant of his character, the fault does not affect the law of nations, but
comes within the case of common trespasses. Some dissolute young fellows
in a town of Switzerland having, in the night-time, insulted the English minis-
ter’s house, not knowing who lived there, the magistracy sent a message to
the minister to know what satisfaction he required. He wisely answereu,
that it was the magistrate’s concern to vindicate the public as they should
judge proper; but as for himself he required nothing, not thinking himself
affronted by persons who could have no design on him, as not knowing his
house. Another particular circumstance in the protection of foreign minis-
ters is this: according to the wretched maxims introduced by a false point
of honor, a sovereign is under a necessity of shewing indulgence towards a
person wearing a sword, who instantly revenges an affront done to him by a
private person; but violent proceedings can never be allowed of, or excused,
against a public minister, unless the latter, by beginning and urging the vio-
lence, should lay the other under a necessity of defending himself. ib.
59. Of the Time when it commences. Though the minister’s character
does not become declared in its whole extent, and thus does not secure to
him the enjoyment of all his rights till he is acknowledged and admitted by
the sovereign to whom he delivers his credentials; yet, on his entering into
the country whither he is sent, and making himself known, he is under the
protection of the law of nation; otherwise it would not be safe for him to
398 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES.
come. Till he has had his audience of the prince, he is on his word to be
considered as a minister; and further, besides notice of it, usually sent by let-
ters in case of doubt, the minister is provided with passports, certifying his
character. ib.
60. What is due to them in Countries through which they pass. These
passports sometimes become necessary to him in the countries through
which he passes in his way to the place of his destination ; and, when
it is necessary for procuring the respect and honor due to him, he pro-
duces them. Indeed that prince alone to whom the minister is sent, is
under a particular obligation that he shall enjoy all the rights annexed to his
character: yet the others, through whose dominions he passes, are not to
deny him those regards to which the minister of a sovereign is entitled, and
which nations reciprocally owe to each other. They especially owe to him
an entire safety. To insult him would be injuring his master and the whole
nation; to arrest him and offer violence to him, would be hurting the right
of embassy, which belongs to all sovereigns. Francis the First, king of
France, had all the reason in the world to complain of the murder of his
ambassadors Rincon and Fregosa, as an horrible crime against public faith
and the law of nations. These two persons, destined, the one to Constanti-
nople, and the other to Venice, having embarked on the Po, were stopt and
murdered, and in appearance, by order of the governor of Milan. The
emperor Charles the Vth’s negligence to discover the author of the murder
gave room to think that he had ordered it, or at least that he had tacitly
approved of the fact. And as he did not give any suitable satisfaction con-
cerning it, Francis the First had a very just cause for declaring war against
him, and even demanding assistance of all other nations. For an affair
of this nature is not a particular difference, or a litigious question, in which
each party wrests law over to his side: it is the quarrel of all nations who are
concerned to maintain as sacred the right and means of communicating
together, and treating of their affairs. If an innocent passage be due, even
with entire safety, to a mere private person, much more is it due to the min-
ister of a sovereign who is going to execute his master’s orders, and travels
on the affairs of a nation—I say, an innocent passage; for the minister’s
journey is justly suspected, if a sovereign has reason to apprehend that he
will abuse the freedom of coming into his country, for plotting something
against his service, or that he is going to give intelligence to his enemies, or
to stir up others against him.—We have already said that a passage may be
denied him, but he is not to maltreat him, nor suffer any insult to be offered
to his person. Though he has not reason sufficient for denying him a pas-
sage, he may take precautions against the ample use which the minister may
make of it. These maxims the Spaniards found even in Mexico, and the
neighbouring countries. The ambassadors were respected all along the
PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES. 399
road; but if they went out of the highway they were to forfeit their rights.
A very wise reservation, that spies might not be sent, under the name of
ambassadors. Thus, at the famous congress of Westphalia, whilst peace
was negociating amidst the dangers of war and the noise of arms, the routs
of the several couriers sent or received by the plenipotentiaries were marked,
and out of such limits their passports were of no protection. ib.
61. Independence of foreign Ministers. The inviolability of a pub-
lic minister, or the safety due to him, more sacredly and more partic-
ularly than to any other person, whether foreigner or native, is not his only
privilege; he is further, by the universal practice of nations, to enjoy an
entire independency from the jurisdiction and authority of the state where
he resides. Some authors pretend that this independency is merely positive
among nations, and will have it referred to the arbitrary law of nations,
which owes its origin to the manners, the customs, or particular conven-
tions: they deny it to be grounded on the natural law of nations. Indeed,
the law of nature gives men a right of punishing those who do them wrong,
and consequently impowers a sovereign to punish a foreigner who disturbs
the public tranquillity, offends themselves, or maltreats their subjects: it
authorises them to compel this foreigner to conform himself to the laws, and
to behave properly towards the citizens. But it is no less true, that the
same natural law imposes on all sovereigns the obligation of consenting to
those things without which nations could not cultivate the society nature
has established among them, correspond together, negociate their affairs, or
adjust their differences. Now, ambassadors and other public ministers are
instruments necessary to the support of this general society, of this mutual
correspondence of nations. But their ministry cannot attain its designed
end, unless invested with all the prerogatives which may secure the lawful
success of it; and which are necessary for the free, faithful, and safe dis-
charge of it. The same law of nations whereby they are obliged to admit
foreign ministers, manifestly obliges them likewise to admit those ministers,
with all the rights necessary to them, and all the privileges relative to the
exercise of their functions. It is easy to conceive that independency must
be one of these privileges; without it, that privilege so necessary to a public
minister, would be precarious and fluctuating. He might be molested,
injured, and maltreated, under a thousand pretences. A minister is often
charged with a commission disagreeable to the prince to whom he is sent.—
If this prince has any power over him, and especially if his authority be
sovereign, how is it to be expected that the minister can execute his master’s
orders with a proper freedom of mind, fidelity, and firmness? It is neces-
sary he should have no snares to fear, that he cannot be diverted from his
functions by any chicanery. He must have nothing to hope, and nothing to
fear, from the sovereign to whom he is sent. Therefore, in order to the
400 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGE3.
success of his ministry, he must be independent of the Sovereign’s authority,
and of the jurisdiction of the country, both civil and criminal. To this it
may be added, that the nobility, and persons of great eminence, will be
averse from taking on themselves an embassy, if by this commission they
were to be subjected to a sovereign authority, and often among nations of
no very friendly dispositions to that which they represent, where they must
support disagreeable claims, and enter into discussions naturally productive
of a crimony. In fine, if an ambassador could be indicted for common
trespasses, be criminally prosecuted, taken into custody, punished if he
might be sued in civil cases, the consequence will often be, that he will
want the power, leisure, or freedom of mind, which his master’s affairs
require. How will the dignity of the representation be supported in such
a subjection? From all these reasons it is impossible to conceive, that the
prince, in sending an aunbassador, or any other minister, intends to submit
him to the authority of a foreign power. This is a fresh reason, which
fixes the independency of a public minister. If it cannot be reasonably
presumed that his master means to submit him to the authority of the sove.
reign, to whom he is sent, this sovereign, in receiving the minister, con-
sents to admit him on the footing of independency. And thus there subsists
between the two princes a passive convention, giving a new force to the
natural obligation. ib.
62. The question of which we have been treating [Immunities of Public
JMinisters] has been debated in England and France, on two famous occa-
sions. In London, on account of John Lesly, bishop of Ross, ambasador
from Mary, queen of Scotland.* This minister was continually intriguing
* NoTE. In Ward’s Law of Nations the case is thus stated
In the year 1567, Leslie Bishop of Ross, came to the Court of England, in behalf of his
mistress the unfortunate Queen of Scots; who, although she was detained prisoner by the
English, was allowed to send him, to plead before the Commissioners appointed to examine
into her cause. Nothing was determined by the commission; but Leslie continued at Court,
and exercised the office of Ambassador of MARY for the space of one year, when being con-
cerned in raising a rebellion against the English government he was committed to the cus-
tody of the Bishop of London. From this he was soon liberated, and returning to his func-
tion of Ambassador, continued to preserve it near two years longer. At that time, being
detected in the attempt to raise a serious conspiracy in favor of MARY against Eliza B ETH,
he was once more committed; and the following questions concerning him, as appears from
Lord Burleigh’s State Papers, were propounded to David Lewis, Valentine Dale, William
Drury, William Aubrey, and Henry Jones, learned civil lawyers.
I. “Whither an Embassador procuring an insurrection or rebellion in the Prince's
cowntrey, towarde whome he is Embassador, is to enjoye the priviledge of an Embassador?”
II. “Whither he may not, jure gentium et civili Romanorum, be ponished as an enemy,
traitor, or conspirator, ageinst, that Prince, notwithstandinge he be an Embassador?”
“To these two questions they answered: Touchinge these two questions, we are of opyn-
nyon, that an Embassador procuringe an insurrection, or rebellion, in the Prince’s cowntrey
towards whome he is Embassador, ought not, jure gentium, et civili Romanorum, to enjoye
the privileges, otherwise dew to an Embassador; but that he maye, notwithstandinge, be pon-
ished for the same.”
III. “Whither, if the Prince be deposed by the comen Aucthoritie of the Realme, and
PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES. 401
against queen Elizabeth, and the tranquillity of the state, forming conspira-
cies, and exciting the subjects to rebellion. Five of the most able civilians
an other elected and invested of that Crowne; the solicitor, or doer of his causes, and for his
ayde, (although the other Prynce do suffer such one to be in his Realme) is to be accompted
an Embassador?”
To this they answered “We doe thinke, that the sollicitor of a Prince lawfully deposed,
and an other being invested in his place, cannot have the privilege of an Embassador, for that
none but Prynces, and such other as have Soverayntye, may have Embassadors.”
IV. “Whither a Prynce, comynge into an other Realme, and remayning there under
custodye and garde, ought, or may have there his sollicitor of his causes, &c. yſ he have,
whither he is to be cownted an Embassador?”
To this they answered, “We doe thinke that a Prynce comynge iuto an other Prynce's
Realm, and being there under guarde, and custodye, and remayning till a Prynce, may have
a solicitor there; but whither he be to be accompted an Embassador, that dependeth on the
nature of his comyssion.
V. “Whither if such a solicitor be so appointed by a Prynce so flyenge, or comynge
into an other Prynce's Realm; if the Prynce in whose Realm, the Prynce so in grade, and his
solicitor is, shall denownce, or cause to be denownced, to such a Solicitor, or to such a Prynce
under custodie, that his said solicitor shall hereafter be taken for no Embassador; whither
then such sollicitor or agent can justly clayme the priviledge of Embassador?”
To this they answered, “We doe thincke that the Prynce to whom any person is sent
in message of Embassador, may for causes forbidd him to enter into his lands, or when he
hath recey'ved him, comaunde him to departe; yet so long as he doth remayne in the Realme,
and not eaccede the bounds of an Embassador, he may clayme his privilege as Embassador,
or sollicitor, according to the qualitie of his commission.
VI. “Whither, if an Embassador be confederacy, or be ayder, or comforter of any
traytor, knowinge his treason towarde that Prynce, towarde whome, and in whose Realme he
pretendeth to be Embassador; ys not punishable by the Prynce in whose Realme and ageinst
whom such treason is committed, or confederacy for treason conspired?” -
And to this they answered, “We doe thincke that an Embassador aydinge and comfor-
tinge any traytor in his treason towarde the Prynce with whom he pretendeth to be Embassa-
dor in his Realme, knowinge the same treason is punishable by the same Prynce ageinst
whome suche treason is comytted.”
These answers of the Civilians were supposed to be so decisive in favour of the intentions
of the Court, that the Bishop was sent for from his confinement in the Isle of Ely, and after
being sharply rebuked, was told he should no longer be considered as an Ambassador, but
but severely punished as one who well deserved it. He, however, answered with much firm-
ness and apparent knowledge of the law of nations, that he was the Ambassador of an absolute
Queen, and of one who was unjustly deposed, and had, according to his duty, carefully en-
deavoured to effectuate the delivery of his Princess, and the safety of both kingdoms. That
he came into England, with the full authority of an Ambassador, upon public warrandise,
or safe conduct, which he had produced; and that the sacred privileges of Ambassadors were
by no means to be violated. Burleigh in return, observed that no privilege or public warran-
dise could protect Ambassadors that offend against the public Majesty of a Prince, but they
are liable to penal actions for the same; otherwise lewed Ambassadors might attempt the life
of princes without any punishment. The Bishop persisted in his positions and maintained
that the privileges of Ambassadors had never been violated via juris fed via facti, not by reg-
ular form of trial, but by violence. This boldness, or the true view which he seems to have
taken of this nice subject, appears so far to have weighed with the Ministers of Elizabeth, that
they did not dare to put him to death, with the Duke of JWorfolk and other conspirators, but
after detaining him for some time in prison, banished him the country in 1573.
51
402 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES.
being consulted by the privy council, gave it as their opinion, That an am-
bassador raising a rebellion against the prince at whose court he resides, for-
feits the privileges of his character, and is subject to the punishment of the
law. They should rather have said, that he should be treated as an enemy.
But the council only caused the bishop to be taken into custody, and after
keeping him prisoner in the Tower two years, when nothing more was to be
feared from his intrigues he was set at liberty, and obliged to leave the king-
dom. This instance may confirm the principles here laid down; and the
like may be said of the following: Brenau, secretary to the Spanish ambas-
sador in France, was surprised treating with Mairargues in a profound peace,
to engage him to deliver up Marseilles to the Spaniards. On this he was im-
prisoned, and the parliament at the trial of Mairargues, likewise interrogated
Brenau; but instead of proceeding to condemn him sent him to the king, who
ordered him to return to his master, and immediately to depart the kingdom.
The ambassador warmly complained of the detention of his secretary: but
Henry IV. very judiciously answered, That the law of nations does not for-
bid putting a public minister under an arrest, in order to hinder him from
doing mischief. Wattel.
63. If a foreign ambassador, being prorex, committeth here, any
crime, which is contra jus gentium, as treason, felony, adultery, or any
other crime, which is against the law of nations, he loseth the privilege
and dignity of an Ambassador, as unworthy of so high a place; and may
be punished here, as any other private alien, and not to be remanded to his
sovereigne but of courtesie. And so of contracts, that be good, jure gentium;
he must answer here. But if any thing be malum prohibitum, by an act
of parliament, private law, or custom of this realm, which is not malum in
se, jure gentium, nor contra jus gentium, an ambassador residing here
shall not be bound by any of them. Lord Coke.
64. Rights and Prerogatives enjoyed by Diplomatic Agents. All
Diplomatic Agents, representing more or less the constituent power, usage
has attached to them a sacred character, and attributed peculiar distinctions
and immunities. These attributes are founded on the nature of their func-
tions, and it is, on this principle, that we must judge of all the pretensions
which they impart. -
Although the public character of Diplomatic Agents sent to a foreign
court, is not developed in all its extent, nor secures to the agent the enjoy-
ment of all his rights, until after he has forwarded his credentials, and been
recognised and admitted in his character of Envoy, by the government near
which he is to reside, it is recognised as a principle now by all the powers
of Europe, that the court being once apprised of his mission the public min-
ister, of whatever rank he may be, is entitled to perfect inviolability from
the moment he touches the territory of the state to which he is accredited,
to that in which he quits it.
PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES. 403
It is in accordance with this principle that the government, when it hath
once recognised a foreign ministerin his quality of representative of his sover-
eign is held, not only to abstain itself from every act contrary to this inviola-
bility attached to the person of the minister, but also to punish severely, and
even as a crime of state, every offence committed against the person of the
diplomatic agent; it being always supposed, however, that the offender may
have known the person against whom he has committed an act of violence,
that he be subject to the jurisdiction of the country, and that the minis-
ter have not himself provoked the act of violence committed on his person.
This inviolability due to every diplomatic agent is not annulled by any
misunderstanding which may have taken place between the two governments,
and least of all, when in case of rupture hostilities have already commenced.
Martens’ Manual.
65. Eaterritoriality. The dignity of the state represented by the dip-
lomatic agent, as well as the reciprocal interests of the powers amongst
themselves, require that their representatives enjoy, with regard to the
affairs entrusted to them, an entire independence: the universal law of na-
tions recognises now as a principle, that they ought enjoy exterritoriality, by
which they are considered as not having quitted the realms of their sovereign,
but as continuing to live out of the territory in which they really reside.
The positive law of nations extends the idea of this exterritoriality much
farther, since it not only regards the minister as to his person, but even all
the people in his retinue, his house, and even his carriages, as being in a
foreign territory. The extension of this exterritoriality, granted to diplo-
matic agents, being connected, as it has been explained, with the positive
law of nations, inasmuch as it is founded upon treaties or consecrated by
usage, is susceptible of many modifications, which indeed it experiences
in many cases. It would be therefore wrong to pretend, in all cases, to
the rights of exterritoriality. ib.
66. Independence. As the Independence enjoyed by the minister of a
foreign power is a right granted to him only in his diplomatic capacity, he
cannot therefore disclaim it wholly, or in part, without the consent of his
constituent. This is the reason also why a foreign minister cannot accept
any employ, or title, from the sovereign near whom he resides, without
the express permission of his constituent.
When a foreign minister is the subject of the state near which he is ac-
credited, and his constituent consents that he may be considered as such,
he stands amenable to the laws of that state, in all matters not connected
with his ministry as diplomatic agent. Nevertheless, it should be remarked
that every public minister, altho’ before a subject of the state near which he
is to be accredited, enjoys an entire independence during the whole time of
his mission, unless the state to which he is sent refuse to receive him, except
under the express condition of being regarded as a subject. ib.
404 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES,
67. Immunity from civil Jurisdiction, enjoyed by Diplomatic Agents.
Although the universal and rigorous law of nations would not except the
diplomatic agent from the civil jurisdiction of the state near which he resides,
yet exterritoriality founded upon the positive principles of the law of nations
would effectually screen him. The only jurisdiction to which he is amenable
is that issuing from the tribunals of his own government, unless—
1. If the diplomatic agent have been already a subject of the government
near which he resides at the time of his nomination, and have not renoun-
ced that jurisdiction.
2. If the diplomatic agent be at the same time in the service of the so-
vereign to whom he is sent in quality of public minister.
3. If he be able or willing to submit to the jurisdiction of a foreign power.
This can take place when he pleads, and thereby submits to the legal forms.
The debts contracted by a foreign minister before or during the course of his
mission, even if they were incurred on the faith of Bills of Exchange, cannot
authorize his arrest, or the seizure of furniture and fixtures in his posses-
sion as diplomatic agent. In many states, moreover, the laws of the country
forbid expressly any act of this nature by the authorities. Martens’. Manual.
68. The Immunity from Criminal Jurisdiction enjoyed by the Diplomatic
JAgent.The nature of acts,which are ofteninseparable from a criminal prosecu-
tion, and the inconveniences which thence result to the business with which
the diplomatic agent is charged, forbids his subjection to the criminal juris-
diction of the state near which he is accredited.
The tribunals cannot therefore institute any process against his person
or against the persons of his suite, neither can they issue a warrant or grant
any judgment in the case. If however there be amongst his suit any natives
of the country where he resides, who may have rendered themselves amenable
to the laws, before proceeding against them it is necessary to obtain the sanc-
tion of the minister in order to their appearance before the tribunals: but judg-
ment cannot be followed up, without the agent’s consent; unless the offender
have quitted his service. ib.
69. The Ambassador is evenpt from the civil Jurisdiction of the Country
near which he resides. Some authors are for submitting the ambassador,
in civil affairs, to the jurisdiction of the country where he resides; at least
for such as have taken rise during the time of the embassy; and in support
of their opinion, they allege, that this subjection does no injury to his char-
acter. However sacred, they say, a person be, his inviolability is not affected
by suing him on a civil action. But is it not on account of the sacredness
of their person that ambassadors cannot be sued; it is because they do not
depend on the jurisdiction of the country whither they are sent; and the
solid reasons for this independency may be seen above. Let us here add,
that it is entirely proper, and even necessary, that an ambassador should
PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES. 405
not be liable to any juridicial prosecution, even for a civil cause, that he may
not be disturbed in the exercise of his functions. The ambassador or pub-
lic minister is at present by the custom and consent of all nations independent
of all jurisdiction in the country where he resides, either for civil or military
C3 SeS. In the year 1657, a resident of the elector of Brandenburgh, in
England, was arrested for debt. But he was set at liberty, the arrest
judged contrary to law; and even the creditors and officers of justice con-
cerned in the insult were punished. Wattel.
70. How the Eagemption of the Minister extends to his Possessions. A
foreign minister is independent of the jurisdiction of the country, and his
personal independency as to civil cases would be of no great signification,
did it not extend to every thing necessary to his living with dignity, and
the quiet discharge of his functions. Besides, whatever he has brought with
him, or purchased for his use, as minister, is so connected with his person
as to follow its fate. From the independency in which the minister comes,
it is not to be supposed that he means to subject his retinue, his baggage,
and necessaries, to the jurisdiction of the country. Therefore every thing
belonging to the minister’s person, as a public minister, whatever is for his
use, whatever serves for the subsistence of himself, and that of his household;
these, I say, partake of the minister’s independency, and are absolutely
exempt from any jurisdiction of the country. These things, like the person
to whom they belong, are considered as if they were out of the country. ib.
7ſ. The Ea'emption cannot extend to Effects belonging to any Trade the
Minister may carry on. But this cannot take place in effects manifestly
belonging to the ambassador, under another relation than that of minister.
What has no affinity with his functions and character, cannot partake of the
privileges derived only from his function and character. Should then a mi-
nister as it has been often seen, engage in trade, all the effects, goods, money,
and debts, active and passive, belonging to his commerce, come within
the jurisdiction of the country. ib.
72. Not to Immoveables which he possesses in the Country. All estates,
all immoveable goods, depend on the jurisdiction of the country, whoever
be the proprietor, are they to be exempted from it only because the owner
of them is appointed to be the ambassador of a foreign power? There is no
reason for this. The ambassador does not hold those possessions as ambas-
sador: they are not annexed to his person so as, like himself, to be reputed
out of the territory. ib.
73. How Justice may be obtained against an Ambassador. All private
persons, citizens or strangers, who have any demands on a minister, if they
cannot obtain justice, from himself, should apply to the sovereign his master
who is obliged to do them justice, in a manner most agreeable to the public
service. The prince is to consider whether it be fit to recall his minister,
406 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES.
to appoint a tribunal before which he may be sued, or to order delays, &c.
In a word, the good of the state does not allow that any person whatever,
should disturb the minister in his functions, or divert him from them,
without the sovereign’s leave; and the sovereign, his supreme duty being
obliged to do justice to all, ought not to countenance his minister in refusing
it, or wearying out his adversaries, by unjust delays. Vattel.
74. Ambassador’s House and Domestics. The independency of the
ambassador would be very imperfect, and his security weakly founded,
did not the house in which he lives enjoy entire exemption, so as to be in-
accessible to the ordinary officers of justice. The ambassador might be
disturbed under a thousand pretences; his secrets might be discovered by
searching his papers, and his person exposed to insults. Thus all the rea-
sons which establish his independence and inviolability, concur likewise to
secure the freedom of his house. The right of the character is generally ac-
knowledged in all civilized nations: an ambassador’s house is, at least in all
the common cases of life, like his person, considered as out of the country. ib.
75. There are various grades of public ministers, from ambassadors
(which is the highest grade,) down to common resident ministers, whose
rank, and diplomatic precedence, and authority, are well known, and well
ascertained in the law and usages of nations. But whatever may be their
relative rank and grade, public ministers of every class are the immediate
representatives of their sovereigns. As such representatives, they owe no
subjection to any laws, but those of their own country, any more than their
sovereign; and their actions are not generally deemed subject to the control
of the private law of that state, wherein they are appointed to reside. He,
that is subject to the coercion of laws, is necessarily dependent on that power
by whom those laws were made. But public ministers ought, in order to
perform their duties to their own sovereign, to be independent of every
power, except that by which they are sent; and, of consequence, ought not
to be subject to the mere municipal law of that nations wherein they are to
exercise their functions. * The rights, the powers, the duties, and the privi-
* In the case of the Schooner Exchange v. JM'Faddon, [7 Cranch, 116, 138] the Supreme
Court state the grounds of the immunity of foreign ministers, in a very clear manner, leaving
the important question, whether that immunity can be forfeited by misconduct, open to future
decision. “A second case,” [says Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, in delivering the opinion of the
court, “standing on the same principles with the first, is the immunity, which all civilized
nations allow to foreign ministers. Whatever may be the principle, on which this immunity
is established, whether we consider him, as in the place of the sovereign he represents, or by
a political fiction suppose him to be extra-territorial, and, therefore, in point of law, not within
the jurisdiction of the sovereign, at whose court he resides; still, the immunity itself is granted
by the governing power of the nation, to which the minister is deputed. This fiction of ex-
territoriality could not be erected, and supported against the will of the sovereign of the
territory. He is supposed to assent to it.
“This eonsent is not expressed. It is true, that, in some sountries, and in this, among
PUBLIC MINISTER2S PRIVILEGES. 407
leges of public ministers are, therefore, to be determined, not by any munici-
pal constitutions, but by the law of nature and nations, which is equally
obligatory upon all sovereigns, and all states. What these rights, powers,
duties, and privileges are, are inquiries belonging to a treatise on the law of
nations, and need not be discussed here. But it is obvious, that every
question, in which these rights, powers, duties, and privileges are involved,
is so intimately connected with the public peace, and policy, and diplomacy of
the nation, and touches the dignity and interest of the sovereigns of the min-
isters concerned so deeply, that it would be unsafe, that they should be sub-
mitted to any other, than the highest jndicature of the nation. Story's
Commentaries.
76. It is most fit, that this judicature should, in the first instance, have
original jurisdiction of such cases, so that, if it should not be exclusive, it
might at least be directly resorted to, when the delays of a procrastinated
controversy in inferior tribunals might endanger the repose, or the interests
of the government. It is well known, that an arrest of the Russian amhas-
sador” in a civil suit in England, in the reign of Queen Anne, was well nigh
bringing the two countries into open hostilities; and was atoned for only
by measures, which have been deemed, by her own writers, humiliating.
On that occasion, an act of parliament was passed, which made it highly
penal to arrest any ambassador, or his domestic servants, or to seize or dis-
train his goods; and this act, elegantly engrossed and illuminated, accom-
panied by a letter from the queen, was sent by an ambassador extraordinary,
to propitiate the offended czar. And a statute to the like effect exists in
others, a special law is enacted for the case. But the law obviously proceeds on the idea of
prescribing the punishment of an act previously unlawful, not of granting to a foreign minis-
ter a privilege, which he would not otherwise possess.
“The assent of the sovereign to the very important and extensive exemptions from terri-
torial jurisdiction, which are admitted to attach to foreign ministers, is implied from the con-
siderations, that, without such exemption, every sovereign would hazard his own dignity by
employing a public minister abroad. His minister would owe temporary and local allegiance
to a foreign prince, and would be less competent to the objects of his mission. A sovereign
commiting the interest of his nation with a foreign power to the care of a person, whom he
has selected for that purpose, cannot intend to subject his minister in any degree to that
power; and, therefore, a consent to receive him, implies a consent, that he shall possess
those privileges, which his principal intended he should retain—privileges which are essential
to the dignity of his sovereign, and to the duties he is bound to perform.
“ In what cases a minister, by infracting the laws of the country in which he resides,
may subject himself to other punishment, than will be inflicted by his own sovereign, is an
inquiry foreign to the present purpose. If his crimes be such, as to render him amenable to
the local jurisdiction, it must be because they forfeited the privileges annexed to his character;
and the minister, by violating the conditions, under which he was received, as the represen-
tative of a foreign sovereign, has surrendered the immunities granted on those conditions; or
according to the true meaning of the orginal assent, has ceased to be entitled to them.”
*See case in Note [marked 1.] under the present head.
408 PUBLIC MINISTER’S PRIVILEGES.
the criminal code established by the first congress, under the constitution
of the United States. Story’s Commentaries.
77. . It has been made a question, whether this clause,” extending juris-
diction to all cases affecting ambassadors, ministers, and consuls, includes
cases of indictments found against persons for offering violence to them,
contrary to the statute of the United States, punishing such offence. And
it has been held, that it does not. Such indictments are mere public prose-
cutions, to which the United States and the offender only are parties; and
which are conducted by the United States, for the purpose of vindicating
their own laws, and the law of nations. They are strictly, therefore, cases
affecting the United States; and the minister himself, who has been injured
by the offence, has no concern in the event of the prosecution, or the costs
attending it. Indeed, it seems difficult to conceive, how there can be a
case affecting an ambassador, in the sense of the constitution, unless he is a
party to the suit on record, or is directly affected, and bound by the judg-
ment. Story’s Commentaries.
78. The language of the constitution is perhaps broad enough to cover
cases, where he is not a party; but may yet be affected in interest. This
peculiarity in the language has been taken notice of, in a recent case, by the
Supreme Court: “If a suit be brought against a foreign minister,” (said
Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, in delivering the opinion of the court) “the Su-
preme Court alone has original jurisdiction, and this is shown on the record.
But, suppose a suit to be brought, which affects the interest of a foreign min-
ister, or by which the person of his secretary, or of his servant, is arrested.
The minister does not, by the mere arrest of his secretary, or his servant, be-
come a party to this suit; but the actual defendant pleads to the jurisdiction
of the court, and asserts his privilege. If the suit affects a foreign minister,
it must be dismissed, not because he is a party to it, but because it affects
him. The language of the constitution in the two cases is different. This
court can take cognizance of all cases “affecting’ foreign ministers; and,
therefore, jurisdiction does not depend on the party named in the record.
Story's Commentaries.
79. Jurisdiction over the Retinue of a Minister. The retinue of the min-
ister, being exempt from the jurisdiction of the state, ought to be subject to
the jurisdiction of their master, or of his and their sovereign. It belongs
to the two sovereigns to fix on the degree of jurisdiction that the minister
shall exercise over his retinue; for this point is very far from being so gener-
ally settled as not to admit of further contestations. A minister is never
refused a more extensive authority over his servants, than that of a father
over his family. Ambassadors claim a sort of civil voluntary jurisdiction
over their retinue, and which is very often granted them; but, with respect
* [Of the Federal Constitution.]
NEGOCIATION-RATIFICATION. 409
to criminal jurisdiction, the right claimed by some ministers of imprisoning
their servants in their own house, and of sending them bound to their sove-
reign is not generally granted them: and much less does their exterritoriality
extend to the pronouncing of a criminal sentence, and causing it to be
executed. Martens’ Law of Nations.
80. .7mbassadors not always Inviolable. The prince that is offended,
not caring to make fruitless complaints, and being willing at the same time
to preserve some respect for the law of nations, dismisses the minister, with-
out giving his master time to recall him. Wicquefort.
81. In England, the foreign ministers, on arriving, give in a list of their
retinue,” and those only are exempted from the civil jurisdiction of the state.
Note to Martens' Law of Aſations.
82. Aegociation—Opening a Conference. In monarchical states. a min-
ister sometimes negociates with the sovereign himself in private audiences,
either verbally, or in presenting memorials; sometimes with the minister for
foreign affairs, or with one or more commissaries, chosen by the sovereign at
the minister’s request. These conferences are sometimes held at the foreign
minister's, sometimes at the apartments of the minister of state, or those of
the commissary, and sometimes at the house of a third person.
In republican states, it is customary to name deputies to open a confer-
ence with a foreign minister, and this conference is usually opened at the
house of the minister, or at that of a third person. The choice of these
deputies depends, of right, on the will of the state only. It is an abuse to
permit the minister to reject them, as is practised in soine places.
The minister often presents in writing the substance of what he has
delivered by word of mouth; and there are several republics, which, accord-
ing to their constitution, can enter into no deliberation on any proposition
of a foreign minister, until such proposition be delivered in writing. It is
however, a point of much dispute, whether a foreign minister is obliged, on
requisition, to give in writing, or to sign, a copy of what he has delivered
verbaily. Murtens’ Law of Nations.
83. The art of negociating cannot be reduced to principle: it is an
effect of talents; of a court education, and, in part, of the study of the most
important negociations. Note to Marlens' Law of Vations.
84. Ra'íſicalion. The ratification is not an essential part of a treaty,
which is by so much the more evident, not only because a treaty. is a coin-
mon and public instrument, and the ratification a private and particular
one; but also because a treaty would be good, and subsist without the rati-
. .” Note.—On the subject of Retinue, Wattel adds, That the ambassader's consort shares
his independency and inviolability, and even distinguished honors are paid her; that the re-
gard due to the ambassador, cominatinicates itself to his child em, who also partake of his im-
munities; and that the Secretary of the Embassy, and the Ambas'ador's private Secretary,
*e protected by the law of natious, and that the former enjoy immunities independent of the
A:mbassador.
52
410 DESPATCHES-PASSPORTS.
fication, if it were certain that the treaty, and he that has made it, would
not be disavowed.
Notwithstanding that the ratification is no essential part of a treaty, nor
even of the function of the ambassador, yet it seems to be become a neces.
sary appendix to the one and the other; since it is by it that a treaty receives
its last perſection, and that without it there is no security that it shall be
executed. This is one of the reasons why the publication of treaties is not
performed, till after the ratifications have been exchanged; tho' it is what is
not always nicely observed, for the reason I have just alleged: that the
ratification is not of the essence of a treaty, nor does not make a part thereof.
Wicquefort.
85. Letters and Despatches. There are some ambassadors who make
two sorts of despatches, the one for the affairs they have to negotiate, and
where the prince their master is interested, and the other for general news,
which they are obliged to inform themselves of, that they may acquaint
their master therewith, some act one way ard some another; for iny part, I
think a distinction might be made, and that the ambassador might swell his
despatches, with some important affairs, notwithstanding they have nothing
in common with his negociation; but for common news, I should rather be
for his putting them in a sheet by themselves, and sending them rather to
the minister than to the prince. Picquefort.
86. Passports and Safe Conducts. It is generally recognized as a
principle at this day, that in time of peace, every government ought to grant
a free passage, and especially to travellers not suspected, and above all to
those invested with a public character, and in the service of a foreign power.
They would appear to require no other passports, than those which are deliv-
ered to them by the competent authority of their own government.
But, in order that a Public Minister, or other diplomatic agents, may be
enabled, in time of war, to reach their destination in security, it is necessary
that he be furnished with passports or safe conducts, by means of which he
is authorized to traverse the territory of the foreign state with the govern-
ment of which his own is at war. Martens’ Manual.
87. The ministers, of all the orders, are every where authorized to
give passports to those belonging to their retinue, to subjects of their sove-
reign, and to foreigners (at the request of the ministers of their courts), to
travel in the country of the sovereign of the minister who gives them. Note
to Martens’ Law of JN'ations.
88. When the Ambassador's Function ceases. The power of the ambas-
sador ceases when he is recalled, and when he has gone through the time of
his service. That of ambassadors in ordinary, is almost every where regula-
ted to three years; yet for all that, it is not lawful for an ambassador to
depart from a court where he resides without an express order, or the leave
of his prince.
DEWOTION-ENDING EMBASSY. All
An ambassador may go from his post, when in his person the prinee
whom he represents is injured; so that he is obliged to shew his resentment,
and to demand reparation.
That prince who obliges a minister to depart from his court, does indeed
put an end to the function of his employment, but does not thereby take
away his character. That ambassador of Portugal, to whom the states of
the United Provinces notified, That they no longer acknowledged him for
an ambassador, and that they would have no more conferences with him,
made a very wise answer in telling them, That the one depended on the
states, but that the other depended entirely on the king his master only:
That it was he who had given him him the character, and that none but he
could take it from him, and that it was into his hands he would surrender it.
JFicqueſort.
80. Custom with Regard to qualified Devotion. The custom generally
adopted since the sixteenth century, is, to allow the right of qualified levo-
tion to ambassadors, ministers of the second and even of the third order,
when, 1. The religion they profess is not, publicly or privately, exercised
in the place where they reside. 2. When there is not already a minister of
their court, at whose dwelling they may perform their devotions. If, as is
often the case, we see ministers, particularly those of the inferior orders,
who do not exercise this right, we are not to inſer from thence, that it has
been refused them, or that it would be refused them. The exercise of this
right, like that of most others, may depend upon circumstances. Martens'
Ilaw of Nations.
90. Ectent of this Right. The qualified domestic devotion granted to
a minister, includes, 1. The light of keeping a chaplain and other subaltern
ministers; and, 2. That of performing, in his own dwelling, all the acts and
rites of his religion, the effects of which do not appear in public. But, 3.
The exercise of this devotion is granted to the minister, his family, and his
retinue, only. Every state may forbid its own subjects, and even foreigners,
to frequent the chapel of a foreign minister, and particularly to partake of
the sacraments there administered. Yeſ, latterly, few states are very rigor-
ous in this respect, especially towards the subjects of the sovereign of the
ininister; nor, indeed, towards foreigners in general. 4. The chaplain of
the minister is not authorised to perform his functions out of the dwelling of
the latter, though this be sometimes connived at, ib.
91. JMeans of Ending an Embassy. Ministers being mandatories of the
state, it follows that their letters of credence and full powers must become
void, in case of the death of their own sovereign, or of the sovereign to
whom they are sent. They must, then, in both cases be provided with new
eredentials, without which, they can neither continue to negociate or per-
form their other ministerial functions, nor demand the honors and prerog-
** 412 *
RECALL–DEPARTURE OF A MINISTER.
atives due them as ministers; in such a situation, all they can claim is, thcir
inviolability, till such time as they can quit the state. Nevertheless, in the
practice, when circumstances make it reasonable to suppose, that the inter-
ruption will not continue any time, the court to which they are sent, not only
continues to treat them as ministers, but, sometimes to negociate with them
also. But this depends wholly on the will of the sovereign at whose court
they reside.
A minister whose credentials and powers authorise him to act for a cer-
tain time only, or per interim, can act no longer than during the time speci-
fied, or till the return of the ninister whose place he supplies. His functions
in either case, cease, without his being recalled in form. Martens' Law of
J\"ations.
92. Recall. An embassy is sometimes terminated by a recall. This
takes place, 1. When the object of the mission is accomplished; 2. On
account of something that has no relation to the court at which the minister
resides; 3. At the request of a court that complains against the minister,
and demands his recall; 4. For reasons of state; for instance, by way of
retaliation, in consequence of an infraction of the law of nations, and, in
general, in consequence of any dispute that threatens a rupture between
the two powers. In the latter case, the minister is often ordered to depart,
without taking leave; but, in the two former cases (and sometimes even in
the latter), the minister, if present, ought to request an audience at taking
leave. At this audience, which is sometimes public and sometimes private,
he presents his letters of recall, and makes a speech. If the minister be
absent at the time of his recall, he may take leave in writing, annexing to
his own letter, his letter of recall. In both of these cases, he receives let-
ters from the court where he has resided, which, if there be the least rootn
for it, contain an eulogium on his character and conduct. After this, he
receives his necessary passports. Having thus taken leave of the coºrt,
he takes leave of the other foreign ministers, ministers of state, &c. which is
done in visits, made in the same manner as his visits of arrival, and, this
•
ceremony ended, he takes his le parture. ib.
93. Departure of a Minister without being Recalled. Sometimes a minister
terminates his embassy himself, by quitting the place of his residence, with-
out being recalled. This happens, 1. When, in virtue of his instructions,
he inay take leave without waiting for a recall in form; 2. When the sovereign
at whose court he resides, requests him to take leave. or obliges him to quit
his tertitory. This latter is sometimes done by way of etaliation, or in
consequence of the misconduct of the minister, or in case of an approaching
rupture. 3. When he quits the court of his own accord, without taking leave.
This is done when some gross infraction of the law of nations has been com-
ſlitted against his person. ib.
I) EAT II—SEAL–DEPARTURE OF I. ETINUE. 4 i3
94. I)eath of a Minister. An embassy may be terminated by the death
of the minister. Those who have the care of his interinent, have certainly
a right to insist on his being buried honorably; but, whether a minister, of a
religion not tolerated in the country where he dies, is entitled to a public
solemn interment in the burial place, is a point which, in default of partic.
ular convention, must be determined on the principles of the religion of the
country where he resided at time of his death, in case the corpse is seat
home to the country of the sovereign who has sent the minister, it is custom-
ary to exempt it from the ecclesiastical dues commonly called jura stolæ,
which are paid by subjects only. Martens' Law of Nations.
95. The S al. In the case of the death of a minister, if there be another
minister from the same court, or a secretary of embassy, present, he ought
to put the seal on all the effects of the deceased. If there be no other min.
ister from the same court on the spot, nor any secretary of embassy, the
minister of another court may do it, iſ authorized so to do by the deceased,
or the deceased’s sovereign. The sovereign at whose 'court the deceased
resided, is the last person that can claim any light here. ib.
96. I) parture of the Retinue and Effects of a Minister. Though, strictly
speaking, the immunities and prerogatives of the embassy cease at the death
of the minister, it is customary to leave his widow and retinue in the enjoy-
ment of them for sometime longer; and, if the widow q:its the country, the
effects of the deceased, as weil as her own, are exempt from the droit
d’aubaine, and from sequestration. 13ut, if she chooses to remain in the ter-
ritory, the court has undoubtedly a right to fix on a term, after the expiration
of which, if she still remains, she is to be considered as, subject to the state,
and consequently to its laws, jurisdiction and imposts. ib.
97. - Embassies which terminate in Part. Sometimes an embassy is
partiy terminated by changing it into an embassy of another order. This
happens when a minister assumes a more exalted quality; for instance, when
a minister of the second order takes the quality of ambassador, on occasions
of great ceremony; or, when a minister, after having been vested with the
quality of ambassador or envoy extraordinary, quits it, to assume that of
minister of the second or third order. In all these cases, the minister takes
leave, in the quali'y which he lays aside, in presenting letters of recall, to
to which he subjoins letters of crederice specifying his new quality. From
that time he can claim no honors but such as are due to the quality which
his new credentials attribute to him. ib. * .
93. Ambassador's Expenses. The minister who is straightened in his
allowance, and is thereby obliged to employ all his thoughts on the means
how to subsist, cannot labor with application in the affairs of his master, who
neglects him. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The ambassador extraordinary cannot well avoid keeping an open table,
if he will do honor to his master. At Venice it is not suffered to have commu-
§ 14 AMBASSADOR'S EXPENSES.–UNOTE.]
nication with an ambassador; and in the courts of Rome, France and Spain,
the ministers never make themselves so particular with the ambassadors, as
to go and dine with them, unless they are invited on some extraordinary
occasions.” Wicquefort.
* NoTE. The salaries of public ministers varied much under the confederation.
At first no fixed compensation was allowed; but in Qctober 1779 a salary of £2500
was established for the ministers in France, and of £1000 for the secretaries, in full
for services and expenses. This rate, greater than the present remuneration, con-
tinued till '84, when Congress resolved that the salary of a minister should not ex-
ceed 9000 dollars; but it does not appear that an outfit was annexed. The confed-
oration generally paid their ministers better than is now done; for the expense of
living in Europe, particularly on the continent, has increased at least one half the
last forty years. W. have still remaining a report of the Secretary of Foreign Af-
fairs on the expenses of his department in 1782. Lyman.
“Dr Franklin has a part of Mr Chaumont’s house at Passy, he keeps a chariot and pair,
and three or four servants, and gives a dinner occasionally to the Americans and others. I lis
whole expense, as far as I can learn, is very much within his income. Mr. Adams lives in
lodgings; keeps a chariot and pair, and two men servants. He has hitherto retained a private
secretary, who will, in the abscnce of Mr Dana, it is presumed, be paid by Congress. I
have lately heard that Mr Atlans was about to take a house. Mr D.ina’s salary, even if he
should assume a pablic character in a country where the relative value of money is so high,
that if I well informed, an elegatt house may ie hired for fifteen guineas a year, is very ample.
‘Jf Mr Jay's manner of living, I have been able to give no account, but I should conclude
ſrom the price of the necessaries of life in that part of Spain in which he lives, from the port,
the court, and the people about it maintain, and above all, from its sitting in different parts of
the kingdom, that to live in the same style with Dr. Franklin, his expenses must amount to
neearly the double of theirs. But as every conjecture of this kind must be Very uncertain,
all l can do is to lay be ſore congress the relative expense, as far as l can learn it, between
the different places at which the ministers reside, taking l’hiladelphia for a common standard.
t’aris, if wine, clothing, and the wages of servants are included, is about twenty per cent
cheaper than IPhiladelphia; Amsterdam, ten; and at Madrid, the expenses of a family are
somewhat higher than at this place. But from the unsettled state of those who follow the
court, their travelling equipage and charges must greatly enhance this cxpense. Congress
will make their own deductions from these facts, after allowing for their inaccuracy.
“Annual expense of the Department of Foreign Affairs, exclusive of contingencies:–
“Secretary of the United States for the Department of Foreign Affairs.......... $4000
1st Under Secretary, Lewis R. Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. 800
2d Under Secretary, Peter S. Du Ponceau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ 700
Cleik, the Rev. Mr Tetard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............500
$6000
Dr. Franklin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62500 at 4s. 6d. e G & © e º e º 'º e º e º º e º e o 11,111. 10-90
Mr. Jay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2500 63 e e e º e º e º 'º & © e º O p & © e º tº 1 1,111. 1(Y-90
Mr. Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2500 6 (; tº e º e º e e . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,111. 10-90
Mr. Laurens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1500 & C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,666. 60-90
Mr. Carmichael. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...1000 C & e e e s e e º 'º tº e º e º 'º e C & G & © tº 4,444. 40-90
IMr. Dana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1000 6 & . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,444. 40-90
Mr. Dumas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Louis do’rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 920
a-mesmen
$7,398. 89-90
PrivateSeeretary to Dr. Franklin.
Private Secretary to Mr. Adams.”
By the law of May 1810, the salaries of ministers were fixed at $9666, and of
eharges, at $4,500, exclusive of one year's salary in the shape of outfit,
pIPLOMATIC PRIVILEGES CLAIMED. 415
Points decided in the District Court of Pennsylvania, relative to
the privilege claimed, as Chargé d'Affaires, in the case of T. d’Azambuja
vs. Barrozo. March Term, Philadelphia, 1830.
99. The constitution of the United States having made it the duty of
the President “ to receive foreign ambassadors and other public ministers,”
it would appear, and, it has been judicially determined, that it has necessa-
rially bestowed upon the exccutive branch of the federal government the ex-
clusive right to judge of the credentials of the ministers so received, and
that the other branches of the government are bound to regard them as inin-
isters, so long as the President continues to treat them as such. Dist. Court,
Phila. D'Azambuja vs. Iłarrozo.
100. When the commission of an ambassador is at an end, when he has
finished the business on which he came, is recalled, dismissed, or is obliged
to go away on any account whatever, his functions cease, but his privileges
and rights do not expire at the some time; he retains them till he returns to
his principal, to whom he is to make a report of his cmbassy. It is as a
returning minister only, that the defendant can claim privilege. ib.
101. The ſunctions of a public minister in many cases cease, as upon
the death of his own sovereign, or of him to whom he is sent, the termination
of his missiºn in consequence of his having effected its object, his recall
by his own government, or dismissal by that near which he resides, the no-
ral death of his sovereign, or of him to whom he is sent, by abdication,
whether it be voluntary or forced by revolution, by essential changes in
the form of one of the two interested states; and, when his functions do
cease, in any of these or in any other way whatever, the minister still remains
entitled to his privileges and immunities, under the laws of nations. ib.
102. If a sovereign or state receive under the public faith the minister
of another sovereign or state, and afterwards (leeming it for the interest of
the country or himself, to receive and recognize another, as the minister of a
rival sovereign or party, that may have obtained possession of the govern-
ment of the foreign nation, or, if such sovereign or state think proper to as-
sert that another government exists de facto, or de jure, in the minister’s
country; is such received minister of the former recognized government or
sovereign, ipso facto stripped of his quality and privileges? are his person,
his property, and the archives of his mission, previously the property of his
sovereign and government, subjected to the jurisdiction of the courts of
justice of the country? The aſſirmative of these questions has been contended
for, as the necessary result of the position, that the inviolability of foreign
ministers is founded upon the general principle, that they represent their
sovereign; and it is said in the case before the court, Don Miguel being ac-
knowledged King of Portugal, the defendant represents him, Don Miguel,
and of course cannot assert his privilege against his constituent. The
4 [6 DIPI.OMATIC PRIVILEGES CLAIMEſ).
institution of this suit is said to be evidence that Don Miguel claims the
property in question, or, at all events, that he has waived the privilege of
the defendant through his authorized Agent the plaintiff.
103. A foreign minister is not to be ill used by way of reprisal; for a
prince using violence against a public minister commits a crine which is
not to be revenged by an imitation of it. ib.
104. When a civil war exists in a nation, the obligation of observing the
laws of war is absolute and indispensable to both parties, and, the same
which the law of nations obliges all nations to observe between each other.
Although foreign states will not intefere as a general rule in such quarrels,
yet if a nation or sovereign thinks proper to do so, there is no law to prevent
it; and having received and recognized the annivassadors of ore party, the
same law of nations which regulates the intercourse between the rival ſac-
tions or princes may not unfairly be presumed to apply so far to the inter-
course between a foreign state arti one of the parties, as to protect a received
minister within the jurisdiction of the government receiving hin, in the
privileges secured to diplomatic agents. ib.
105. If by any unforeseen event by which a minister's functions may be
suspended or cease, some of which we have enumerated, including dismissal
by the government or sovereign near which he resides, he ceased to enjoy
on that account the exterritoriality or inviolability due to his character, it
may well be questioned whether, in cases of danger arising from revolutions
or from the perfillious character of a particular sovereign, men of high stand-
ing would be willing to submit their fortunes and their persons to the changes
and dangers of war, or the caprice or perfidy of such a monarch. ib.
106. The grounds of the judgement of the court are briefly these:–We
are satisfied that the defendant was received and recognized in a diplomatic
character by our government; that he continued to be so recognized until
the second October, 1829; that our government detained the plaintiff more
than a year before he was received and recognized as the chargé d'affaires
of Portugal; that the executive having given defendant a passport as a return-
ning minister, must have so regarded inim; that we have no evidence ſtom
our government that he was deprived of his privileges by Don Miguel, if
that monarch had the power to do so, nor that Don Miguel authorized this
suit; that the act of plaintiff in bringing the suit in his own name, as chargé
d'affaires of Portugal, does not ipsa facto divest the defendant of the privi.
leges attached to him as a returning minister, recognized by the president,
and as protected by the passport, issued under the authority of the United
States; and, consequently, that the defendant is entitled to his claim ºf
privilege, under the law of nations and the act of congress of the thirtieth of
April 1790, and, consequently, to be discharged from the process issued
against him. ib.
ASSAULT ON A PUBLIC MINISTER. 417
Case of the United States, vs. Juan Galberto de Ortega. Circuit Court,
United States, Philadelphia, October Session, 1825. [ExtRACT.]
107. This is a prosecution instituted by the United States for the pur-
pose of vindicating the law of nations, and of the United States, offended
as is charged, in the person of a foreign minister, (Mr Salmon,) by an assault
committed on him by the defendant. It is a case which cannot fail to be
highly interesting to the defendant, and to our government. To the former
on account of the punishment which might be the consequence of a convic-
tion; and to the latter, because the government of the United States,like that
of all civilized nations, is bound to afford redress for the violation of those
privileges and immunities which the law of nations confers upon foreign
ministers, and which are consecrated by the practice of the civilized world:
a neglect or refusal to perform this duty, might lead to retaliation upon our
own ministers abroad, and even to war.
108. It has been insisted that, by waiving his privilege, in becoming
a voluntary witness, he has, himself, violated the law of nations and his
duty to his sovereign. If this be so, that is a matter to be settled by them.
We have nothing to do with it. It deprives him neither of his competency
nor of his credibility.
109. That this act amounted to an assault, admits of not the slightest
doubt, and brings the case within the provisions of the act of congress, pro-
vided Mr Salmon was a foreign minister, which is the point to be con-
sidered.
110. Was Mr Salmon a foreign minister at the time the alleged offence
was committed? (the judge here recapitulated the evidence of Mr Salmon’s
official character, and then proceeded.) The counsel for the defendant
have gone into a rigid examination of the credentials of Mr Salmon. They
deny that any thing short of credentials, emanating from the sovereign, or
from some department of his government, charged to perform duties of this
nature, could constitute him a minister; and that, even if the appointment
of minister under the constitutional government of Spain, was sufficient, it
became void, by the revolution, which restored the king to his former power,
and rendered a re-appointment necessary.
111. If these were questions fit for judicial inquiry and decision, we
should say that the appointment of a chargé d'affaires by a foreign minister,
upon his retiring from the station to which he had been appointed, is usual in
practice, and, if he be recognized as such by that branch of the government
which is authorized to receive ministers, and with which he is to transact
the business of his own sovereign, his character of minister is unquestionable.
And further, that if after the constitutional government of Spain terminated,
a re-appointment, or a recognition by the king, of the public character of
this gentleman, were necessary, still as he is found, after a lapse of about
53
4.18 ASSAULT ON A PUBLIC MINISTER,
two years, the recognized minister of Spain by our government, we ought
to presume that his sovereign has done all that he thought necessary to clothe
him with that character.
112. But the conclusive answer to these arguments, is, that these are
matters of state, with which courts of justice have nothing to do. The con-
stitution of the United States having vested in the president the power to re-
ceive ambassadors and other public ministers, has necessarily bestowed on
that branch of government, not only the right, but the exclusive right, to
judge of the credentials of the ministers so received; and so long as they
continue to be recognized and treated by the president as ministers, the
other branches of the government are bound to consider them as such. If
courts of justice could sit in judgment upon the decision of the executive,
in reference to the public character of a foreign minister, and by pronounc-
ing him unduly appointed, or improperly recognized, deprive him of the
privileges of a minister, what an extroardinary anomaly would such an inter-
ference present to the world?
113. The individual, who should be placed in this predicament, would,
for all the purposes of his own or this government, be a minister, the repre-
sentative of his sovereign, authorized to transact the business with which he
is charged, and to bind his sovereign, whilst acting in obedience to his or-
ders; and yet he would be no minister in the view of the judiciary, and, of
course, not entitled to the protection due to that character: in other words,
a public minister, without the privileges and immunities of one. For not-
withstanding this judicial interference he would still continue to be a min-
ister as long as the president should continue to recognize him as such, and
no judgment of a court of justice could deprive him of that character, altho’
it should withold from him the sanctity appertaining to it. Besides, if it
belongs to courts of justice to meddle with these matters, and, looking be-
yond the acts and conduct of the president, to decide a person recognized
by him to be a minister, to be no minister, Surely that branch of government
ought to possess all the lights to guide their judgment which are possessed
by the president, and should consequently be empowered to call for, and ex-
pose to public view, the archives of state, and the correspondence of the ex-
ecutive of this nation with foreign nations, in relation to the subject on
which the decision is to be made.
114. The principles which have been stated, are those which governed
this court in Liddle's case, decided in 1807, in which it was stated that the
certificate of the secretary of state, that the person claiming to be a chargé
d'affaires, was received and recognised as such by the executive of this go-
vernment, was the best evidence which could be given of that fact. The
only proper enquiry, in short, in cases of this nature, is, has the person claim-
ing to be a foreign minister been received and recognized as such by the ex-
ASSAULT ON A PUBLIC MINISTER. 419
ecutive of this government? If he has, the evidence of those facts is not
only sufficient, but, in our opinion, conclusive, upon the subject of his privi-
leges as a minister.
115. A foreign minister, by committing the first assault, so far loses
his privilege, that he cannot complain of an infraction of the law of nations
if, in his turn, he should be assaulted by the party aggrieved. This was de-
cided by this court in Liddle’s case. It was insisted by the defendant’s
counsel that it was incumbent on the prosecutor to prove that the public
character of Mr.Salmon was known to the defendant, at the time this trans-
action took place. If this position could be maintained, still, as it is shewn
by the defendant’s letters to Mr Salmon, in May, 1824, that he then knew
that gentleman to be the Spanish chargé d'affaires; if he had afterwards
ceased to be so, it lay on the defendant to prove it. Knowing him once to
have been entitled to this character, he acted at his peril, if it should turn out
that that character still continued, or if indeed the reverse should not be
proved.
116. But in point of law, it is immaterial whether the defendant knew
that the person assaulted was the chargé d'affaires, or not. And this point
also was decided in the case before referred to of the United States vs. Liddle.
[The jury brought in a verdict of guilty on both indictments.]
117. The counsel for the defendant moved for a rule to shew cause, why
there should not be a new trial, and gave for the reason that there had been
a verdict of guilty upon both indictments, whereas evidence had been given
of but one offence.
118. They also moved in arrest of judgement, on the ground that the
circuit court had no jurisdiction in this case, it being a case affecting an am-
bassador, or other foreign minister. •
119. On motion of the district attorney, that the defendant should be
taken into custody, the court decided that he might be admitted to bail,
pending the motion for a new trial and in arrest of judgement. He accord-
ingly gave bail in the sum of 3000 dollars in each case.
420 DIPLOMATIC AGENT'S PRIVILEGES [NOTES].
NOTES, from Ward's Law of Nations, on “PUBLIC MINISTER’s PRIVILEGES.”
Of the sacredness of the persons of ambassadors, we have examples in the oldest
histories, and in almost all codes of law; and among the rest, an eminent one in the Jewish
story, where David's messengers to Hanan King of the Ammonites, being treated with con-
tempt and insulted by that prince, whom they were sent to console on the loss of his father, it
was the cause of dreadful war between the nations, in which seven and forty thousand of the
Ammonites were destroyed. So also the great rage expressed by Xerxes against Athens,
which ended in the entire destruction of that city in the Persian invasion, was said to be owing
to their violence towards his Ambassadors, though coming with an hostile message.
The sack of Rome by Brennus, of Corinth by the Romans, and of Philomela by Frederick
Barbarossa in the thirteenth century, was the consequence of the same sort of conduct.
Hence, also, those various marked passages in the digest, and the works of the different Ro-
man lawyers, which all tend, in the most explicit terms, to enforce this necessary doctrine.
The Arabians, the Chinese, the Indians and the Mexicans, are all found to unite in it, nor is
there scarce a point in morality more generally received; the exceptions to it being few in
number, and chiefly to be found among the Turks.
It being found in England in the beginning of the 17th cent. that there was no legal punish-
ment for those who violated the privileges of an Ambassador; 7th of Ann. C. 12, was passed,
by which the matter was put out of doubt; and whoever now dares to sue out any process
against any public minister, or his domestics, are deprived of their trial by jury, and if con-
victed of the same by the oath of one or more witnesses, before the lord chancellor, and the
two chief justices, or any two of them, they are to be deemed violators of the law of nations,
and disturbers of the public repose, and to suffer such pains and penalties and corporal punish-
ment, as the said lord chancellor and chief justices or any two of them shall judge fit to be
imposed and inflicted. Thus the magistrates, according to Blackstone, [Commentaries, 4, 71]
have an unlimited power to proportion the punishment with the crime.
[1..] The occasion of the statute was the well known arrest of the Russian ambassador on
21st July, 1708, who being upon the eve of his departure, and indebted to Thomas Morton,
a laceman, and various other tradesmen, they resolved to arrest him according to the ordinary
forms of law. This was done with some circumstances of aggravation, for the ambassador,
thinking himself attacked by ruffians, defended himself, but was overpowered and ill used by
the bailiffs, who carried him to a spunging-house, where he was detained till the Earl of Fa-
versham bailed him. He immediately complained to the queen, of this violation of the law of
nations, and the Count de Gallas, and the Baron Spanheim, ambassadors of Sweden and
Prussia, together with several other foreign ministers, joined in the complaint. The queen
Was indignant at the affront, and Morton, the attorney, and all who were concerned in the
arrest, to the number of seventeen, were committed to custody and ordered to be prosecuted
with the utmost severity of the law. Most of them were brought to trial, on an information of
the attorney general, and were found guilty of the facts, though the question how far those
facts were criminal, was reserved to be argued before the judges; which question was never
determined. Mr. Boyle, the secretary of state, writing to the ambassador, speaks of the at-
tempt as “desperate and dismal,” and the privy council were several times summoned of his
Satisfaction. As far as punishment, however, was concerned, none could be obtained, and the
affronted minister was forced to be content with his liberty, the reimbursement of his expenses,
anº the enaction of a law, by which the above mentioned provisions were made in future. The
Preamble, however, having merely observed, that the Muscovite ambassador had been taken
out of his coach by violence, in contempt of the protection granted by her majesty, with-
out taking notice of the breach of the law of nations, (Black. Comment. 1.) “which is
Superior and antecedent to all municipal laws; the foreign ministers in London met again
together, and procured the addition of these words, “ contrary to the law of nations and in
DIPLOMATIC AGENT'S PRIVILEGES [NOTES]. 42 i
prejudice to the rights and privileges which ambassadors, and other public ministers, author-
ised and received as such, have at all times been thereby possessed of, and which ought to be
kept sacred and inviolable.” With this act of parliament elegantly engrossed, and an apology
for not being able to punish the persons of those who had affronted his minister, the czar,
who at first insisted upon their deaths, was at length induced to be content; and thus ended
this delicate affair.
Comyns, though he mentions not the punishment of their infraction, yet seems to hold
that all process against ambassadors was void,even before the 7th Anne; since in laying down
the law of ambassadors, he quotes the opinion of Grotius, concerning their immunity, before
he comes to mention the statute. And it is therefore not improbable, that he thought that
opinion was a part of the common law of England, although much elucidated and strengthened
by the statute. Blackstone asserts in terms, that the common law of England recognizes the
rights of ambasssadors in their full extent, by immediately stopping all legal process, sued
out through the ignorance or rashness of individuals, which may intrench upon the immunities
of a foreign minister, or any of his train; the more effectually to enforce which, he continues,
when violated through wantonness or insolence, it is declared by the statute 7th Ann, &c. &c.
IIence it should appear, that in his opinion, the statute did not create any new law, except
as far as the punishment of the persons violating the law of nations, was concerned; and that
the rest was merely declaratory of what the common law had always been.
[2] Whichever way this may be, in other times probably the violators of law would have
been severely punished, even without such a statute, as may be collected from the following
case: In the year 1627, one Philip Weiseman, a German, who was a kind of Purveyor to
foreigners in England, having bargained to defray the ambassador of Denmark’s expences at
a certain rate from Paris to London, made some unreasonable demand upon him on his arrival
at the latter place, and that, says Finet, “with much touch to his honor.” The ambassador
complained to the lord chamberlain, who acquainted the king, order was made for the lord
president of the council, the lord Chamberlain, and the vice-chamberlain “to hear and
determine” the business. The cause was examined, and the following record and sentence
was the consequence:
“Henry, earl of Manchester, president of the privy council of his majesty of Great Britain;
Phillip, earl of Montgomery, Great Chamberlaine, and of the council of state, to his said
majesty, being commissioners and deputies for his said majesty, to hear the protestation
which the Lord Rosenbranck, ambassador extraordinary to his majesty of Denmark, shall
make against Phillip Weiseman, for certaine injuries and calumnies which he should speak
and write against his person, in prejudice of the honour of the king his master, and of his own
particular reputation, having by express commandment from his majestie adjourned, and
examined the foresaid Phillip Weiseman, and having understood at the same time, by confron-
tation, some of the domestiques of the said lord ambassador, and others; as also examined
his letter to the said lord ambassador: we finde that the said Phillip, without any reason or
cause, having received more monies than were agreed upon, according to his own confession,
hath maliciously and impudently blazed abroad, such words and writings without having re-
gard to the honour of the person whom he presents, or to his own particular quality: There-
fore we have inordered that he be put in safe custody, untill he give satisfaction to the aforesaid
ambassador, if he thinks it not fit to bring him before the king his master, to be punished ac-
cording to his demerit. In faith whereof we signe this present instrument this 14th of April,
1627. Manchester—Montgomery—Carleton.”
The fellow, continues Finet, persisting stuborne and most averse from submission,
was after four or five days restraint in the house of a messenger, delivered by a warrant from
the lord president, and the lord Chamberlaine, from the messenger’s hands to the embassa-
dor's; who, causeing him to be imprisoned in the Counter, by virtue of the said warrant, which
gave him power to dispose of him; he was upon the point of being sent to Hamburg; but his
A.2% Ji PLOMATIC AGENT'S PRIVILEGES [NOTES].
stomach lessening, and his submission made with acknowledgment of his guilt, both by word
and writing, he was at last set at liberty.
[3.] In the year 1583, uot long after the opinions delivered in the bishop of Ross's case,
Mendoza, the Spanish ambassador in E.gland, having conspired to introduce foreign troops,
and dethrone the queen, it was a matter of difficulty how he should be punished. Had the
council thought the opinions of Lewis Bale, and the other civilians good law, they probably
would have acted upon them; for here was a case, precisely similar to that on which they had
been consulted. They however took the opinions of the celebrated Albericus Gentilis, then
in England, and of Hottoman in France, who both asserted that an ambassador, though a con-
spirator, could not be put to death, but should be referred to his principal for punishment;
or, (according to Hottoman) sent away by force out of the country. In consequence of this
Mendoza was simply ordered to depart the realm, and a commissioner sent to Spain to pre-
fer a complaint against him.
[4.] Three years afterwards there was a conspiracy not only to dethrone the queen, but
to put her to death. The circumstances are these : L’Aubespine, the French ambassador,
being wholly devoted to the Queen of Scots, endeavored to procure the assassination of Eliza-
beth. For this purpose he tampered both by himself, and secretary, with William Stafford,
a man about the court. Stafford refused to be concerned in it himself, but recommended
Moody, a noted ruffian, then in Newgate, to be the instrument. With this man conferences
were held by Trappy and Cordalion, both of them secretaries to L’Aubespine. It was pro-
posed to take off the queen by poison, or to blow her up by firing twenty pounds weight of
gunpowder under her bed. Neither method was approved by Trappy, “who wished for
such another resolute fellow as had assassinated the Prince of Orange.” In this state of the
affair Stafford revealed the plot. Trappy was arrested, and both he and Stafford confessed
the whole before the council. The ambassador was sent for, but said “he would not hear
any accusation to the prejudice of the privileges of ambassadors.” When Stafford was
brought in, however, he assented to his knowledge of the matter, but said it was first propoun-
ded by him. Stafford, on the contrary, protested on his salvation that the first he knew of it
was from the ambassador. Lord Burleigh then reproached him with the design; yet never
thought of trying him. All that we can find is, that he bade him beware how he committed
treason any more; that the queen would not by punishing a bad ambassador, prejudice the
good; and that he was not acquitted from the guilt of the offence, though he escaped the
punishment.
[5.] In 1601, the Compte de Rochpot, being ambassador from France to Spain, his
scrvants had a quarrel with some Spaniards at Valladolid, in which two of the latter were
slain, of whom also one was a priest. The magistrates seized the criminals with a view to
try them, but upon lochpot’s complaint, and retiring from Spain, they were delivered into
the hands of the Pope, at Rome, and finally released.
[6.] Henry IV. of France, having given a promise of marriage to Mademoiselle D'Em-
tragues, and afterwards marrying Mary de Medecis, the Spanish Ambassador De Zuniga,
after the birth of the Dauphin, plotted with the father of the lady, and the Compte D'Auvergne,
to carry her off to Spain, together with her son by Henry, whom they meant to consider as
the real Dauphin. The plot was discovered: D'Entragues and D'Auvergne were tried and
imprisoned; but though the crime of the ambassador was manifest, the king would not suffer
him to be punished.
[7.] The Spaniards had before this, in time of full peace, plotted with Merargues.
Syndic of Provence, for the surprise of the city of Marseilles. The affair was carried on by
Merargues and Brunceau, secretary of the Spanish embassy, under whose garters a paper
containing the particulars of the treason was discovered. Merargues was tried and put to
death, but the Spanish ambassador (kemanded Brunceau as his secretary, and under the pro-
tection of the law of nations; and the King, Henry IV. having consulted the most able jurists
at Paris, delivered him up with an order for him to depart the kingdom.
DIPLOMATIC AGENT's PREVILEGES [NOTES]. 423
[8.] In 1603, the Duc de Sully, then Marquis de Rosney, being ambassador at London,
one of his retinue quarrelled at a brothel with some English, one of whom he killed. The
populace rose, but were quieted by the Lord Mayor, who demanded justice. Justice, however
was not done by the magistrate, but by Sully himself; who assembled a council of French-
men, condemned the man to death, and not till then, delivered him to the civil power. James
I. pardoned him, but no attempt was made to try him by the English law, and Sully delivered
him up solely for execution.
[9.] In 1618, Alphonso de la Cueva, Marquis de Bedmar, ambassador of Spain, con-
trived the famous conspiracy against Venice. It is needless to go into particulars of that cel-
ebrated plot. Suffice it to say, that the town was to be set on fire, the citizens and nobles
murdered and the government overturned. The facts were proved against Bcdmar; arias
and fireworks were found in his house, and letters concerning their application. But though
the populace endeavored to destroy him, the senate protected him from violence, and con-
tented themselves with sending him to Milan, and requesting the king of Spain to recal him.
{10.] In the reign of king James I. of England, the Spanish ambassadors Inoyosa and
Colonna, endeavored to breed a disturbance in the country, by informing the king that the
Duke of Buckingham meant to imprison him by means of the parliament, and to transfer the
regal authority to the Prince of Wales. Both the court and the parliament deemed this a
scandalous libel, but knew not how to proceed with the ambassadors.
[11] Sir Robert Cotton, who was consulted, wrote a tract called “A Relation of the
Proceedings against Ambassadors who had miscarried themselves,” in which he asserts “that
an ambassador, representing the person of a sovereign prince, he is by the Law of Nations,
exempt from regale tryale; that all actions of one so qualified, are made the act of his master,
until he disavow them; and that the injuries of one absolute prince to another, is factum hostil-
itatis, not treason, so much doth public conveniency prevail against a particular misehief.”
He then states various examples of ambassadors who have had violence put upon them by way
of prevention, rather than punishment; none of them amounting even to a design to try them;
and then recommends that some of the chief secretaries should wait upon the ambassador of
Spain, and by way of advice, desire him to keep his house, for fear of the people; that the
Prince of Wales and Duke of Buckingham should complain of the calumny in parliament;
that both houses should, in consequence, wait upon the ambassador, to request to know the
authors of it, in order to try them legally in parliament; that if he refused, he should then
be confined to his house, and a formal complaint sent against him to the king of Spain, requi-
ring such justice to be done upon him, as by the leagues of amity and the law of nations is
usual. If the king refused, it would then be “transactio criminis upon himself, and an abso-
lution of all amity, amounting to no less than war denounced.” This was the opinion of the
English court, complaint was made to the king of Spain, and the ambassador allowed to
depart. -
[12.] In 1657, a domestic of Monsieur de Thou, ambassador at the Hague, endeavoring
to commit violence upon a woman in the streets, he was detected by the patrol and carried to
the guard house, in order to be delivered to the civil tribunal. He was, however, demanded
by De Thou, of the deputies of Holland, as a privileged person, and restored by the munici-
pal power to receive justice from the hands of his master. *
[13.] In 1666, a hunting party being made by the court at Vienna, a gentleman in the
suite of the Spanish Ambassador, endeavored to press into a place reserved for the nobility,
and was stopped by the count de Kevenhuller, who being treated with impertinence, gave him
several strokes with a cane. The affront produced a serious affray some days afterwards, the
ambassador's train in revenge setting upon the Count in his coach, firing into it with pistols,
and piercing it with swords, by which the coachman was wounded, and the Count scarce able
to save himself. The guard arriving, the Spaniards retreated to the Hotel de Ville, where
they defended themselves till two were disabled, and then yielded. The ambassador flew
424 DIPLOMATIC AGENT'S PRIVILEGES [NOTES].
to support his domestics, and endeavored to force the Hotel de Ville where they were impris."
oned, but failing, went to court to demand reparation, which he did in such insulting terms,
that he was himself put into confinement. In the end, instead of the punishment of the Span-
iards, who had been guilty of the greatest outrage, a compromise was made. The ambassador
made excuses for his own passion towards the emperor, for which he and his domestics were
released, and the Count de Kevenhuller declared upon his honor that he did not know that
the person whom he originally struck had belonged to the Embassy.
14. In 1654, M. De Bass, minister from France to Cromwell, was accused of a con-
spiracy against his life. The council endeavored to make him undergo examination, but he
refused, saying, “that although he would communicate with Cromwell personally, and prove
to him that he was not privy to the design; yet he would not submit to interrogatories before a
judge; for being a public minister, he would by so doing offend against the dignity of his mas-
ter, to whom alone he was accountabe for actions.” The council retired to cousult what was
to be done with him, and he persisting in his refusal to answer, they contented themselves with
ordering him to depart the country in four and twenty hours.
[15.] In the reign of Charles II, the Spanish ambassador, enraged at the approaching
match with Portugal, endeavored to raise a sedition in the army, and the people, by scattering
inflammatory papers among them; at which the king was so incensed, that he ordered him to
depart the realm, and told him that he would send a complaint to his master, from whom he
would expect that justice should be done him.
[16.] Even the Turks have sometimes acknowledged the doctrine we are discussing. In
1646, the ambassador of England at Constantinople, was summoned by the merchants before
the Divan to answer some complaints. The ambassador representing his privilege, the grand
vizir said, “he was aware that it was a thing unheard of to summon an ambassador before
the divan, which would destroy the rights of ambassadors, and the law of nations.” It is true,
he was afterwards arrested and sent home, but that being solely owing to the revolution in En-
gland, and the arrival of a new minister, has nothing to do with the point.
And thus we have quoted a variety of examples which are in point to prove the principles
we have adopted. They contain a number of positive, and some of them very serious breaches
of the law of the country where the ambassadors have resided, yet shew the fullest exemption
from the power of the civil tribunals. Some authors, indeed, have allowed that they are ex-
empt from answering for breaches of the municipal law, which they call “malum prohibitum;”
but insist that nothing can prevent them from being responsible for crimes against the law of
nations, which are mala per se. See Lord Coke's opinion, Page 402 ante, JVo. 63.
[17.] On the first of November, 1653, Sa, and two others of the embassy, talking of some
matters in the new exchange, were set right as to a fact by one Colonel Gerhard. One of
them gave him the lie, and a scuffle ensued, in which Gerhard was severely wounded, and
would have been killed, had it not been for another gentleman, who drew in his defence. The
Portuguese resolved upon revenge, and a more atrocious or deliberate scheme could not be
devised. They came on the next night to the number of fifty, to the new exchange, armed
with swords, pistols, and coats of mail, and attended by two or three coaches with ammu-
nition, consisting of hand grenadoes, bottles, and little barrels of powder, and bullets. Their
scheme seems to have been, to have murdered every one promiscuously; being said to have
put every one to flight, and to have pistolled, cut, and wounded many. In this situation, a
Mr. Greenaway coming to see what was the matter, they shot him through the head, and
wounded Col. Mayo, and Messrs. Howard and Carter, who were passing by. It was not till
this time that the horse-guards came and took several of them to prison, the rest retiring
firing at the guards.
The Ambassador was afterwards required to deliver up others of the delinquents, which
he complied with, and his brother was among them. He interceded for his brother, but
Cromwell resolved, iſ he could, to try him by the law of the land. He, therefore, consulted
bIPLOMATIC AGENT'S PRIVILEGES [NOTES]. 425
the most eminent of the professors of the civil law, to settle how such a barbarous murder
might be punished. But these, disagreeing among themselves, he left the decision of the af-
fair to a court of delegates, consisting of the Chief Justice, and two other judges, three noble-
men, and three doctors of the civil law. Before these, Sa was examined. At first he was
supposed to be a colleague in the Embassy, and he vaunted himself that he was the king's
ambassador, and subject to the jurisdiction of no one else. He was made, however, to pro-
duce his credentials, by which, all that could be proved was, that the king intended in a little
time to recal his brother, and give him a commission to manage his affairs in England. This
being judged insufficient to prove him an ambassador, he was, without any farther regard to
the privilege of that character, ordered, as well as all the rest, to plead to the indictment.
{The result was, that lon Pantaleon Sa, brother to the Portuguese Ambassador in En-
gland (in the time of Cromwell) was tried, found guilty, and executed for murder.]
Such is the accurate statement of the affair till it came to a jury, as it appears from the
account of Zouch, a Civilian of eminence, and himself a delegate in the cause; and I have been
thus particular in these preliminary steps of it, in order the better to ascertain what was the
real opinion of the English lawyers upon the main point in question. For I think it is evident
from this account of the matter, (and one of more authority can hardly be met with) that had
Sa been actual ambassador, instead of forming part of the suite, the proceedings against him
would have been the same with those in the cases cited above. All, therefore, that can fairly
be drawn from this precedent, as to the decision of the then existing law of England is, that
the suite of an ambassador, if they committed murder, were liable to be tried for it by courts
of the country. Zouch asserts expressly, that his own opinion upon the main question, found-
ed upon Grotius, and the best authors agreed with them as to the exemption of ambassadors
themselves; and it should appear, from lais Solutio Questionis, that if Sa could have proved
that he was an actual ambassador, his plea before the delegates would have been allowed.
Lord Hale, in that part of his work which treats of the proceedings authorised by the
law of England against ambassadors, rests the whole upon cases. Upon these cases it is, that
he relies upon the authority in saying that an ambassador committing treason can only be
treated as an enemy, and not tried as a subject. Upon this one case (of Sa) also it is, that he
founds his position, “That if the ambassador or his associates, commit any other capital
offence, as rape, murder, or theft, they may be proceeded against by indictment in the ordi-
nary course of justice, as other aliens committing like offences. [Pleas of the Crown. 1.99.1
But if we are right in what we have shewn to be the true extent of the precedent of Sa;
though it may apply to the associates of an ambassador, it cannot apply to the ambassador
himself. For authority to try him for rape, or theft, Hale quotes no case at all.
“But for murder,” says Foster, “and other offences of great enormity, which are
against the light of nature, and the fundamental laws of all society, the persons mentioned in
this section, are certainly liable to answer in the ordinary course of justice, as other persons
offending in the like manner are, For though they may be thought not to owe allegiance to
the sovereign, and so be incapable of committing high treason, yet they are to be considered
as members of society; and consequently bound by that eternal universal law, by which all
civil societies are united and kept together.”
From any thing therefore, which Foster has laid down concerning this point, there is
nothing in it which appears so universally binding, as to preclude all exception; and that the
case of an ambassador committing murder was not an exception, should have been proved by
cases, which Foster has not endeavored to shew. Whereas, there are against him both reason
and cases, which we have shewn, and we may perhaps therefore be not far wrong in consid-
ering these tenets to be not sufficiently made out, as forming part of the law of England,-
(See Blackstone, 1. 253.)
54
426 DIPLOMATIC AGENT'S PRIVILEGEs [NotEs].
[18.] On the 29th of January, 1717, the government of England having certain infor-
mation of a conspiracy to invade the country and dethrone the king, contrived by Gyllenburg,
the Ambassador of Sweden, at that time at peace with Great Britain; they ordered the arrest
of that minister, which was accordingly effected. General Wade and Colonel Blakeney to
whom the charge was intrusted, found him making up dispatches, which they told him they
had orders to seize; and they even insisted upon searching his cabinet, which, upon the refusal
of his lady to deliver the keys, they actually broke open, Gyllenburg complained of these
proceedings, as a direct breach of the law of nations, and some of the foreign ministers at the
court of London expressed themselves to the same effect; upon which the Secretaries of State,
Methuen, and Stanhope, wrote circular letters to them, to assign reasons for the arrest, which
satisfied them all except Montleone, the Spanish Ambassador, who in his answer observed,
that he was sorry no other way could be fallen upon for preserving the peace of the kingdom,
than that of the arrest of a public minister, and the seizure of his papers, which are the repos-
itories of his secrets, two facts which seemed sensibly to wound the law of nations. The ob-
servation, however, answers itself; since the confession that there was no other way, proves
that this extremity was the simple consequence of those universal laws, which ever will, and
must overcome all other; I mean legitimate necessity, and self defence.
[19.] A criminal at Madrid in the time of Philip II. having escaped from justice, took
refuge in the house of the Venetian ambassador, and was pursued by an officer, who was told
from a window by the ambassador himself to enter the house, but who was immediately set
upon, ill-treated and driven away by the gentlemen and servants of the embassy, the officer
complained to the president of Castile, who took information of the whole affair, and ordered
the provosts to send and seize the delinquents. Hearing that they were to be resisted, the
provosts, instead of sending, went themselves, and upon entering, found the ambassador armed
with sword and buckler, and the whole suite prepared to oppose them. They nevertheless
without violence, contrived to amuse the person of the ambassador, while their officers seized
several delinquents, among whom was Badoaro one of his relations. These were tried by the
tribunals of the country, Badoaro was condemned to be beheaded; several valets to be hanged;
and others to be flogged; and the king wrote to the republic of Venice, and to all other christian
powers, acquainting them that his will and desire was, that when his ambassadors committed
any crimes unworthy of their station, they should be stripped of their privileges and judged by
the laws of the kingdom where they reside.
This case is as strong as it is possible to be against the positions in question. It is to be
found in Anthony Vera's Parfait Ambassadeur, and Wicquefort endeavors to shake its author-
ity by saying he never met with it in any other history. It is, however, also to be found in
Wotton’s account of Christendom, and the Legatus of Frederick Marslaer. De Callieres
seems content in thinking that justice was done, and yet the dignity of an ambassador preserv-
ed. But according to all the foregoing reasoning, whatever may have become of the ambas-
sador himself, it must be confessed that the whole law concerning the inviolability of embassies
as we have reviewed it, was absolutely destroyed. All then that we can fairly say upon this,
and the case of Sa, is, that the one happened before the doctrines which relate to the suite
were well understood or disseminated; and that the other forms an exception to the general
usage, which will not impugn the general law. Since, according to the observation of Byn-
kershoek, upon one of these very examples, “one single decision, of one single state, cannot
do away the Law of Nations itself.
U. S. CONSULAR ESTABLISHMENT. 427
120. Message from the President of the United States, in Relation to the
Consular Establishment of the United States:
WASHINGTON, MARCH 2, 1833.
To the Senate: I transmit herewith, for the consideration of the Senate, a report
from the Secretary of State, in relation to the consular establishment of the United
States. ANDREW JACKSON.
REPORT, To the President of the United States: _SIR:—The report which yon di-
rected to be made on the consular system of the United States has hitherto been
delayed, from the desire of laying before Congress all the facts and observations ne-
cessary to a proper course of legislation on a subject so important to our commercial
interests. These could only be procured from distant and various sources; and it
was soon found, from the course of public business, that no final action could be ex-
pected, on a subject in which such a variety of opinion was to be expected, at this
session, when other objects seemed to engross the attention of the Legislature. Even
at this late day, the information I expected is far from being complete; and addition-
al facts may perhaps induce different deductions before the subject can be finally act-
ed upon. In the meantime, what is now presented, in obedience to your direction
may show the inconveniences of our present system, if one it may be called; prove
the necessity of some change; and, by presenting the several remedies for the evil
that have occurred to me, perhaps indicate one that may receive the sanction of legis-
lative wisdom.
To a nation essentially commercial, like the United States, the consular functions
are highly important, and ought to be strictly defined. They are performed in a for-
eign country, often in collision with the officers of the nation, in which they are placed;
and therefore public, as well as private interests, are put in jeopardy by thcir errors
or faults. Frequently. commissioned to reside in countries where there is no public
Minister of their country, Consuls are forced, in defence of their fellow-citizens, to
assume, occasionally, diplomatic power, by addressing themselves directly to the go-
vernment: without proper instructions giving them by law,they may do this unadvised-
ly, or indiscreefly, and thus involve their country in difficulties and disputes.
In the various acts they are called on to perform in relation to the commerce of their
fellow-citizens, they may assume powers injurious to their interests, or refuse to act,
from ignorance of their duty, where the case would seem to require it. In most of these
circumstances, they have no legal adviser, and no rule prescribed by law to guide
them, in the delicate and important questions that are continually calling for their de-
cision. At home, every officer is surrounded with the means of obtaining information
and advice; yet, at home, every officer has his duties prescribed and marked out by
law. Abroad, an officer is entrusted with the most important functions, out of the
reach of control or advice, and is left with, comparatively, no written rules for his gui-
dance. In their absence, he frequently puts such construction on his powers as best
suits his interest, and avoids taking any responsibility that is not forced upon him.
No written rule being given to which the merchant or the ship master can refer in his
transactions with Consuls, constant bickerings are the result, injurious to the in-
terest of trade, and the reputation of the country. This might, in a great measure,
be avoided by laws defining the rights and duties of Consuls, establishing a table of
fees for their services, and prescribing clearly the duties of American masters, mari-
ners, and merchants, in relation to their Consuls in foreign ports. In all this, our
present system is wofully deficient: Two or three meagre laws, and an equivocal re-
ference to the laws of nations, with some usages of uncertain authority, and differing
in different ports, being the only guides afforded the parties interested, so that officers
most desirous of restraining themselves within the bounds of duty, and of doing all
that it requires, know not how to conform to laws of which they are ignorant, whilst
those of looser principles find in this uncertainty the means of vexatious extortion.
The first law on the subject was passed on the 14th day of April, in the year 1792;
and its principal object was, as the title of the bill imports, to give effect to the con-
428 U. S. CONSULAR ESTABLISHMENT.
sular convention with France. It, however, contains some general provisions, which,
since the French convention has been annulled, have formed the ground work of our
consular system. These provisions extend only to the authority given to Consuls to
receive protests and declarations; to give copies under the consulate seal; to settle
the affairs of American citizens who shall die within the limits of the consulate; to se-
cure property saved from wrecks; to provide for the deposite of the ship's papers; and
to afford relief to destitute American seamen. These are the subjects in relation to
which specific duties are assigned by the law abovementioned, and an other passed
28th February, 1803; but more enlarged, general, and undefined powers are given by
the 9th section, which enacts that the “specification of certain powers and duties to
be performed by Consuls and Vice-Consuls, shall not be construed to the exclusion
of others resulting from the nature of their appointments, or any treaty or convention
under which they may act.”
These are all the statutory provisions on this important subject; a bare perusal of
which, will show how many points are left unprovided for. Among these, that which
creates the most frequent cause of misunderstanding between the Consuls and masters
of vessels, is the want of a bill of fees, extending to all the acts which a Consul may
be called on to perform.
The general referrence to powers and duties resulting from the nature of the ap-
pointment, is also the source of much difficulty. No instructions having yet been
given, either by the Legislative or Executive Department, to define these powers, or to
define their powers, or to prescribe the compensation to be given for the exercise of
those duties thus indefinitely alluded to, the Consul is left in the one case to the ex-
ercise of his own, often, very imperfect, knowledge of the general duties of his office;
and, in the other, to the estimate he may form of the value of his services.
A more precise designation of the duties of Consuls is therefore of the first neces-
sity; and if the system of compensation by fees should be persevered in, it would re-
quire a more particular table of those which ought to be received.
The first, as far as the powers of the Department could extend, has been attempted
by the circular instructions annexed to this report; but legislative action seems abso-
lutely necessary to extend the powers where they are deemed inadequate, or to restrict
them where they may be supposed to be too extensive.
The subject of compensation is one that has engaged my close attention since I
have had the direction of the Department, and I have no hesitation in giving a deci-
ded opinion, that the exaction of fees has been the source of misunderstandings be-
tween ourConsuls and the masters of vessels.injurious to the reputation of the country
—that it is degrading to the officer who is obliged to wrangle for them—is unequal in
its operations,—oppressive to our commerce,—and ought either to be wholly abolish-
ed, or so modified as to make the operation of the system more equal, by apportion-
ing the amount to the size of the vessel, or, if possible, to the value of the cargo.
But I cannnot avoid expressing the opinion that these officers, like all others,
should be compensated by adequate salaries, and should be prevented from engaging
in commerce. According to the present system, our Consuls, with very few excep-
tions, are commission merchants, anxious, like all other merchants, to increase their bu-
siness and obtain consignments. In many, perhaps in the greater number of cases,
the place is sought for chiefly for the advantage and the influence it will give to ex-
tend the commercial affairs of the officer. Can it be believed that this official influ-
ence will always be properly exercised? When it is, will not contrary suspicions
be entertained? This must create jealousy, detraction, and all the arts that rivalship
will exercise and provoke, amidst which the dignity of the public officer is degraded,
and his influence with the foreign functionaries lost. The Consul at least, therefore,
if not the Vice-Consul, ought not to be salaried officers. They will never, then, by
their countrymen, be suspected of acting towards them as their commercial interest,
not as their duty, requires; and their complaints in behalf of their fellow-citizens will
be attended to, because they will not be liable to the suspicion of advocating their
own interest; consular offices would no longer be held in counting-houses, nor the
Consul himself, called from defending the case of an injured American citizen, to sell
a barrel of sugar, or to despatch the settlement of an account. All fees paid to pub-
U. S. CONSULAR ESTABLISHMENT. 429
lic officers are taxes; fees to Consuls are taxes on commerce. Are such taxes, in the
state of our finances, necessary? Are they just? Are they equal? Are they easily
collected? None of these questions, it is believed, can be answered in the affirma-
tive. They are certainly not necessary; the customs alone produce more than suffi-
cient for the payment of all the expenses of government. Why should an extra tax
be laid upon commerce, which already bears the whole expense of government, for
the support of a particular set of officers! Should it be said that those who derive
the benefit should pay the expenses, it would not seem to be a satisfactory answer.
It is not for the sole benefit of the ships which touch at a consular port that the con-
sular office is created: the whole country is interested in the establis, ment. The
concerns of its general commerce, the protection of its citizens abroad, its reputation,
is concerned. But the principle itself is a false one. Public officers are established
for the general good; and though particular individuals may have more occasion for
the exercise of these functions than others, yet those who are under the necessity of
applying for their interposition never can, with justice, be exclusively taxed for the
expense of the department which is organized for their protection. . The judge re-
ceives a salary, yet not one-tenth of the community are suitors in his court. So of
all the salaried officers of government; all the exceptions to the rule are abuses. The
evils of such a system are apparent. The question of compensation varics according
to the place and circumstances of the time. . It can rarely be accurately known. The
collection gives rise to illegal exactions and oppressions, to disputes, to the loss of
official dignity, to the suspicion of bad motives where even they do not exist. In no
case are these evils more apparent than in the case of consuls. At a distance from
all superintendance, they have greater opportunities for illegal exactions, and that
very circumstance makes them more liable to suspicion.
It is easily conceived that, in the infancy of our government, when we were bur-
dened with a great amount of public debt, every available mode of supporting the dif-
ferent institutions of the country should be resorted to, and that therefore the exam-
ples set by other nations of supporting particular offices, by the exaction of fees,
should be followed; but now when one uniform mode of collecting revenue yields a
product more than sufficient for all the wants of government, why should others, lia-
ble to so many objections be continued! Nor ought the amount to deter us. Accord-
ing to the list hereto annexed, we have one hundred and fifty-six consuls, vice-con-
suls, and commercial agents. By a proper distribution these may be classed as fol-
lows: *
Thirty consuls, with salaries averaging $2,000 will amount to - $60,000
One hundred and twenty-six vice-consuls and commercial agents,
with salaries averaging $1,000, is º º dº tº 126,000
Total annual sum, * > $186,000
This is calculated on the present establishment. It is however probable that
some additions may be necessary; but as they will be vice consular establishments,
the increase for many years cannot be considerable. When it is considered that not
only the respectability of the government and security of its citizens abroad will be
promoted by this change, but that it is chiefly intended for the protection and exten-
Sion of that commerce from which the whole revenue of the country is derived, the
expense will not be thought too great for the objects.
Such a provision ought to be accompanied by prohibitions of any interest in com-
merce, with clear definitions of official duty, and heavy penalties for neglecting them:
and we might then see these important offices filled, as they should be, by men of
talent, education, and respectability of character, who would be the protectors, not
the rivals of our merchants, who would command the respect of the functionaries of
the ports in which they reside, do honor to our national character, and whose whole
time would be devoted to the duties of their office.
Until some change could be made, I have thought it my duty to prepare a set of
instructions which might introduce order and uniformity into the system, and cor-
4.30 U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
rect as many evils as could be done without legislation. These have been re-
ferred to before as forming a schedule to this report. EDW. LIVINGSTON.
General Instructions to the Consuls and Commercial Agents of the United
States. The following instructions are intended to supersede those which have
at different periods, been issued from this department, embodying directions
to those officers, and arranging them under proper heads, for the purpose of
making them easily referred to, and producing uniformity in all the consular
proceedings. -
121. [CHAP. I. Of the Duty of a Consul on his appointment before he
enters on the exercise of his Official Duties.] ART. 1. As soon as a Consul
receives notice of his appointment, he is required to execute a bond, with
such sureties as shall be certified by the district attorney of the United
States for the district in which he resides, to be sufficient. He is to transmit
the bond executed to this department for the approval of the Secretary of
State, and, if he receives no notice that further security will be required, he
will, with all convenient despatch, after receiving his commission and in.
structions, depart for the place of his destination, giving notice to the depart.
ment of the time of his departure, and of the vessel in which he embarks,
0n his arrival at the place of his destination, he will give notice to the de-
partment of the fact, if the Consul appointed be, at the time of his appoint.
ment, a resident of the country to which he shall be appointed, his consular
bond must be executed by him, and transmitted to the United States for the
purpose of being executed by his sureties, who must be residents of the
United States.
122. [CHAP. II. Of the formalities to be observed by a Consul or Vice
Consul after entering upon the duties of his ºffice..] ART. 2. The first duty
of a censul, on his arrival, will be to transmit his commission to the minis-
ter of the United States, if there be one near the government of the country
to which he is sent, to the end that he may obtain the usual exeguatur. This
he must see made public in the manner usual in such country; and he will
then apply to the person having charge of the consular seal, and the archives
of the consulate to which he is appointed, for the delivery thereof, making
an inventory of the papers and other effects they may contain, or verifying
a former inventory, if any such has already been made, and passing a receipt
for the same; transmitting a copy of such inventory to the department, if it
has not already been done; or, if any additions have been made to such
archives since the last transmission, then sending a copy of the additional
articles not contained in the former inventory.
A Rt. 3. If there are any funds in the hands of the former incumbent
of the office, they must be delivered over to his successor, unless they are
the proceeds of the effects of an American who has died intestate more than
a year, and which, according to the second section of the act of the 14th of
U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS, 43i
April, 1792, ought to be remitted to the Treasury of the United States, in
which case the Consul who received the same shall make the remittance:
ART. 4. Having entered on the duties of his office, the Consul must im-
mediately give notice thereof to the Department of State, to the minister of
the United States in the country to which such Consul is appointed, and to
the Consuls of the United States residing in the same country, and in the
neighboring ports of other countries. And no Consul is to absent himself
from the country of his consular residence, without leave first obtained from
the Department of State, or from the diplomatic agent of the United States
in that country; unless in cases of emergency, which must be made to ap-
pear to the satisfaction of the department.
123. [CHAP. III. Of the Records and Papers of the Consular Offices.]
ART. 5. The following record books are to be kept in each consulate:
1. A letter book, into which are to be copied all official notes and let-
ters, (other than those addressed to the Department of State) according to
their dates, which are written by the Consul or by his order.
2. A book of correspondence with the Department of State, in which
are to be copied, according to their dates, all the letters written by the Con-
sul to the department, with the returns and other documents accompanying
the same.
o
3. A record book for the entry of protests, and all other official con-
Sular acts, in which all such acts,of every description,shall be fairly written.
ART. 6 When a paper of any description shall be entered or recorded
in either of the said books, the same shall be indexed by a reference both to
the name of the party and the subject of the paper.
ART. 7. The answers received to official letters, and all other papers
transmitted to the consulate intended to be permanently kept in a proper
place, labelled according to their subject matter, until a sufficient number
shall be accumulated to form a volume, when they shall be bound up, and
indexed in the same manner as is directed with respect to the other records.
ART. 8. All letters addressed to this department must be written on
foolscap paper in a fair hand, leaving an inch margin all round the page,
and the Consuls will recommend to their correspondents to observe the same
form. These letters are to be folded in the manner of the ink lines which
are herewith sent to regulate the distance between the written lines of the
communication; and the writer’s name, consulate or agency, and date, must
be regularly endorsed, after which they are to be enclosed in an envelope,
and properly directed. The Consuls are further requested not to put
wafers or sealing wax upon the communications and letters themselves, but
only on the envelopes which enclose them.
ART. 9. All the abovementioned books must be regularly paged; but
where blanks occur, (as in the book of original letters from the covers and
A32 U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
unwritten pages,) a cross must be made over the blank page, and it is not
to be numbered. -
ART. 10. The consular books are not to be mixed with those of the Con-
sul’s private affairs; and, his consular business should, if possible, be trans-
acted in a separate apartment from that in which his ordinary commercial
or other affairs are carried on; and it must be designated by the arms of the
United States exhibited at the entrance, and the words “Consulate of the
United States,” in English, and in the language of the country where the
Consul resides.
ART. 11. A seal must be provided for every consulate, the impression
of which shall be the American eagle in the centre, with the name of the con-
sulate around it. This seal is to be kept in some secure place, and used to
authenticate all documents given by the Consul.
ART. 12. With these “Instructions,” the Consuls will receive printed
forms, which are to be employed in future in making the customary commer-
cial returns. These returns are to be made regularly, half yearly, even if
it should be necessary to transmit them in blank. The Consuls are requir-
ed, also, to give the respective sums at the foot of the columns of figures,
and finally, after folding the returns in the shape of which they have a speci-
men in the accompanying blanks, to endorse them with the name of the Con-
sul or agent, the consulate or agency, and the date; with a brief recapitula-
tion, specifying the number of vessels, the amount of tonnage, the number of
seamen, and where possible, the estimated value of cargoes.
ART. IS. Also, with these “ Instructions,” the Consuls will receive
another printed form, being a consular statement of fees, designed to accom-
pany the printed forms,of returns described in the preceding article. In the
specification of the items, the most scrupulous accuracy of detail is expected.
It is earnestly hoped that the Consuls and agents will co-operate with the
department in its endeavor to organize a complete consular establishment,
for which purpose they are requested to note such parts of the forms
mentioned in this and the next preceding article, as they may deem suscep-
tible of improvement, and to make such suggestions as may in any way con-
tribute to the object in view. This form is to be folded up, like that of
which it is an accompaniment, and endorsed with the name of the Consul
or agent, the consulate or agency, the date, and the sum total in dollars and
cents.
When the blanks described in the foregoing articles fail, the Consuls
are instructed to make them out in the same form; and for that purpose,
they should always retain one specimen of each, which they are to regard
in future as an established form.
ART. 14. Whenever accounts are to be transmitted, they must be en-
closed in a separate communication, the subject of which must be confined
U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS. 433
exclusively to such accounts. All duplicates must be written on separate
sheets or parts of sheets and marked as duplicates.
ART. 15. The Consuls are requested in future to endorse, numerically,
all their communications and returns thus: No. 1, 2, &c. &c.; so that at any
time a deficiency in the series may be readily ascertained and supplied.—
Short marginal notes, too, indicating the subject matter of their communi-
cations, are particularly enjoined.
124. [CHAP. 4. Of the Duties required to be performed by Consuls
and Vice Consuls of the United States. SEc. 1. Of the nature of Consu-
lar Duties.] ART. 16. A consul, (excepting those to the Barbary powers)
is not invested with any diplomatic powers, and therefore is not entitled
to communicate directly with the Government of the country in which he
resides; except under the special circumstances hereinafter mentioned;
whenever application is to be made to the Government, it must be done
through the Minister of the United States, if there be one; if not, and the
case should require it, the Consul may make the application to the proper
department, but in respectful terms, stating the exigency of the case, and
that an application to the subordinate officers could not be made, or had
proved ineffectual. t -
ART. 17. The duties of a Consul or Vice Consul are such as are pre-
scribed by positive law, or such as arise from the nature of the office under
the general commercial laws of nations. -
The first statute prescribing particular duties to Consuls is the act of 14th
May, 1792. The first section of this act relates solely to the consular cor-
vention with France, which, being no longer in force, this section is obsolete.
A copy of so much of this act as is in force, is annexed to these instructions.
125. SEC. II. [Of the Duties of Consuls in Relation to Intestate’s
Estates.] ART. 18. By the first clause of the second section, Consuls and
Vice-Consuls are empowered to receive protests or declarations, which
captains, masters, crews, passengers and merchants, citizens of the United
States, may make in the place for which such Consul is appointed, and also
such as foreigners may make before them relative to the personal interest
of any citizens of the United States. The originals of these acts are to be
kept in the book of records of the consulate, and copies, duly authenticated
under the consular seal, are to be given to such persons as may demand
the same. r
By the second clause of the second section, where a citizen of the United
States shall die within the consular district, the Consul or Vice-Consul shall
take possession of his effects, shall sell at public auction such part of them
as may be of a perishable nature, and such further part as may be necessary
for the payment of the debts of the deceased.
55
434 U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
But in order to execute this power, the following are pre-requisites:
1. That the laws of the country permit such administration, or that it
be stipulated by treaty.
2. That the person has died without any legal representative, any part-
ner in trade, or trustee, to take care of his effects.
ART. 19. In the execution of this duty the following requisites are
prescribed by the act: #
1. An inventory must be taken of all the effects of the deceased, with
the assistance of two merchants of the United States, or, for want of them,
of any others.
In performing this branch of the consular duty, great attention is required;
the word “effects” are under the act, comprehends property of every descrip-
tion, including debts due. Merchants of great respectability are to be se-
lected as the assistants of the Consul. Although appraisement is not men-
tioned in the act, the Consuls are instructed to have the apparent value of
each article affixed to it. If among the papers of the deceased are found
any evidences of debts, although they may not be due in the consular dis-
tricts, yet they are to be placed in the inventory.
2. The commercial books of the deceased are to be placed in the inven-
tory, and particularly described, mentioning the number of pages each of
the said books contains, and the Consuls shall place a certificate, signed by
him, at the beginning and the end of each book, in such manner as to prevent
any addition being made to them.
The letter books of the deceased are comprehended in the term commer-
cial books.
ART. 20. This inventory must be entered in the consular books, and
as doubts may arise whether this is such a document as is comprehended in
the provisions of the first clause of this section of the law, the Consul is in-
structed to make two originals; that is to say, that the inventory be signed
by him, and by his two assistants, both in the book of records in which it is
entered, and in the authenticated copy.
ART. 21. By the second section of the act aforesaid, all sales of the
property of the deceased must be “at auction, after reasonable public
notice.” In the execution of this duty, the Consul is instructed to give the
the same previous notice that is directed by the laws of the country for the
judicial sale of property in execution, and at some public place; but whether
it be required in judicial sales or not, notice must be given in at least one of
the gazettes of the place, if any be printed there, both in English and in the
language of the country.
ART. 22. No property shall be sold as being of a perishable nature, until
it has been viewed by three respectable merchants, and by them, under oath,
declared to be of that description.
U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS. 455
ART. 23. In one year after the death of the intestate, the Consul is di-
rected, by the said 2d, section of the act aforesaid, “to transmit the residue of
the estate unsold, and the balance(in money after paying the debts and char-
ges) to the Treasury of the United States, to be holden in trust for the legal
claimants. But if at any time before such transmission, the legal representa-
tive of the deceased appear and demand the effects in the hands of the Con-
sul, he shall deliver them up, being paid his fees, and shall cease his proceed-
ings.”
ART, 24. In the execution of the duty prescribed by the last preceding
article, the Consul is hereby instructed—
1. To keep a regular account of all monies received, as well for effects
sold as for credits collected, and all sums expended; taking duplicate receipts
expressing on what account the sums were paid, numbering them regularly;
one of each of the said duplicates to be kept by the consul, the other to be
delivered to the representative of the deceased, or transmitted to the trea-
sury, if no representative appear.
2. To enter on his consular books a regular account between himself
and the estate of the deceased, in which he shall enter to his debit all the
moneys and effects that came to his hands, and to his credit all the payments
he may make, and, finally, the balance that he may deliver over or remit,
so as to close the account. A copy of this account shall be delivered to the
representative of the deceased, or transmitted to the treasury, as the case
may be. -
3. As soon as any estate shall be finally settled, the Consul shall give
notice to the department; designating the balance money, and the list of ef.
fects, which has been transmitted to the treasury, or delivered to the repre-
sentative of the deceased, as the case may be. -
4. If there should be several parties each claiming to be the represen-
sentative of the deceased, and demanding the effects, the Consul must di-
rect the parties to determine their rights in the tribunals of the country.
126. SECTION 3. [Of the duties of Consuls in relation to Wrecks.]
ARt. 25. By the third section of the act aforesaid, the “Consuls and Vice
Consuls, in cases where vessels of the United States shall be stranded on
the coast of their consulates respectively, shall, as far as the laws of the
country permit, take proper measures as well for saving such vessels, their
cargoes and appurtenances, as for storing and securing the effects and
merchandise saved, and for taking an inventory and inventories thereof;
and the merchandise and effects saved, with the inventory and inventories,
shall, after deducting therefrom the expense, be delivered to the owner or
owners. But no Consul or Vice Consul shall take possession of any such
goods, wares merchandise or property, when the master, owner or consignee
thereof, is present or capable of taking possession of the same.”
436 U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
ART. 26. In the execution of the duties prescribed by this part of the
act, the Consul is instructed:
1. That all vessels, parts of vessels, and any portion of their cargo be-
longing to citizens of the United States, saved and brought into the consu-
lar jurisdiction, after being wrecked, or in consequence of any disaster at
sea, are to be proceeded with in the same manner as if the vessel had stran-
ded within the consular jurisdiction; and if salvage shall be claimed and
allowed by a competent tribunal, the remainder of the effects, or the balance
of their proceeds, if sold, shall be disposed of in the same manner as is direc-
ted in the last preceding section with respect to intestate's estate; provided,
in the case of salvage, that the court deciding the same will permit the Con-
sul to receive the effects and balance after paying the salvage.
2. In some countries (as in Sweden) chartered companies have the
privilege of taking possession of all property wrecked; in others it may be
vested in particular magistrates or officers. In all these cases the Consul
is not to interfere with the legal function of the proper officer; but he may
demand, as the representative of the absent master or owner, or as his official
adviser if he be present, to assist at the taking of the inventory, the sale,
and all other proceedings in relation to the property. It is his duty to pro-
tect the interest of the owner, and, if his reasonable requests are not com-
plied with, to take the necessary evidence, and transmit it to the Depart-
ment of State.
3. When any accident of this kind happens within his jurisdiction, the
Consul is to give immediate notice to the Department of State, designating
the vessel and the owners or master.
4. When there is no impediment from the laws of the country, all pro-
ceedings in relation to property wrecked are to be the same with those pre-
scribed for the property of intestates.
127. SEGTION 4. [Of the Duties of Consuls in relation to the masters of
American vessels.] ART. 27. By an act of the Congress of the United
States, passed the 28th February, 1803, a copy whereof is annexed to these
instructions, it is, in substance, directed, that every master of an American
vessel shall, on his arrival at a foreign port, deposit his register, sea letter
and Mediterranean passport, with the Consul, Vice Consul, commercial
Agent, or Vice Commercial Agent, under a penalty of five hundred dollars,
($500) which the Consul, Vice Consul, &c. &c. may recover in his own name,
for the use of the United States, and that whenever a clearance from the
proper officer of the port shall be produced to the Consul, he shall deliver
up all the ship’s papers, provided the master shall have complied with
the provisions of the act of 28th February, 1803, and the act to which it is a
supplement, (that is to say) the act of 14th April, 1792.
U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS. 437
ART. 28. By another section of the same act, it is directed, that when-
ever a vessel belonging to an American citizen shall be sold in a foreign
port, and her company discharged, or whenever a mariner, a citizen of the
United States, shall, with his own consent, be discharged in a foreign coun-
try, it is the duty of the master or commander to produce to the Consul, Vice
Consul, Commercial Agent, or Vice Commercial Agent, the list ofthe ship’s
company, certified according to the first section of the act of 28th February,
1803, and to pay to such Consul, &c. &c. for every mariner being designated
on such list as a citizen of the United States, three months’ pay, over and
above the wages which may be due to such mariner; two thirds to be paid by
the Consul to the mariner discharged, upon his engagement on board of any
vessel to return to the United States, and the remaining third to be retained
for creating a fund for the payment of the passage of mariners, citizens of
the United States, who may be desirous of returning to the United States,
for the maintenance of American seamen, who may be destitute in such port;
and the sums retained for such fund, shall be accounted for to the treasury
every six months by the person receiving the same.
ART. 29. The under officers (below that of Captain) are included in
the provisions of this section; but the two months' wages are not to be paid
in any case, unless the person so discharged has engaged on board of some
vessel to return to the United States. If no occasion offers of a direct return,
an engagement on board of a vessel ultimately to return, will be sufficient,
or, if no such vessel offers, the seaman will be entitled to his two months’
wages on his shipping for an intermediate convenient port.
ARt. 30. Under the first of these sections, it will be the duty of the
Consuls immediately on the arrival of an American vessel in his consulate,
should the master neglect to deliver his ship’s papers, as is directed by the
law, to apprize him of the necessity of so doing, by showing him the law
that requires it, and of the penalty he will incur by refusal or neglect.—
When received, the papers are be kept together in a place as safe as possible
to guard against fire and other accidents; and the Consul, on receiving such
papers, shall make an entry in his consular record, specifing the time of
delivery, the name of the vessel, the master, and what is the description of
the papers deposited, as register, sea letter, &c. &c.; and when the master
shall produce the clearance of his vessel, shall have complied with the direc-
tions of the act above recited, the Consul, shall, without delay, deliver up
the papers, and shall make an entry in his consular record of the time of
such delivery.
ART. 31. The provisions of the acts with which the master is obliged
to comply before receiving these papers, are—
1. If any of the seamen are discharged, he must have paid three months’
wages of such of them as, by the shipping articles or description list of the
4.38 U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
seamen, shall appear to be American citizens. If they appear to be such
by either of these papers, no other evidence is required or permitted.
2. If a vessel be bound for a port in the United States, and there are
destitute American seamen in the port, he must agree to take such seamen
on board, as he shall be requested to do by the Consul, not exceeding two
seamen for every 100 tons burden of the vessel—on the terms he may agree
on with the Consul, not exceeding ten dollars for each seaman.
3. He must pay the fees for the following services, or such of them as
have been rendered by the Consul for the master or his vessel, according to
the rules established by law, that is to say:
1. For authenticating, under the consular seal, any act whatever, which
may be made, or passed in by the master, or at his request, for the concerns
of the vessel, or its owners or freighters, two dollars.
2. For any certificate of the discharge of a seaman, fifty cents.
These are the only fees for the payment of which, by the acts of Congress,
a Consul has a right to detain a ship’s papers.
ART. 32. For all other dues, the Consul may require payment at the
time the service is performed, or refuse his agency until they are paid for
or secured to his satisfaction; but the Consuls are earnestly advised to avoid
as much as possible all contentions of this nature with their countrymen,
which tend to degrade our national character abroad.
ART. 83. When a vessel is sold under a decree of a court, as having
become unseaworthy, in consequence of any accident or stress of weather,
and the crew are discharged in consequence of such sale, the three months’
wages are not to be required; but if the vessel is found not to be seaworthy
in consequence of some decay or defect at the inception of the voyage, the
seamen are not to lose their wages on account of the fault of the owners,
and the three months’ wages are to be exacted.
ART. 34. If any fine or penalty shall be incurred by the master of an
American vessel under any of the laws abovementioned, the Consul shall
send to this department a certificate of the fact, under the consular seal,
with a proper description of the vessel, designating the port to which she
belongs, and the place of abode of the master; to the end that suits may be
instituted for the recovery of the penalty.
128. SECTION 5. [Of the duties of Consuls in relation to Seamen of
the United States.] ART. 35. By the fourth section of the said act of
28th February, 1803, it is made the duty of Consuls to provide for the ma-
riners of the United States, who may be found destitute within their districts,
sufficient subsistence and passages to the United States, in the most rea-
sonable manner, at the expense of the United States, subject to such instruc-
tions as the Seeretary of State shall give, and the section also provides for
the manner in which such mariners are to be transported to the United States.
U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS 439
tjnder this section, the Consuls are instructed—
1. That all seamen shipped as American seamen, are entitled to the ben-
fit of its provisions, and they shall not be refused the relief provided for by it,
under pretence that they are not really American citizens.
2. That the relief to be provided shall include board, lodging, and me-
dical attendance, and clothing, when necessary; all to be on the most reason-
able scale, consistent with the comfort and proper support of the individual.
3. That persons applying for relief be examined touching the manner
of their being left destitute; and, if it shall appear from such examination
that they have been discharged from any American vessel contrary to the
provision of the third section of the act of the 28th February, 1803, or that
any other provisions of the said act or other laws of the United States have
been violated, in every such case it shall be the duty of the Consul to trans-
mit a copy of the examination of the mariner to this department, with such
other information as may enable it to cause prosecution to be instituted for
such breach of the laws, designating the place at which the necessary wit-
nesses will probably be found.
4. That, in all cases of such relief afforded, whether the seamen have
received it, be returned to the United States or not, an exact account be fur-
nished, in the half yearly returns made by the Consul, of the name of the
individual, and of the ship, its master, owner, and the port to which she be-
longed, together with the sum expended, with vouchers, where, from the na-
ture of the case, they can be procured.
ART. 36 Where piracy, mutiny, or any other offence against the laws
of the United States, shall have been committed on board of any vessel ef
the United States coming into the consular district, it is the duty of the Con-
sul, after taking the depositions necessary to establish the facts, to apply to
the local authorities for means of securing the offenders while they remain
in port, and to provide the means of sending them, without delay, to the
United States for trial; and, in all such cases, where the vessel, on board
which the offence was committed, is not bound to the United States, the
Consul is directed to procure two of the principal witnesses to be sent home
with the person accused; and he is at the same time, to transmit certified
copies of all the depositions he has taken in relation to the offence; an exact
detail of all its circumstances; and such information as may be necessary to
secure the conviction of the offenders.
ART. 37. Great care must be taken in all cases of accusations against
mariners, by their officers, not to confound a simple and casual disobedience
of orders with the crime of mutiny, which has, in some cases, been made, in
order to justify a discharge of seamen in a foreign port, contrary to the di-
rections of the act: In this, as in all other cases, the Consuls are particularly
instructed, while on the one hand they support the masters of vessels in the
440 U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
exercise of their proper authority, on the other to discourage and prevent,
all oppression of seamen by their officers. One essential object of the con-
lar appointment is the protection of this class of our fellow-citizens,whose hab-
its of life require a kind of guardianship of their persons and interests in for-
eign countries; but, at the same time, a strict vigilance over their conduct.
127. SECTION 6. [Of the Duties of Consuls in granting Certificates
and Passports.] ART, 38. Consuls are authorized to great passports to
American citizens, which must be authenticated by their signature, and the
consular seal, and must be in the form hereunto annexed. Great care and
circumspection are required in the exercise of this duty, that passports be
given to none but American citizens; and to give such passport to an alien,
knowing him to be such, is an offence punishable by a fine of one hundred
dollars, (3100,) to which the President will always add deprivation of office.
The same observations apply to certificates, that property belonging to
aliens is the property of citizens, knowing the fact to be otherwise; by which
offence a much higher penalty is incurred, the punishment being a fine not
exceeding ten thousand dollars, ($10,000) and imprisonment not exceeding
three years. Consuls therefore, in all such cases, will require such evidence
as will show clearly that they had good reason to believe the truth of the
facts they certify.
ART. 39. By the revenue laws of the United States, Consuls are author-
ised to give certificates of the landing of merchandize, to obtain the benefit
of drawback. As great frauds upon the revenue have sometimes been com-
mitted by obtaining certificates without a due examination of the articles,
Consuls are instructed to give no such certificates without personal inspec-
tion or full proof.
ART. 40. Authority is also given by the same laws to certify invoices
of goods shipped to the United States; but the shipper is entitled to include
in one invoice all the goods he may ship by the same vessel. On these, and
on all other subjects relating to duties regarding the revenues, particular in-
structions will be given by the Treasury, which will be equally obligatory
as if they had proceeded from this department. &
128. SECTIon 7. [Of the duties of Consuls with respect to the appoint-
'ment of Consular Jigents.] ART. 41. When there are several seaports in a
consular district, to which American vessels resort, it is the duty of the Con-
sul to appoint some fit person to be consular agent in such port, who shall
correspond with, and make his returns to him, (the Consul,) who shall trans-
mit copies of them with his own quarterly returns.
ART. 42. Great care must be taken in the selection of Consular agents.
American citizens are to be preferred when other qualifications are equal;
and when fit persons can be found who are not engaged in commerce, they
are to be selected. The Consul is to be responsible for the official act of the
U. S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS 441
consular agent appointed by him, and he must immediately give notice to
the minister of the United States, near the government of the country where
he resides,to the local authority of the place, and to this department, of such
appointment.
129. [CHAP. 5. Rules for the General Conduct of Consuls, not reducible
to either of the preceeding heads...] ART. 43. Every law, edict, or regulation,
in any way affecting the commerce of the United States, or of any other
country than that in which the consular district lies, must immediately be
transmitted to this department; and, if it be a local regulation operating only
on a particular port, the Consul must also give immediate notice thereof to
the Minister, if there be any in the country to which the district belongs.
ART. 44. The Consuls are expected, once in three months at least, to
write to the department, if it be for no other purpose than that of apprising
the department of their being at their respective posts. They are not required
to write oftener, unless in emergent cases, or where interest or business points
out the propriety of more frequent communication. In their correspondence,
they will note all events that bear upon the commerce of the country with the
United States, and of our navigation, the establishment of new branches of
industry in the extent of their consulate, and the increase and decline of
those before established; they will make such suggestions as in their opinion,
may lead to the increase of our commerce or navigation, and point out those
which have a contrary effect, with the means that appear proper for avoiding
them. Samples of manufactures, and specimens of produce which appear to
be valuable articles either of export or import, if not generally known, should
be sent, if not too bulky, with the consular letters; and if too bulky, may be
addresed to the collector of some of our principal ports; also seeds of plants
and grain which might be cultivated to advantage in the United States. In
general, the duties of the consular office require an attention to whatever can
promote the commerce and navigation of our country, as well as to the parti-
cular affairs of the individuals of our nation who may require the exercise of
the consular function.
ART. 45. The Consuls are particularly cautioned not to enter into any
contentions that can be avoided, either with their countrymen, or the author-
ities of the country in which they reside; referring questions of that nature to
the Minister or to this department, and using every endeavor to settle, in an
amicable manner, all disputes in which their countrymen may be concerned;
countenancing and protecting them with the authorities of the country in all
cases in which they may be injured or oppressed; but firmly refusing them
support when they have been wilfully guilty of any infraction of the laws,
particularly in any attempt to defraud the revenue; and giving aid to the
proper officers in preventing any such practices, which, though they may
prove a pecuniary benefit to the individuals concerned, leave a stain or the
national character.
56
442 U.S. CONSULAR INSTRUCTIONS.
\ w
Arºr. 46. It is at all times the duty of consuls exercising the functions,
and enjoying the privileges attached to their offices, scrupulously to abstain
from all participation whatever, direct or indirect, in the political concerns.
of the countries to which they are appointed, and by whose governments they
are severally acknowledged and recognized in their public characters; but
it is, at the same time, no less their duty to report, freely and seasonably,
to their own governments all important facts which may come to their know-
ledge, through authentic channels, touching the political condition of these
countries, especially if their communications can be made subservient to,
or may effect, the interest and well being of their own.
From the disturbed and unsettled condition of the republics of the
South American, and United Mexican States, and the excitements there
prevailing, it is especially desirable that the Consuls of the United
States, in those states, should forbear intermeddling with their political
or local affairs, in the smallest degree whatever, and that they
should be equally on their guard against the enlistment of their feel-
ings or sympathies upon the side of any of the political or sectional parties
which divide them at the present time. In their letters, even to this depart-
ment, upon such subjects, they will confine themselves to the communica-
tion of important or interesting public events as they occur, in as concise
and succinct a form as may be convenient, avoiding all unnecessary reflec-
tions or criticism upon the characters or conduct of individuals; and they
will, on no occasions, give publicity through the press, to opinions or spec-
ulations injurious to the public institutions of those countries, or the persons
concerned in the administration of them.
130. [CHAP. vi. Of the Consular Uniform.] ART, 47. The consular
uniform (as prescribed by the circular from this Department, dated August
8th, 1815, hereto annexed) must be worn on all visits of ceremony to the
authorities of the place, and on all other proper occasions.
131. [CHAP. vii. Of the intercourse between the Consuls of the United
States and the Officers of the Navy.] ART. 48. The rules laid down in the
circular from this Department of the 25th of June, 1830, (hereunto annexed)
are to be observed whenever a vessel of war of the United States visits the
consular residence.
132. [CHAP. viii. Of the Fees to be received by the Consuls of the
Onited States.] The following are the fees allowed by law to be taken by
the Consuls of the United States for services they may have performed:
1. For authenticating, under the consular seal, every protest, declara.
tion, deposition or other act which captains, masters, marines, seamen,
passengers, merchants, or others as are citizens of the United States, may
respectively choose to make, the sum of two dollars—$2.
It would appear by the limitation to citizens of the United States, that
the fee for this service was not designed to be prescribed where the service
U. S. consular INSTRUCTIONs. 443
was rendered to persons not citizens. In all such cases, therefore, where
the service is rendered to an alien, the Consul is at liberty to charge accord-
ing to the fees allowed to notaries in the country where he resides.
2. For taking into possession, inventorying, selling, and finally settling,
and paying, or transmitting, according to law, the balance due the personal
estate of any citizen who shall die within the limits of his consulate, five per
centum, on the gross amount of such estate.
If part of such estate shall be delivered over before a final settlement,
two and a half per cent. is allowed on the part so delivered as is not in
money, and five per cent. on the gross amount of the residue.
3. For granting a certificate of the delivery of merchandise under the
revenue laws, one dollar—31; and for administering the oath, twenty-five
cents.
4. For every verification and certificate of an invoice, two dollars—82.
But every shipper shall have a right to include all articles shipped by him in
the same invoice. - -
5. For every certificate of discharge of any seaman in a foreign port,
fifty cents.
6. And for receiving and paying the amount of wages due on such dis-
charge, 2% per cent.
7. On the deposite of a ship's papers, the Consul shall give a certificate
thereof, under seal; and, on the delivery of them, a like certificate, for
which he is entitled, as above, to two dollars—32, each; making the whole
of the fees for the deposite and delivery of the papers, four dollars—84,
which is not to be exceeded.
8. No other or greater fees are to be charged to American citizens for
the services above enumerated; but if American citizens or others require
other services, they may be charged at the rate allowed to notaries in the
same place for the same services.
138. [CHAP. Ix. Of the ea'penses to be allowed to Consuls.] ART, 49.
When a Consul is put to any extraordinary expense, such as postage for
public despatches, expenses in forwarding them when directed so to do, he
shall be allowed the same in his account with the department, but no provi-
sion is made for his house or office rent, stationery, or other ordinary ex-
penses of his office. -
ART. 50. His accounts for the support of American seamen must be
transmitted quarterly.
ART. 51. The Consul going to a place where there is no seal, flag, or
arms of the United States provided for the Consulate, will be allowed the
reasonable coat of the same.
EDWARD LIVINGSTON,
444 PASSPORT-CONSULAR UNIFoRM.
134. An Act concerning Consuls and Vice Consuls. Passed on the 14th of April, 1792.
And for the direction of the Consuls and Vice Consuls of the United States in certain cases:–
[The Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Sections, only, are appended to these
official Instructions, for which, see pages 85, 86, and 87, of this volume.]
135. An Act of Congress of February 28, 1803, supplementary to the “Act concerning
Consuls and Vice Consuls,” and for the further protection of AmericanSeamen. [see this law
at large in pages 88, 89,90, and 91, in this volume. The last section of this law (the ninth)
is omitted in the official Instructions.]
[PAssport.]
136. Consulate of the United States of America, at
presents shall come, Greeting:
DESCRIPTION. No.
Age, years.
*... fºet, I, the undersigned, Consul of the United States of America, here-
inches, Eng.
. To all to whom these
Forehead, by request all whom it may concern, to permit safely and freely to
Eyes, pass, the bearer hereof, a citizen of the United
R. States; and, in case of need, to give him all lawful aid and pro-
sº. 2 º
#. tection.
tºlexion, Given under my hand, and the seal of my consulate,
ace, [L. S.] at , of the Independence of the United States
Signature of the
earer. the
137. [CIRCULAR.]
DEPARTMENT of STATE, August 8, 1815. The Consular uniform, prescribed in
the standing Consular instructions, is abolished, and the following substituted, viz: .
Single breast coat of blue cloth, with standing cape or collar, and ten navy but-
tons infront; one button on each side of the cape; four on each cuff; four under each
pocket flap; and one on each hip and in the folds; two on each side in the centre;
and one on each side of the same, at the lower extremity of the skirts.
The front, (from the cape down to the lower extremity of the skirts,) cuffs, cape,
and pocket flaps, to be embroidered in gold, representing a vine composed of olive
leaves; and the button holes to be worked with gold thread; the button holes corres-
ponding with the width of the embroidery, which is not to exceed two inches in any
art.
p West and small clothes of white, and navy buttons; the former to have ten in
front, and four under each pocket flap. With this dress, a cocked hat, small sword,
and shoes and buckles are to be worn. The hat, to be furnished with gold loop,
gold tassels, and black cockade, with gold eagle in the centre; added to which, it is
to be understood that the mountings of the sword, and shoe and knee buckles, are to
be gold, otherwise gilt.
138. [CIRCULAR.]
DEPARTMENT of STATE, Washington, June 25, 1830. SIR, I have the honor to
subjoin the copy of a circular letter from the Secretary to the Captains of the Navy,
Prescribing the rules of etiquette to be observed by them in relation to their inter-
course with the Consuls of the United States, resident at foreign ports, where they
may arrive, and to state that these rules entirely coincide with the views of this dé-
partment upon the subject.
REGULATION FOR NAVAL VISITS. 445
According to the first, the Consul of the United States, residing at a foreign port,
which is visited by a ship of war of the United States, is to receive the first visit
from such ship, in the person of an officer belonging to it, deputed and sent for that
purpose by the commander; and this officer is then to tender to the Consul a passage
to the said ship. In such cases you will accordingly avail yourself of the proposed
accommodation, whenever occasion may require, as well for the purposes of making
the first visit to the commanding officer of the ship in question, (this being a mark
of courtesy due to the commission and rank he holds in the Navy of the United
States,) as for that of offering to him any services which your official situation may
enable you to render for the convenience of his ship, or those belonging to it; and
you will accordingly receive and execute any such commission as may be entrusted
to you for these ends by him, as far as this may be compatible with your sense of
public duty. e
According to the second and last, “it shall be the duty of the commander of any
of our ships of war, (commanders of squadrons excepted,) to visit the Consul Gene-
ral, and offer him a passage to the ship of war.” The Consuls General of the Unit-
ed States, where there are such officers, will, accordingly, reciprocate these atten-
tions on the part of the commanders of the ships of war, or will pay the first honors
to the commanding officers of squadrons, as the case may be; and they will, of
course, employ their good offices, as far as it may be useful or proper on their part,
to promote the good and convenience of the service in which such vessels are engaged.
I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant.
139.
NAwy DEPARTMENT, June 23, 1830. SIR, I have the honor to present herewith,
a copy of the regulations of this Department, prepared by the direction of the Presi-
dent, for the government of the Commanders of our ships of war, in their intercourse
with the Consuls of the United States residing in foreign ports.
Should it meet your approbation, it will be communicated to the Commanders of
the national vessels of war; and I will be obliged to you, when convenient, for a copy
of the corresponding regulations of the State Department to our Consuls abroad.
I am, very respectfully, Sir, your obedient servant, JNO. BRANCH.
The Hon. MARTIN VAN BUREN, Secretary of State.
140. [CIRCULAR.]
NAVY DEPARTMENT, June 22, 1830. To promote harmony and concert of action
between the Commanders of our ships of war, and Consuls of the United States, re-
siding in foreign ports, the following regulations have been established by direction
of the President of the United States, and are promulgated for the government of the
officers concerned:
1. Upon entering a foreign port where a Consul of the United States resides, the
Commander of our ships of war shall send a boat on shore with an officer on board,
who shall visit the Consul, and tender to him a passage to the ship of war.
2. Where a Consul General resides, it shall be the duty of the Commander of any
of our ships of war, (commanders of squadrons excepted,) to visit the Consul Gene-
ral, and offer him a passage to the ship of war.
3. The commander of squadrons will send a boat on shore, as prescribed in the
first regulation, tendering to the Consul or Consul General a passage on board to the
flag ship of war. JNO. BRANCH,
446 U. S. CONSULAR COMMISSION AND BOND.
[commission.]
141. The President of the United States of America, To all who shall see these Presents,
Greeting: Know ye, That reposing special trust and confidence in the abilities and
integrity of , of , I have nominated, and by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate, do appoint him Consul of the United
States of America, for f , and do authorize and empower him to
have and to hold the said office, and to exercise and enjoy all the rights, pre-eminen-
ces, privileges, and authorities, to the same of right appertaining; during the plea-
sure of the President of the United States, for the time being, he demanding and
receiving no fees or perquisites of office whatever, which shall not be expressly
established by some law of the United States. And I do hereby enjoin all captains,
masters, and commanders of ships, and other vessels, armed or unarmed, sailing
under the flag of the said States, as well as all other of their citizens, to acknowledge
and consider him, the said accordingly. And I do hereby pray
and request, governors and officers, to permit the said -
fully and peaceably to enjoy and exercise the said office, without giving, or suffering
to be given, unto him, any molestation or trouble; but, on the contrary, to afford him
all proper countenance and assistance, I offering to do the same for all those who
shall, in like manner, be recommended to me by --
In testimony whereof, I have caused these letters to be made Patent, and the Seal
of the United States to be hereunto affixed. Given under my hand, at the City of
Washington, the day of , in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and , and of the Independence of the United States of
America the
By the President: Secretary of State.
[BoND.]
142. Know all Men by these Presents, That we,
are held and firmly bound to the United States of America,
in the sum of two thousand dollars, money of the said United States, to the payment
whereof, we bind ourselves jointly, and severally, our joint and several heirs, execu-
tors, and administrators. Witness our hands and seals, this day
of 183 .
The condition of the above obligation is such, That if the above bounden
appointed of the United States, in certain
foreign parts, shall truly and faithfully discharge the duties of his said office, accord-
ing to law, and also shall truly account for all moneys, É. and effects, which may
come into his possession by virtue of the laws of the United States, or of his said
office, then the above obligation to be void: otherwise, to remain in full force.
Signed, sealed, and delivered, in the Presence of
:


[Copy of the “Printed Form” referred to in the Consular Instructions, page 432, Art. 12.]
* - 183 .
143. Consular Statement of Fees, from the of , to the of , inclusive.
-- — — — —--- - - - --- - - Contracts Registering Certificates Tº Sum
2, Names Certificates. Oaths. |Not- º: sur. 5. opy of Exten-IDeclarations| . er. of and Qharter Passports. |Documentsnotlof Citizen- || 5 |total leeneral
3: #. º: • §. veys, i. ding 9"nºy " |Parties. - ordered from ship. # recºdifiemarks
#º Nelsºn, anº. º. ºf Nolamºs.ºir,Rºlls Consulate. |_|on ºn this
* |rendered. O. Aſſl. "[.. N O, e - e. "|pers. W*|Record. º º e 4 • AII]. : O. Am.’t, No. Am.’t. No, Am. Pt. Nolan't g;|. |Vene.
- 9 rºlvesse
|
NOTE. The Consuls are requested to note, under the column of “General Remarks,” as minutely as possible, the nature of the various documents on which they have
received fees—also, all other renumerations not noticed in the respective columns of this “Consular Statement.”
[Copy of the “Printed Form” referred to, page 432, Art 13.]
183 .
144. Consular Return, from the of , to the of , inclusive.
- Crew in |w here |Ports Value |Amount Value | Crew out |Date of
Date of Bur- Where Cargo - Cargo out- General Remarks.
º Class. Name. Master. 2 * belong- |touch-| 8% of in- of Cargo t of out-|T-TTF-3: Depart-
Arrival. | then. * º gn from. . §- j inward. Wai. i.anded. ward. [. * º Ulre,
| | |
| | |
|
|
448 CONSULAR DUTIES AND POWERS
145. Consuls are commercial agents, appointed to reside in the sea-ports of
foreign countries, with a commission to watch over the commercial rights
and privileges of the nation deputing them. The establishment of consuls
is one of the most useful of modern commercial institutions. They were
first appointed about the 12th century, in the opulent states of Italy, such
as Pisa, Lucca, Genoa, and Venice, and their origin has been ascribed to
the necessity for extroardinary assistance in those branches of commerce
formerly carried on with barbarous and uncivilized nations. The utility of
such a mercantile officer has been perceived and felt by all trading nations,
and the Mediterranean trade, in particular, stands highly in need of such
accredited agents. Consuls have been multiplied and extended to every
part of the world, where navigation and commerce can successfully pene-
trate, and their duties and privileges are now generally limited and defined
in treaties of commerce, or by the statute regulations of the country which
they represent. In some places, they have been invested with judicial pow-
ers over the disputes between their own merchants in foreign ports; but in
the commercial treaties made by Great Britain, there is rarely any stipula-
lation for clothing them with judicial authority, except in treaties with the
Barbary powers; and in England it has been held, that a consul is not strict-
ly a judicial officer, and they have there nojudicial power. [Mansfield, Ch.
J., in Waldron v Coombe, 3 Taunton, 162. 1. Chitty 50,51.] It has been urg-
ed by some writers, as a matter highly expedient, to establish rules requiring
merchants abroad to submit their disputes to the judicial authority of their own
consuls,particularly with reference to shipping concerns. But no government
can investits consuls with judicial power over their own subjects, in a foreign
country, without the consent of the government of the foreign country, found-
ed on treaty; and there is no instance, in any nation of Europe of the ad-
mission of criminal jurisdiction in foreign consuls. The laws of the United
States, on the subject of consuls and vice-consuls, specially authorized them
to receive the protests of masters and others, relating to American com-
merce, and they declare that their consular certificates, under seal, shall
receive faith and credit in the courts of the United States. It is likewise
made their duty, where the laws of the country permit, to administer on the
personal estates of American citizens, dying within their consulates, and
leaving no legal representative, and to take charge of and secure the effects
of stranded American vessels, in the absence of the master, owner, or con-
signee, and they are bound to provide for destitute seamen within their con-
sulates, and to send them at the public expense, to the United States. These
particular powers and duties are similar to those prescribed to British con-
suls and to consuls under the consular convention between the U. States and
France,in 1788; and they are in accordance with the usages of nations, and are
not to be construed to the exclusion of others, resulting from the nature of the
CONSULAR DUTIES AND POWERS. 449
consular appointment. [1 Beawes' L. M. tit. Consuls, p. 292,293.] The for-
mer consular convention between France and this country, allowed consuls
to exercise police over all vessels of their respective nations, “ within the in-
terior of the vessels,” and to exercise a species of civil jurisdiction, by deter-
mining disputes concerning wages, and between the masters and crews of
vessels belonging to their own country. The jurisdiction claimed under the
consular convention with France, was merely voluntary, and altogether ex-
clusive of any coercive authority; [Mr. Pickering to Mr. Pinckney, Jan-
wary 16th, 1797.] and we have no treaty at present which concedes even such
consular functions. The doctrine of our courts is, [Case of the Bello Cor-
ruras, 6 Wheaton, 168.] that a foreign consul, duly recognised by our govern-
ment, may assert and defend, as a competent party, the rights of property
of the individuals of his nation, in the courts of the United States, and may
institute suits for that purpose, without any special authority from the party
for whose benefit he acts. But the court, in that case, said, that they could
not go so far as to recognise a right in a vice-consul to receive actual restitu-
tion of the property, or its proceeds, without showing some specific power,
for the purpose, from the party in interest.
No nation is bound to receive a foreign consul, unless it has agreed to do
so by treaty, and the refusal is no violation of the peace and amity between
the nations. Consuls are to be approved and admitted in the usual form,
and if any consul be guilty of illegal or improper conduct, he is liable to have
his eacequatur, or written recognition of his character, revoked, and to be punish-
ed according to the laws of the country in which he is consul; or he may be
sent back to his own country, at the discretion of the government which he
has offended. The French consuls are forbidden to be concerned in cum-
merce, and, by the act of Congress of February 28, 1803, American consuls
residing on the Barbary coast, are forbidden also; but British and American
consuls are generally at liberty to be concerned in trade; and in such cases
the character of consul does not give any protection to that of merchant,
when these characters are united in the same person. [Beawes' L. M. vol.
1. tit. Consuls, p. 291. 1 Chitty, 57, 58. 3 Rob. Adm. Rep. 27. The
Indian Chief.] Though the functions of consul would seem to require, that
he should not be a subject of the state in which he resides, yet the practice
of the maritime powers is quite lax on this point, and it is usual, and thought
most convenient, to appoint subjects of the foreign conntry to be consuls at
its ports.
A consul is not such a public minister as to be entitled to the privileges
appertaining to that character, nor is he under the special protection of the
law of nations. He is entitled to privileges to a certain extent, such as for
safe conduct, but he is entitled to the jus gentium. Wattel thinks, that
his functions require that he should be independent of the ordinary criminal
57 -
450 CONSULAR DUTIES AND POWER5,
jurisdiction of the country, and that he ought not to be molested, unless he
violates the law of nations by some enormous crime; and that if guilty of any
crime, he ought to be sent home to be punished. But no such immunities
have been conferred on consuls by the modern practice of nations; and it
may be considered as settled law, that consuls do not enjoy the protection of
the law of nations any more than other persons who enter the country under a
safe conduct. In civil and criminal cases they are equally subject to the
laws of the country in which they reside. The same doctrine declared by
the public jurists, has been frequently laid down in the English and Amer-
ican courts of justice. It seems, however, from some decisions in France
mentioned by Mr Warden,” that foreign consuls cannot be prosecuted before
a French tribunal for acts done by them in France by order of their govern-
ment, and with the authorisation of the French government, and that
in general, a consul cannot be prosecuted without the previous consent
of his government. Consular privileges are much less extensive in
Christian than in Mahometan countries. In the latter they cannot be im-
prisoned for any cause whatever, except by demanding justice against them
of the Porte, and they partake very considerably of the character of resident
ministers. They are diplomatic agents under the name of consuls, and enjoy
the rights and privileges which the Ottoman Porte recognises in relation to
the foreign ministers resident at Constantinople. By treaty an entire im-
munity is usually given to the persons, domestics, and effects of the resident
consuls, and no consuls reside with the Barbary states but under the protec-
tion of treaties.
Considering the importance of the consular functions, and the activity
which is required of them in all great maritime ports, and the approach
which consuls make to the efficacy and dignity of diplomatic characters, it
was a wise provision in the constitution of the United States, which gave to
the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in all cases affecting consuls, as well
as ambassadors and other public ministers, and the federal jurisdiction is un-
derstood to be exclusive of the state courts. Kent’s Commentaries.
146. Consuls have not, in strictness, a diplomatic character. They are
deemed, as mere commercial agents, and therefore partake of the ordinary
character of such agents; and are subject to the municipal laws of the coun-
tries where they reside. Yet, as they are the public agents of the nation,
to which they belong, and are often entrusted with the performance of very
delicate functions of state, and as they might be greatly embarrassed by be-
ing subject to the ordinary jurisdiction of inferior tribunals, state, and na-
tional, it was thought highly expedient to extend the original jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court to them also. The propriety of vesting jurisdiction, in
such cases, in some of the national courts seems hardly to have been ques-
tioned, by the most zealous opponents of the constitution. And in cases.
*See page 456 of this volume.
CONSULS-CASE OF KOSLOFF. 451
against ambassadors, and other foreign ministers, and consuls, the jurisdic-
tion has been deemed exclusive. Story’s Commentaries.
147. Consuls are under the special protection of the law of nations, and
may be considered, in a general sense, as diplomatic agents of the state
which names them; they cannot, however, as to this prerogative, rank in the
class of public ministers, not even of those of the third order, seeing that
they are not provided with letters of credit, that they are merely furnished
with letters of provision, [Provisional Powers] and that, finally, they cannot
enter on the discharge of their functions, until they have obtained exeguâtur
of the sovereign power, in whose states they are to reside. Martens’ Manual.
148. Those consuls sent to barbarous states, and to the ports of the
Levant, are an exception to this rule: those consuls alone are accredited
and treated as ministers. The greater part of them, and especially the con-
suls general, named by the certain powers for the several places, or over
several consuls, possess, in some points, even more prerogatives than those
sent to the ports of Europe. ib.
The case of the Commonwealth against Kosloff. Sup. Court, Penn.
Philadelphia, Jan. Sess. 1816. [Sergeant & Rawle's Reps. vol. 5.]
149. The grand inquest for the city and county of Philadelphia, having
preferred a bill of indictment for a rape, against Nicholas Kosloff, Consul
General of his Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia, a motion has been
made to quash the indictment for want of jurisdiction in this court. Two
causes are assigned for our want of jurisdiction. 1. That the privilege of
immunity from criminal prosecutions, is conferred on consuls by the law of
nations. 2. That by the constitution and laws of the United States, exclu-
sive jurisdiction in all cases affecting consuls, is vested in the courts of the
United States.
150. It has not been contended, that a consul is a public minister,
but it is said, that a consul-general, such as Mr Kosloff, is prohibited from
exercising trade and commerce, and entrusted with important concerns
from his sovereign, and so nearly resembles a public minister, that he is en-
titled to some of his prerogatives, and in particular, to exemption from
criminal prosecution. In considering this case, we must exclude from our
view, the august personage to whom allusion was made in the argument.
Concerning his high character, and the intimacy of the relations to be pre-
served with him, there is but one voice,—one wish. These considerations
would have their deserved weight, in the proper place. But before us there
is only a naked question of right, in which all nations are equally concern-
ed; for we cannot but see, that that which is granted as the right of one,
must be conceded as the right of all. The law of nations is sought for in the
usages of nations, in the opinions of approved authors, in treaties, and in the
decisions of judges. -
151. With regard to the privileges of consuls, there is some difference
452 CONSULS-CASE OF KOSLOFF.
of opinion among respectable authors. Wicquefort, Bynkershoek, and
Martens, allow to a consul no privilege, against suits civil or criminal; and
the reason they assign, is, that consuls in no manner represent the person
of their sovereign, but are sent for the purpose of assisting his subjects,
particularly in matters of commerce, and sometimes of deciding disputes,
which may arise between them, by permission of the government in whose
dominions they reside.
152. Opposed to them is Wattel, who, although he does not assert, that a
consul is entitled to the privileges of a public minister in general, is yet of
opinion, that from the nature of his functions. “he should be independent
of the ordinary criminal justice of the place where he resides, so as not to
be molested or imprisoned, unless he himself violates the law of nations by
some uncommon crime.
153. Crimes against the law of nations, are sometimes understood to be,
crimes which all nations agree to punish. Such are murder, and rape,
among the civilized nations: and if that be the meaning of Wattel, his author-
ity would not exempt the consul from the present prosecution. But what
is of more weight than the judgment of authors, however respectable, is the
opinion and the practice of our own government, and that of the foreign
nations with whom we have had intercourse.
154. We have had treaties with France, Spain. Great Britain, Holland,
Prussia and Sweden, in all of which the subject of consuls has been intro-
duced, and in not one of which, have consuls been protected from suits civil
or criminal. I say nothing of our treaties with the Barbary powers, because
there are special reasons why all nations who send consuls to them, take
care to provide expressly for their personal security. In the treaty with
Great Britain, made in 1794, consuls are expressly declared, to be subject
to punishment by the law of the country in which they reside. By the
consular convention with France, in 1788, there is to be full and perfect
immunity, concerning the chancery and its papers, but the house of the
consul is to be no asylum for persons or effects. And in our other treaties,
the most that is stipulated in favor of consuls, is, that they shall respectively
enjoy the same prerogatives and favors, that are granted to those of the
most favoured nations. These treaties afford a strong proof of the usage of
nations—for it cannot be supposed, that they should have omitted to secure
consuls from criminal prosecutions, if it had been thought desirable, or usual,
to afford them that protection. But there is not wanting more direct proof
of the opinion of our own government: in the “act for the punishment of
certain crimes against the United States,” passed April 30, 1790, penalties
are inflicted on persons who sue out process from any court, against an am-
bassador or other public minister—but the act is silent as to consuls. And
what is directly to the point, the 9th sect. of the “act to establish the Judi-
cial Courts of the United States,” (passed September, 24, 1789,) vests the
CONSULS-CASE OF KOSLOFF. 453
District Courts with jurisdiction of offences committed by consuls, in which
the punishment does not exceed a fine of 100 dollars, &c. &c. Neither
are we left, on this important subject, without the light of judicial decision.
Mr Ravara, consul from Genoa, was indicted and convicted for a misde-
meanor, in the Circuit Court of the United States. 2 Dall. 299. He was
defended by able counsel, who contended for his privilege, on the authority
of Wattel. But the court decided against him; and it is worthy of remark,
that Ch. J. Jay presided, who had been long employed in a diplomatic func-
tion of a high grade at the court of Madrid, and was one of the ministers of
the United States who negociated the treaty which established our indepen-
dence at Paris. No person, certainly, had better opportunities of knowing
the usage of nations, or a better capacity for improving these opportunities.
From all these considerations, I cannot hesitate in the opinion, that there
is nothing in the law of nations which protects the consul general of Russia
from this indictment.
155. A more difficult question remains to be considered—Is the juris-
diction of this court taken away, by the constitution and laws of the Uni-
ted States. -
156. An agent of a foreign government, accused of a crime committed
in the state of Pennsylvania, claims, not an exemption from trial, but the
right of being tried by a court of the United States. His public relations
are, not with the state of Pennsylvania, but with the government of the Uni-
ted States: and if the emperor of Russia should suppose that he had cause
to complain of our treatment of his officer, he must address himself, not to
the governor of Pennsylvania, but to the President of the United States.
But even where there was a cause of complaint, cases may be easily suppo-
sed, in which the president might think it more conducive to the peace of
the nation, to send a foreign agent out of the country, to be punished by his
own sovereign, than to inflict punishment on him, by our own laws here.
157. If it was intended by the constitution, that no inferior court of the
United States should have jurisdiction, it cannot be supposed that a state
court was to have it, because there is much stronger reason for denying it
to the state courts, than to the inferior courts of the United States. It will
be perceived, that this principle shakes the decision in the case of Ravara,
who was convicted in the circuit court, though not that part of the decision
which respects the privilege of a consul.
158. No embarrassment, could equal that into which this court would
be thrown, should it determine, that no court of the United States has juris.
diction, in a case which affects a consul in every thing short of life, when
the Constitution declares, that the Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction in
all cases affecting him. Upon full consideration, I am of opinion that the
indictment should be quashed, because this court has no jurisdiction. In-
dictment quashed.
454 CASE OF CONSUL GENERAL OF SAXONY.
Case of C.A.Davis,Con. Gen. of the King of Saxony, Plin Er v. I. Packard, &e.
159. The record of the proceedings in this case, brought up with the
writ of error to the court for the correction of errors of the state of New
York, shewed that the suit was commenced in the Supreme Court of the
state of New York, and that the plaintiff in error, who was consul-general
of the king of Saxony, did not plead or set up his exemption from such suit,
in the Supreme Court: but on the cause being carried up to the court for
the correction of errors, this matter was assigned for error in fact; notwith-
standing which, the court of errors gave judgment against the plaintiff in
error. The court of errors of New York, having decided that the charac-
ter of consul did not exempt the plaintiff in error from being sued in the
in the state court, the judgment of the court of errors was reversed. Davis
v. Packard, 276. U. S. Supreme Court, Jan. Term, 1833. Peters, Vol. 7.
160. As an abstract question, it is difficult to understand on what
ground a state court can claim jurisdiction of civil suits against foreign con-
suls. By the constitution, the judicial power of the United States extends
to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls; and
the judiciary act of 1789, gives to the district courts of the United States,
exclusively of the courts of the several states, jurisdiction of all suits against
consuls and vice-consuls, except for certain offences enumerated in the act. ib.
161. If a consul, being sued in a state court, omits to plead his privi-
lege of exemption from the suit, and afterwards, on removing the judgment
of the inferior court to a higher court by writ of error, claims the privilege,
such an omission is not a waiver of the privilege. If this was to be viewed
merely as a personal privilege, there might be grounds for such a conclusion,
but it cannot be so considered; it is the privilege of the country or govern-
ment which the consul represents. This is the light in which foreign minis-
ters are considered by the law of nations; and our constitution and law seem
to put consuls on the same footing in this respect. ib.
162. If this privilege or exemption was merely personal, it can hardly
be supposed that it would have been thought sufficiently important to require
a special provision in the constitution and laws of the United States. Higher
considerations of public policy, doubtless, led to the provision. It was deem-
ed fit and proper, that the courts of the government, with which rested the
regulation of foreign intercourse, should have cognizance of suits against
the representatives of such foreign governments. ib.
163. The action in the Supreme Court of New York against the defen-
dant, was on a recognizance of bail, and it was contended that this was not
an original proceeding, but the continuance of a suit rightfully brought against
one who was answerable to the jurisdiction of the court in which it was in-
stituted, and in which the plaintiff in error became special bail for the
defendant; and therefore the act of congress did not apply to the case. Held,
that the act of congress being general in its terms, extending to all suits
against eonsuls, is applied to this suit. ib.
consul.AR FUNCTIONS [NOTES]. 455
NOTES. We gather the following matters, on the subject of Consuls, from
WARDEN’s “Consular Establishments:”
164. The functions of a consul are quite distinct from those of a minister, even
in places where the latter resides. The former is charged with the individual com-
mercial concerns of his country; with the prosecution of private claims, with the busi-
ness of seamen, and cases of vessels seized or captured.
He is often requested to examine and verify affairs conducted by agents, who have
not satisfied the views of their constituents. In this respect, he acts like an attorney-
general, and is obliged to communicate to the party the result of his inquiry.
It is his duty to be as useful, as time and circumstances may permit, to scientific
or literary travellers of his nation; and, at their arrival, to procure them information
in the line of their profession; to facilitate their correspondence, and to communicate
to them the passing events of their country, in which they express an interest.
The consul, if he be not a merchant, is often consulted in secret, concerning the
moral and pecuniary character of his countrymen, whose object is credit, or an inte-
rest in a mercantile or manufacturing association. He is also consulted by foreigners,
concerning the nature and value of the lands and stocks of his country; the best mode
of remitting monies, and the means of procuring passages for their respective countries.
In the course of a few years, what a variety of useful information may a consul
communicate to his country, if he have an acquaintance with the directors and pro-
fessors and public establishments! Books, maps, pamphlets, models and drawings of
machines, seeds and plants, are gladly offered in exchange for similar articles.
From enlightened agents of this description, less occupied with the gains of com-
merce than with statistical knowledge, France has drawn, from various countries, trea-
sures of useful information, which she has promptly and wisely employed to increase
her manufactures and strength. In the midst of revolution this great object was not
forgotten. At the request of the French Committee of public instruction, the Depart-
ment of Foreign affairs enjoined the consuls to keep up a regular correspondence on
subjects of science, manufactures and arts. Through this medium it was proposed
to facilitate communication between the French savans and the learned of other coun-
tries: to disseminate new publications, accelerate the circulation of thought and dis-
covery, and increase the fame and prosperity of France, by uniting the fruits of her
genius with those of other philanthropic nations.
French consuls, at the request of the National Institute, and agricultural and
other societies, have furnished interesting accounts of the countries in which they
resided. The academy of sciences, by addressing a series of questions to M. de
Guignes, resident consul in China, obtained new and accurate information concer-
ming a country whose productions have been so carefully concealed from the eye of
strangers.
It would add much to the growth of civilisation throughout the world, if consuls
and agents were permitted to communicate the discoveries of their compatriots, in
exchange for those of the country where they reside. In the United States, where
nothing is concealed, where manufactures, dock-yards, inventions and improvements
of every kind may be examined by strangers from every region, civilisation has made
more progress, in a given time, than in any other country.
In Rymer's Foedera, mention is made of a treaty, [1474] ratified by king Edward
IV, and the consuls and proconsuls of Lubeck, Hamburg, and Dantzick, in the name
of the Hanseatic league. This work contains the substance of a charter, [1478]
granted by the said king to the grandees (gretemanis) consuls, proconsuls, etc. of the
county of Friesland; and also the outlines of another treaty [1498] between king
Henry VII of England, and the arch-perfect, proconsuls, consuls, etc. of the city and
territory of Riga.
During the ministry of Vergennes, § four consuls general were appointed
for the protection of commerce; one at Smyrna, another in the Morea, a third in Syria
and Palestine, a fourth in Egypt, and four subordinate consuls at Salonica, Crimea,
Cyprus and Aleppo, whose decisions were to be regulated by instructions, customs,
and the unerring principles of natural law,
456 consul,AR FUNCTIONs [NotES].
In consequence of an application by the consul of the Venetian merchants [1346]
at Bruges, and an English merchant, the king now took all the merchants of Venice
trading to England, Ireland, and his other dominions, under his protection during
OIle Wear, º, #
Rºmerson, in his Annals of Commerce, observes that, “If he mistakes not, this
is the earliest notice of the office of a consul of merchants in any English record; and
adds, that long before this time, the commercial states in the Mediterranean had con-
suls in every considerable port to which they traded.” -
In the catalogue of the offices bestowed in this year, [1633] by King Charles,
we find that John Stave is appointed consul general in the Kingdom of Portugal,
which is the first instance of that office in Portugal to be found in the Foedera.
Before the discovery of the West-Indies, there was established in different towns
of Spain, a consular court called prior and consuls, for the regulation of internal com-
merce. The judges were elected annually by the merchants trading to the West-In-
dies, and had authority to try all civil and commercial causes relating to mechandise
imported or exported from these countries, and full power to execute their decisions.
In the year 1593, Philip II organized consular courts in the towns of Mexico and
Lima, resembling those of Seville and of Burgos, to take cognizance of all commer-
cial and maritime cases, and the viceroy was judge of appeals. These courts were
improved by Philip III and IV. This last king granted a yearly salary of five hun-
dred dollars to each of the judges, consuls aud priors of the consulate of Lima.
Consuls have existed since the introduction of a regular commerce. The object
of their mission, especially in maritime ports, is to watch ever the preservation of the
rights and privileges of their nation, and to terminate contestations which arise among
their mercantile compatriots. * g
It is evident, from the attributions given to them by the ancient and new laws,
that consuls, to the character of political agent may unite that of judge.
But the administrative and judiciary functions, although cumulated on the same
head, do not for that reason change their nature. Each continues to be respectively
directed by principles inherent in the order of things to which it belongs.
Thus the acts of the political agent are under the immediate and exclusive inspec-
tion of the government, and cannot be separated from it by arbitrary actions of prose-
cution unauthorised by government. .
If it were otherwise, an agent, useful and often necessary to the republic in our
foreign relations, might suddenly and personally have his character exposed, without
the knowledge of his government; and, every instant, operations of great importance
to the general welfare might be troubled or suspended by the shock of particular pas-
SIOIlS.
Infractions against the laws in the administration of justice, as, in every other
administration, ought to be punished; but when the safety of persons, accused of these
infractions, is under the guarantee and protection of the government itself, the sanc-
tion of the government is necessary in legal suits against their persons.
Concerning Consular Powers, (see page 450, 11th line, of this volume) the fol-
lowing are the results of two important decisions, decided in the Courts of Cassation
and Prize of Paris.—(See Warden 108 to 115.) -
1. That a consul is both a judge and a political agent, from the nature and species
of the functions which he exercises:
2. That as a judge, he might be prosecuted according to the terms of the civil law;
but as his character of political agent is the principal and predominant, he cannot be
prosecuted without the special and positive authorisation of his government: t
3. That this measure is necessary, whoever be the person that commences the suit,
and, with much greater reason, when he is a stranger; for then both persons and things
are under the jurisdiction of the law of nations, the discussion of which belongs to
government. In no case therefore, can a consul be prosecuted without the previous
permission of his government. &
The consul, charged with the affairs of his sovereign, and receiving his orders, re-
raains accountable to him for his actions. The consul is not a public minister, and
he cannot pretend to his prerogatives; nevertheless, as he is charged with a commis-
sion from his sovereign, and received in this quality by the chief where he resides,
CoNSULAR FUNCTIONS [NOTES]. 457
he ought to enjoy, to a certain degree, the protection of the rights of nations. The
sovereign who receives him, tacitly engages to grant him all the freedom and protec-
tion necessary to execute his functions with propriety; without which the admission
of the consul would be vain and illusory. His functions require, that he be not a
subject of the state where he resides, for in this case he would be obliged to follow
its orders in every respect; nor could he freely execute the functions of his office.
These seem to require, that the consul be independent of the ordinary criminal jus-
tice of the place of his residence: that he may not be molested nor imprisoned, unless
he himself violate the rihhts of nations by some enormous offence. As he is under
the particular direction of his sovereign, and charged to watch over his interests, the
respect due to his master requires, that he be sent to him for punishment. He who
receives a consul without express conditions, is understood to receive him on the
footing established by usage. Pattel.
The opinion of writers of acknowledged authority, coincides nearly with that of
Vattel. In the “Ambassador of Hottmann” we find the following observations:
“It appears that we might place in the rank of agents and ambassadors, consuls
who settle the disputes of merchants, towns and provinces, in Algiers, Tunis, Tri-
poli, and other places of Barbary and Turkey; inasmuch as the prince nominates,
authorises and recommends them by letters, and that, instead of ambassadors, they
give advice and sometimes execute their duties with success. The Venetians have
consuls in Cairo, in Aleppo, Rosetta, Alexandria, and other celebrated towns, which
is of great importance; for besides the knowledge of commerce thence obtained, they
receive news from all parts of the world; in which respects they surpass all other
states and republics.
“Almost all the consuls sent out of Europe have a jurisdiction sufficiently exten-
sive over subjects of their sovereign. There are places in Europe, where the con-
suls enjoy a civil jurisdiction more or less limited over the subjects of their master:
in others, they can only exercise a voluntary jurisdiction; and besides, their general
function is to watch over the interests of the commerce of their state, and particularly
the observance of commercial treaties; and to assist, by interference and counsels,
those of their nation whom commerce has brought to the place for which they are
named. They are sometimes acknowledged by letters of credence, but oftener by
a patent and letters of recommendation; and although they are under the particular
protection of the rights of nations, they do not enjoy all the advantages which usage
attributes to ministers, neither concerning honors, religion, nor the immunities rela-
ting to jurisdiction; so that it is only in a very extensive sense that they can be placed
in the number of public ministers. Most consuls, out of Europe, approach the con-
dition of ministers; some are at the same time consuls and ministers.”
“Sometimes there are consuls general, who preside over many places at the same
time, or who exercise authority over several consuls.”
A modern writer, (Boucher) has observed, that a consul does not represent his
prince; therefore he is not a public minister, and consequently he is not inviolable:
Another writer observes, that consuls are subjects employed in almost all
maritime towns of importance, for the protection of commerce. There are many
in the great mercantile towns of Europe, situated on the borders of the sea, or at the
mouths of rivers. There are many in Africa, in Asia, and in the ports of the Levant.
If consuls have letters of credence in due form, which authorise them to treat of af-
fairs concerning their sovereign, they may, for this reason, perform the functions of a
minister, without having the title; and therefore, as soon as they are acknowledged,
they have a right to present memoirs, to have conferences, and to treat with towns
and powers, of every thing which regards the commerce of the masters by whom they
were sent. They have consequently the right of protection for their countrymen,
which they may claim, in case of need, for themselves, their families, and public
chapels. In some respects their jurisdiction extends farther than that of ministers of
any order, as they are sovereign arbiters in commercial disputes. It is for this rea-
son, as well as on account of the emoluments of consulates, that the employment is so
much sought, especially in France. It results from what has been said, that consuls,
by means of their attributions, may be placed in the rank of ministers,
58
458 consul,AR FUNCTIONS [NOTESj.
The consul, although not a minister, enjoys various privileges, and that public'
safety which is granted to ministers by the laws of nations. Consuls are even con-
sidered as ministers; that is to say, in ports of the Levant, in the principal commer-
cial towns of Asia and Africa, at Aleppo, Smyrna, Cairo, Alexandria, Tunis and
Algiers.
*ºording to the opinion of Bynkershoeck, consuls “are protectors, sometimes
judgés, of matters of their nation; usually themselves merchants, they do not repre-
sent their prince near a foreign sovereign, but protect the subjects of the prince in
every thing respecting commerce. They also often examine and decide disputes which
arise among them concerning this sort of affairs.
“Consuls are a species of residents, public ministers of the third order,which com-
mercial nations, great and small, send to the principal seaports of Europe, of the Le-
vant, of Africa and other places, to facilitate commerce, and to protect the navigation
and merchants of their nation. For this purpose, they are furnished with letters of
credence, ahd enjoy, on this account, the protection of the rights of nations, without
however pretending to other distinctions.” Bielfield.
“In some states of Europe, it has been proposed to separate the diplomatic from
the consular career. These two form but one; the consul collects facts, the diplomat
Čombines them for the formation of a treaty. If the consulate benot a ladder to mount
to the embassade, the diplomat apprentice ought to travel with a mission of the court.
A perspective ought to be offered to consuls; a pension of retreat to those who have
merited it by their services; and an embassy to such as have displayed wisdom in
their conduct, and economical views in their correspondence, for such men must be
singularly fitted to conduct a negociation. They are intimately acquainted with the
business of a tariff, and to make it well, is the result of all the art of the negociator.
I know that ambassadors have usually higher pretensions; but they seem to forget,
that the strength of nations is founded on agriculture and manafactures.” Beafour.
The cargo of the ship Indian Chief was claimed by M. Millar, acting as American
eonsul at Calcutta. Destined for Hamburg, she touched at Cowes, where she was
arrested and detained. Sir William Scott observed in this decision, that the office of
eonsul does not distinguish the national character of the person who bears it, from
that of the country where he resides. That persons are conceived to take their nation-
al character from that association under which they live and carry on their commerce.
M. Millar must take his situation with all its duties; and amidst these duties, that
of not trading with the enemies of his country. Robinson’s Adm’lly ſtep’ts, Pol. 12.
I agree, that a right more ancient and more sacred than political right, I mean the
social right, authorises any person to pursue the affairs of one who is absent and igno-
rant of his personal situation, and who has need of the spontaneous aid of this natural
benevolence, of which the germ cannot be entirely extinguished by our vices; a senti-
ment of which civil rights ought to sanction the effects.
It has been acknowledged in all ages, and among the most polished people, that one
man, without the knowledge of another, may do him good; and that if he does no injury
to others, he may, without authority, contribute to his advantage.
A consul is a kind of ambassador which one nation sends into the maritime ports of
another, to reside there for the purpose of favoring the commerce of his fellow-citizens.
$)IPLOMATIC WRITING. 453
E X T R A C T S
FROM THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE DIPLOMATIC AGENTS
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
1. From the Committee of Secret Correspondence to Silas Deane.
Instructions to Mr Deane on his Departure for France. Extract.
PHILADELPHIA, March 3d, 1776. With the assistance of Monsieur Dubourg,
who understands English, you will be able to make immediate application to Mon-
sieur de Vergennes, Ministre des Affaires Etrangeres, either personally or by letter,
if M. Dabourg adopts that method,acquainting him that you are in France upon busi-
ness of the American Congress, in the character of a merchant, having something
to communicate to him, that may be mutually beneficial to France and the North
American Colonies; that you request an audience of him, and that he would be
pleased to appoint the time and place. At this audience if agreed to, it may be
well to show him first your letter of credence, and then acquaint him that the Con-
gress, finding that in the common course of commerce, it was not practicable to fur-
Hish the continent of America with the quantity of arms and ammunition necessary
for its defence, (the Ministry of Great Britain having been extremely industrious
to prevent it,) you had been despatched by their authority to apply to some Euro-
pean power for a supply. That France had been pitched on for the first applica-
tion, from an opinion, that if we should, as there is a great appearance we shall,
come to a total separation from Great Britain, France would be looked upon as the
power, whose friendship it would be fittest for us to obtain and cultivate. That
the commercial advantages Britain had enjoyed with the Colonies, had contributed
greatly to her late wealth, and importance. That it is likely great part of our com-
merce will naturally fall to the share of France; especially if she favors us in this
application, as that will be a means of gaining and securing the friendship of the
Colonies; and that as our trade was rapidly increasing with our increase of people,
and in a greater proportion, her part of it will be extremely valuable. That the
supply we at present want, is clothing and arms for twenty-five thousand men,with
a suitable quantity of ammunition, and one hundred field pieces. That we mean
to pay for the same by remittances to France or through Spain, Portugal, or the
French Islands, as soon as our navigation can be protected by ourselves or friends;
and that we besides want great quantities of linens and woolens, with other ar-
ticles for the Indian trade, which you are now actually purchasing, and for which
you ask no credit, and that the whole, if France should grant the other supplies,
would make a cargo which it might be well to secure by a convoy of two or three
ships of war.
If you should find M. de Vergennes reserved, and not inclined to enter into
free conversation with you, it may be well to shorten your visit, request him to con-
sider what you have proposed, acquaint him with your place of lodging, that you
may yet stay sometime at Paris, and that knowing how precious his time is, you
460 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Deane to Com.
do not presume to ask another audience, but that if he should have any commands
for you, you will upon the least notice immediately wait upon him. If at a ſuture
conference he should be more free, and you find a disposition to favor the Colonies,
it may be proper to acquaint him, that they must necessarily be anxious to know
the disposition of France, on certain points, which, with his permission, you would
mention, such as whether if the Colonies should be forced to form themselves into
an independent state, France would probably acknowledge them as such, receive
their ambassadors, enter into any treaty or alliance with them, for commerce or de-
fence, or both? If so, on what principal conditions! Intimating that you shall
speedily have an opportunity of sending to America, if you do not immediately re-
turn, and that he may be assured of your fidelity and secrecy in transmitting care-
fully anything he would wish conveyed to the Congress on that subject. In sub-
sequent conversations, you may, as you find it convenient, enlarge on these topics,
that have been the subjects of our conferences, with you, to which you may occa-
sionally add the well known substantial answers, we usually give to the several
calumnies thrown out against us. If these supplies on the credit of the Congress
should be refused, you are then to endeavor the obtaining a permission of purchas-
ing those articles, or as much of them as you can find credit for. You will keep a
daily journal of all your material transactions, and particularly of what passes in
your conversation with great personages; and you will by every safe opportunity,
furnish us with such information as may be important. When your business in
France admits of it, it may be well to go into Holland, and visit our agent there,
M. Dumas, conferring with him on subjects that may promote our interest, and
on the means of communication.
You will endeavor to procure a meeting with Mr. Bancroft by writing a let-
ter to him, under cover to Mr Griffiths at Turnham Greene, near London, and de-
siring him to come over to you, in France or Holland, on the score of old ac-
quaintance. From him you may obtain a good deal of information of what is now
going forward in England, and settle a mode of continuing a correspondence. It
may be well to remit him a small bill to defray his expenses in coming to you, and
avoid all political matters in your letter to him. You will also endeavor to corres-
pond with Mr Arthur Lee, agent of the Colonies in London. You will endeavor
to obtain acquaintance with M. Garnier, late Charge des Affaires de France en ºn-
gleterre, if now in France, or if returned to England, a correspondence with him,
as a person extremely intelligent and friendly to our cause. From him, you may
learn many particulars occasionally, that will be useful to us.
B. FRANKLIN, BENJ. HARRISON, JOHN DICKINSON,
ROBERT MORRIS, JOHN JAY.
2. S. Deane to the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
First Interview with Vergennes—and Conversation on American Affairs. Extract.
PARIs, August 18th, 1776. M. Dubourg told me that the ministers would not
See me, as they meant to be quite secret in any countenance they gave the United
Colonies, and that my arrival in France was already known in London, in conse-
quence of which Lord Stormont arrived express but a few days before, and had ap-
plied to the court on the subject. I showed him my commission, and told him I
Paris, Aug. 18, 1776] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 461
was determined to apply; for every circumstance, in my opinion, was favorable in-
stead of otherwise. On this he wrote a letter to the Count de Vergennes, asking
liberty to introduce me the Thursday following, on which day I went to Versailles,
and though the letter had not been delivered to his excellency, yet he gave us im-
mediate admission. Fortunately his chief secretary spoke English well, by which
means I had an opportunity of conversing freely with him on the subject of my com-
mission for two hours, and was attentively and favorably heard by him, and was
asked many questions, which shows that the American disputes had been, and still
were a principal object of attention. I pursued nearly the line marked out by my
instructions, stating the importance of the American commerce, and the advantages
Great Britain had received from a monopoly of it. That all intercourse ceasing
between the two countries the Colonies had considered where they might dispose
of that produce, which they necessarily had so large a surplus of, and receive for
their raw or first materials the various manufactures they wanted. That they first
turned their eyes on France, as the best conntry in Europe for them to be connected
with in commerce. That I was purchasing a large quantity of manufactures for
which I expected to pay the money, and that I should want a quantity of military
stores, for which remittances would be made. That I doubted not the colonies had
before this declared independency, and that I should soon receive instructions in
consequence, more full and explicit; that in the mean time they were very anxious
to know how such a declaration would be received by the powers in Europe, partic-
ularly by France, and whether, in such case, an ambaassador would be received
{rom them, &c.
To which he replied, that the importance of the American commerce was wełł
&nown, and that no country could so well supply the Colonies, and in return re-
ceive their produce as France; it was, therefore, the interest of both to have the
most free and uninterrupted intercourse, for which reason the court had ordered
their ports to be kept open, and equally free to America, as to Britain. That, con-
sidering the good understanding between the two courts of Versailles and London,
they could not openly encourage the shipping of warlike stores, but no obstruction
of any kind would be given; if there should, as the custom houses were not fully in
their secrets in this matter, such obstructions should be removed, on the first appli-
cation. That I must consider myself perfectly free to carry on any kind of com-
merce in the kingdom, which any subject of any other state in the world might, as
the court had resolved their ports should be equally free to both parties. That I
was under his immediate protection, and should I meet with any difficulty, either
from their police, with the rules of which he supposed me unacquainted, or from
any other quarter, I had but to apply to him and every thing should be settled.
That as to independency, it was an event in the womb of time, and it would be
highly improper for him to say any thing on that subject, until it had actually
taken place; mean time he informed me, that the British ambassador knew of my
arrival, and therefore advised me not to associate with Englishmen, more than I
was from necessity obliged, as he doubted not I should have many spies on my
Conduct.
I then told him the precautions I had taken and should persevere in, in coming
from Bermuda, and that I did not mean in public to pass for other than a merchant
2.62 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Deane to Com.
from that island, on speculation, during the present cessation of commerce in Amer-
ica; but at the same time I told his excellency, that I was well assured it was
known in London, that I was coming, long before I arrived at Paris, and I doubted
not, they conjectured my errand, but at the same time, I should take every precau-
tion in my power; and most sincerely thanked him for his protection and assistance
so generously offered, which he might depend I would never abuse. He was pleas-
ed with my having come by Bermuda, and passing as an inhabitant of that island,
and said, if questioned, he should speak of me in that character. He then asked
me many questions with respect to the Colonies, but what he seemed most to want
to be assured of, was their ability to subsist without their fisheries, and under the
interruption of their commerce. To this I replied, in this manner, that the fisher-
ies were never carried on, but by a port of the Colonies, and by them, not so much
as a means of subsistence, as of commerce. That the fishery failing, those formerly
employed in them, turned part to agriculture, and part to the army and navy. That
our commerce must for sometime be in a great measure suspended, but that the
greater part of our importations were far from being necessaries of life, consequent-
ly we should not suffer under the want of them, whilst it was not wealth or luxuries
that we were contending for. That our commerce ceasing, it would be out of the
power of our enemies to support themselves on our plunder, and on the other hand,
our ships, as privateers, might harass their commerce, without a possibility of their
retaliating. That I hoped to see a considerable marine force in the Colonies, and
that, joined to the impossibility of Britain’s guarding so extensive a coast, would
preserve some of our commerce, until it should be thought an object deserving the
protection of other powers.
After many questions on this subject, he put this, in which I thought he seem-
ed interested,—whether, if the Colonies declare an independency, they would not
differ among themselves? To this I replied, that the greatest harmony had as yet
subsisted, and I had no grounds to doubt it in future; that the common danger,
which first drove them into measures, which must end in such a declaration, would
subsist, and that alone was sufficient to ensure their union.
He then desired me to give his secretary my address, and said, though he
should be glad to see me often, yet as matters were circumstanced, his house was
too public a place, but that I might put the same confidence in his secretary as him-
self, to whom I might apply for advice and direction, but that whenever any thing
of importance occurred, I need but inform him, and he would see me; but on com-
mon occasions, I must address the secretary, which would be every way more con-
venient as he understood the English language well, and was a person in whom the
greatest confidence could be placed. Having settled the mode of intercourse, I
expressed the sense I had of his excellency’s politeness, and the generous protec-
tion he had given me, and on parting said, if my commission or the mode of intro-
ducing the subject were out of the usual course, I must rely on his goodness to make
allowances for a new formed people, in circumstances altogether unprecedented,
and for their agent wholly unacquainted with courts. To which he replied, that
the people and their cause were very respectable in the eyes of all disinterested per-
sons, and that the interview had becn agreeable.
I am, &c. Sl LAS JDEANE.
Paris, Nov. 28, 1776] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 463
3. S. Deane to the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
Acknowledgment of American Independence by Foreign Powers. Extract.
Paris, 28th November, 1776. Gentlemen, Your favor of the 7th August last,
covering a copy of yours of the 8th of July, I received, though the original never
came to hand. This letter also enclosed the Declaration of Independency, with
instructions to make itknown to this and the other powers of Europe; and Ireceived
it the 5th inst. though the vessel which brought it had but 38 days passage from
Salem. This letter was very far from relieving me, as it enclosed what had been
circulated through Europe for two months before, and my pretending to inform this
Court would be only a matter of form, in consequence of your orders, which were
expressed in the style of any common affair. I certainly prefer simplicity of
style, as well as manners, but something is due to the dignity of old and power-
ful states, or if you please to their prejudices in favor of long established form and
etiquette; and as the United States of America, by this act, introduced themselves
among the established powers, and rank with them, it must of course be expected
that at the first introduction, or the announcing of it, some mode more formal, or
if I may so say, more respectful, would have been made use of, than simple two
or three lines from the committee of congress, in a letter something more apparently
authentic, not that either your power or the reality of your letter could be doubted.
I mention it as deserving consideration, whether in your application here and your
powers and instructions of a public nature, it is not always proper to use a seal?
This is a very ancient custom in all public and even private concerns of any consc-
quence.
As the copy was dated the eighth of July I took occasion to observe, that the
honorable Congress had taken the earliest opportunity of informing this Court of the
declaration of their Independency, and that the variety of important affairs beforo
Congress, with the critical situation of the armies in their neighborhood, and the
obstructions of their commerce, had prevented that intelligence which had been
wished for, but that the present served to shew the early and principal attention of
the United States to this Court; and as their Independency was now in form de-
clared, the queries I had formerly put in consequence of my first instructions might
now be resolved and I hoped favorably.
To this I was answered, unless France by a public acknowledgment of your
Independency makes, war on Great Britain in your favor, what service ean such ac-
knowledgment be of to the United States! You are known here, our ports are
open, and free for your commerce, and your ships are protected in them, and great-
er indulgencies allowed than to any other nations. If France should be obliged to
make war on England, it will be much more just and honorable in the eyes of the
world to make it on some other account; and if made at all, it is the same thing to
the United States of America, and in one important view better for them, to have
it originate from any other cause, as America will be under the less immediate obli-
gation. Further, France has alliances, and cannot resolve a question which must
perhaps involve her in a war, without previously consulting them. Meantime the
United States can receive the same succors and assistance from France without, as
well as with, such an open acknowledgment, and much more advantageously. To
this and such like arguments I had the less to reply, as you informed me that ar-
464 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Fayette, Franklin, Deane
ticles for a proposed alliance with France, were under consideration, and that I
might soon expect them.
I was further told that the Swiss Cantons, though in every respect free and
independent States for several centuries, had not to this hour been acknowledged
as such by any public act of any one power in Europe, except France, and that
neither the Revolution in the United Provinces or Portugal had been attended with
any such acknowledgment, though the powers of Europe in both cases lent their
aid. I replied that I would not urge a formal acknowledgment, as long as the
same ends could be obtained without the inconveniences hinted at: as I expected fur-
ther instructions I would reserve myself until their arrival. The apprehensions of the
United States negociating, has done us much damage, and the interview at New
York said to have been between a Commissioner of Congress and the two brothers
however politic the step may have been in America, was made use of to our preju-
dice in Europe, at this Court in particular, as it has been for some time asserted by
Lord Stormont and others, that a negociation would take place, and as far as this
is believed, so far our cause has suffered and our friends been staggered in their
resolutions. My opinion is, that the House of Bourbon, in every branch, will be
our friends; it is their interest to humble Great Britain. SILAS DEANE.
4. S. Deane to the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
Lafayette’s offer of Service, Extract. -
Paris, December 6, 1776. The desire which the Marquis de la Fayette shows
of serving among the troops of the United States of North America, and the inter-
est which he takes in the justice of their cause makes him wish to distinguish
himself in this war, and to render himself as useful as he possibly can; but not
thinking that he can obtain leave of his family to pass the seas, and serve in a fo-
reign country, till he can go as a general officer, I have thought I could not better
serve my country, and those who have intrusted me, than by granting to him in
the name of the very honorable Congress the rank of Major General, which I beg
the States to confirm to him, to ratify and deliver to him the commission to hold
and take rank, to count from this day, with the general officers of the same degree.
His high birth, his alliances, the great dignities which his family holds at this
Court, his considerable estates in this realm, his personal merit, his reputation, his
disinterestedness, and above all his zeal for the liberty of our provinces, are such
as to induce me alone to promise him the rank of major general in the name of the
United States. In witness of which I have signed the present, this 7th of Decem-
ber, 1776. SILAS DEANE.
On the conditions here explained, I offer myself, and promise to depart when
and how Mr Deane shall judge proper, to serve the United States with all possible
zeal, without any pension or particular allowance, reserving to myself the liberty
of returning to Europe when my family or my king shall recall me.
Done at Paris this 7th of December, 1776.
The MARQUIS de la FAYETTE.
5. B. Franklin and S. Deane, to the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
Favorable, but cautious, Policy of the French Court. Extract.
Paris, 12th March, 1777. Gentlemen, In our first conversation with the min-
ister, after the arrival of Mr Franklin, it was evident that this Court, while it treated
Paris, Mar. 12, 1777] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 465
us privately with all civility, was cautious of giving umbrage to England, and
was therefore desirous of avoiding an open reception and acknowledgment of us, or
entering into any formal negotiation-with us, as ministers from the Congress. To
make us easy, however, we were told that the ports of France were open to
our ships as friends, that our people might freely purchase and export, as merchan-
dise, whatever our States had occasion for; vending, at the same time, our own
commodities; that in doing this, we should experience all the facilities that a go-
vernment disposed to favor us could, consistent with treaties, afford to the enemies
of a friend. But though it was at that time no secret that two hundred field pieces
of brass, and thirty thousand fusils, with other munitions of war, in great abund-
ance, had been taken out of the king's magazines, for the purpose of exportation
to America; the minister, in our presence, affected to know nothing of that opera-
tion, and claimed no merit to his Court on that account. But he intimated to us
that it would be well taken, if we communicated with no other persons about the
Court, concerning our affairs but himself, who would be ready at all convenient
times times to confer with us.
We soon after presented several memorials, representing the state of the Colo-
nies, the necessity of some naval aid, and the utility to France, that must result
from our success in establishing the independence of America, with the freedom of
its commerce. In answer, we received a positive refusal of the ships of the line,
(which we had been instructed to ask,) on this principle, that if a war with En-
gland should take place, the whole fleet of France would be necessary at home for
her defence; that if such a war did not take place, yet while England apprehended
a war, it was equally serviceable to our States, that the fleet of France should re-
main entire in her ports, since that must retain an equal force of English at home,
who might otherwise go to America, and who certainly would follow thither any
French Squadron. During these conferences, every step was taken to gratify En-
gland publicly, by attending to the remonstrances of her ambassador, forbidding the
departure of ships which had military stores on board, recalling officers who had
leave of absence, and were going to joins us, and giving strict orders, that our
prizes should not be sold in French ports; yet we might not be discouraged, it was
intimated to us by persons about the Court, that these measures were necessary at
present, France not being yet quite ready for a war, and that we might be assured
of her good will to us and our cause.
All Europe is for us. Our articles of confederation, being by our means
translated, and published here, have given an appearance of consistence and firm-
ness to the American States and Government, that begins to make them consider-
able. The separate constitutions of the several States are also translating and
publishing here, which afford abundance of speculation to the politicians of Europe,
and it is a very general opinion, that if we succeed in establishing our liberties, we
shall, as soon as peace is restored, receive an immense addition of numbers and
wealth from Europe, by the families who will come over to participate in our pri-
vileges, and bring their estates with them. Tyranny is so generally established in
the rest of the world, that the prospect of an asylum in America, for those who
love liberty, gives general joy, and our cause is esteemed the cause of all mankind.
Slaves naturally become base, as well as wretched. We are fighting for the dig-
59
466 PIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [Franklin, Deane, Lee.
nity and happiness of human nature. Glorious is it for the Americans, to be call-
ed by providence to this post of honor. Cursed and detested will every one be
that deserts or betrays it! O
The tone of the Court accordingly rises, and it is said, that a few days since,
when the British Ambassador intimated to the Minister, that if the Americans were
permitted to continue drawing supplies of arms, &c. from this kingdom, the peace
could not last much longer; he was firmly answered—Nous ne desirons pas leguerre,
mais mous me la craigons pas. “We neither desire war, nor fear it.”
We are glad to learn the intention of Congress to send ministers to the empires
of Prussia and Tuscany. With submission, we think Holland, Denmark, Sweden,
and Russia, (if the expense is no objection,) should not be neglected.
With great respect, &c. B. FRANKLIN, SILAS DEANE.
6. Franklin, Deane, and Lee, to the Committee of Foreign Affairs.
French Court determined to acknowledge Independence—to make a Treaty of Amity and
Commerce. Extract.
Paris, 18th Dec. 1777. On signifying to the ministry the importance it might
be of at this juncture[Burgoyne's surrender]when probably Britain would be making
some propositions of accommodation, that the Congress should beinformed explicit-
ly what might be expected from France and Spain, M. Gerard, one of the secreta-
ries, came yesterday to inform us, by order of king, that after long and full consid-
eration of our affairs and propositions, in council, it was decided, and his majesty
was determined to acknowledge our independence, and make a treaty with us of
amity and commerce; that in this treaty no advantage would be taken of our pre-
sent situation, to obtain terms from us, which otherwise would not be convenient
for us to agree to; his majesty desiring that the treaty, once made, should be dura-
ble, and our amity subsist forever; which could not be expected, if each nation did
not find its interest in the continuance, as well as in the commencement of it. It
was therefore his intention, that the terms of the treaty should be such as we might
be willing to agree to, if our State had been long since established, and in the ful-
ness of strength and power, and such as we shall approve of when that time shall
come. That his majesty was fixed in his determination, not only to acknowlcdge
but to support, our independence, by every means in his power. That in doing this,
he might, probably, soon be engaged in a war, with all the expenses, risks, and
| damages, usually attending it, yet he should not expect any compensation from us
on that account, nor pretend that he acted wholly for our sakes; since, besides his
real good will to us and our cause, it was manifestly the interest of France, that the
power of England should be diminished by our separation from it. He should,
moreover, not so much as insist, that if he engaged in a war with England on our ac-
count, we should make a separate peace; he would have us be at full liberty to make
a peace for ourselves,” whenever good and advantageous terms were offered to us.
The only condition he should require and rely on would be this, that we, in no
peace to be made wtth England, should give up our independence, and return to
the obedience of that government. That as soon as the courier returned from
Spain, with the concurrence expected, the affair would be proceeded in and conclu-
ded; and of this we might give the Congress the strongest assurances in our des-
patches, only cautioning them to keep the whole, for the present, a dead secret, as
*See Vergennes, Dec. 15, and Franklin, Dec. 17, 1782.
passy, Oct. 16, 1778] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 467
Spain had three reasons for not immediately declaring; her money fleet not yet come
home; her Brazil army and fleet the same; and her peace with Portugal not yet
quite completed; but these obstacles would, probably, soon be removed. We an-
swered, that, in what had been communicated to us, we perceived, and ad-
mired equally the king’s magnanimity and his wisdom; that he would find us faith-
ſul and firm allies, and we wished, with his majesty, that the amity between the
two nations might be eternal. And, mentioning that republics were usually steady
in their engagements, for instance, the Swiss cantons, the Secretary remarked, that
France had been as steady with regard to them, two hundred years having passed
since their first alliance for fifty years had commenced, which had been renewed
from time to time; and such had been her uniform good faith towards them, that, as
it appeared in the last renewal, the Protestant cantons were free from their ancient
prejudices and suspicions, and joined readily with the rest in the league of which
we herewith send you a copy. With great respect, &c.
B. FRANKLIN, SILAS DEANE, ARTHUR LEE.
7. Franklin, Lee, and JAdams, to M. Dumas.
Treaty with Holland. -
Passy, October 16th, 1778. Sir, We have received yours of the 2d instant, with
the declaration signed by M. Van Berckel, and his explanatory letter to you, which
gave us much pleasure, as they show the good disposition of that respectable body,
the Burgo masters of Amsterdam, towards the United States of America, and their
willingness, as far as may depend on them, to promote between the republic of the
United Low Countries in Europe, and the said States, “A treaty of perpetual
amity, containing reciprocal advantages with respect to commerce between the sub-
jects of the two nations.” As that body must be better acquainted than we, with
the method of doing public business in their country, and appear to be of the opin-
ion, that some previous steps can be taken by them, which may facilitate and ex-
pedite so good a work, when circumstances shall permit its coming under the con-
sideration of their High Mightiness, we rely on their judgment, and hereby re-
quest they would take those steps, as explained in M. Van Berckel's letter.
And they may be assured, that such a treaty as is described would, at this time,
meet with no obstacles on the part of the United States of America, who have
great esteem and respect for your nation; and that nothing will be wanting on our
part to accomplish the end proposed. We would only remark, that the mentioning
it in the declaration as a thing necessary to precede the conclusion of such a treaty,
“that the American Independence should be acknowledged by the English,” is
is not understood by us, who conceive there is no more occasion for such an ac-
knowledgement before a treaty with Holland, than there was before our treaty with
France. And we apprehend, that if that acknowledgment were really necessary,
or waited for, England might endeavor to make an advantage of it in the future
treaty of pacification, to obtain for it some privileges in commerce, perhaps, exclu-
sive of Holland. We wish,therefore,that idea to be laid aside, and that no further
mention may be made to us of England in this business.
We are, Sir, yours with respect &c.
B. FRANKLIN, ARTHUR LEE, JOHN ADAMS.
468 DIPLOMATIC W RITING. [Arthur Lee.
8. Memorial Presented to the Court of Spain.
American Commerce—Impolicy of allowing the Union of the Colonies by Conquest, &c. Ex.
Burgos, March 8, 1777. It is manifest, that the meutrality of Spain and France
leaves the field open to the opererations of the British foece, and to the production
of one of those events, either of which must be highly prejudicial to both nations
and advantageous to their enemy. If Great Britain should be victorious, America
will become a powerful instrument in her hands, to be wielded at her will against
these countries; and that it will not remain long unemployed, no one will doubt,
who knows that the Court of Great Britain is well informed of the countenance,
at least, given to what they call a most dangerous rebellion, and that the head of
that Court is of a temper that never forgives or forgets.
If an accommodation should produce a re-union, the same advantages will be
lost, and almost all the same consequences are to be feared. The end of the cam-
paign cannot, therefore, promise so favorable a moment for the interposition of
Spain and France as the present; and in all probability it will be then fruitless.
In truth, what moment can be wished more favorable than the present, when
Great Britain is so equally matched by what were her Colonies, that the scales hang
doubtful! Nor can it be questioned, that the interposition of Spain or France,
and much more of both, would make that of America decidedly preponderate, and
separate her from Great Britain forever. And what object can be more important,
than to deprive her of this great and growing source of her commerce and her
wealth, her marine, and her dominion?
There is nothing of which the Court of Great Britain is more persuaded, than
that the loss of America would be the inevitable consequence of a war in Europe;
nor is there a man in the nation that is ignorant of it; hence it is, that the king finds
himself obliged, in all his speeches, to assure his Parliament of the tranquility of
Europe, that they may be emboldened to support his war against America. Hence
it is, that they have labored to prevent a rupture between Spain and Portugal, and
have, at length, renounced the latter. It is therefore certain, that Great Britain
would endure any insult, short of an open and outrageous act of hostility, rather
than engage in a European war during her contest with America.
During the last war, America contributed twelve thousand seamen, and twen-
ty thousand troops to the assistance of Great Britain. These are now tripled
against her. The commerce of America, according to the declaration of Mr Pitt,
who conducted it, carried Great Britain triumphantly through it. The full tide of
that commerce is now turned against her. From America, all the expeditions
against the Islands of Spain and France were then supplied. Now these supplies
are ready to assist in seizing her Islands.
Deprived of all those aids, which ministered to her success and her triumphs
during the last war, what could prevent her now from experiencing the bitter re-
verse of her former fortune! What policy can withhold two Sovereigns, whose
Prosperity is incompatible with her power, to let slip such an opportunity of hum-
bling her as may never return?
º If Great Britain should be again united to America by conquest or conciliation,
it would be in vain to menace her with war. America has been felt, like Hercules
in his cradle. Great Britain, knit again to such growing strength, would reign the
York, Dec.8, 1777] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 469
irresistable, though hated arbiter of Europe. This then is the moment in which
Spain and France may clip her wings and pinion her forever. One of the most re-
spectable bodies in England told their Sovereign some two years since, with a kind
of prophetic spirit, that his Ministers were precipitating his dominions into a situa-
tion in which their existence would depend upon the forbearance of their enemies.
That situation is now certainly occurred. The rest as certainly remains in the arbi-
tration of Spain and France. ARTHUR LEE.
9. Answer, to the Memorial, by the Marquis de Grimaldi at Vitoria.
You have considered your own situation and not ours. The moment is not
yet come for us. The war with Portugal—France being unprepared, and our
treasure from South America not being arrived—makes it improper for us to de-
clare immediately. These reasons will probably cease within a year, and then
will be the moment.
10. The Commissioners at Paris to Baron de Schulenburg, Minister to
the King of Prussia.
Congress propose to send a Minister to Prussia.
Paris, April 19th, 1777. Sir, We received the letter, which you did us the
honor to write to us on the 15th ult. and should earlier have replied particularly
thereto, but from the daily expectation we had of receiving orders from the Con-
gress of the United States on this important subject. We have their commands
to inform his Prussian Majesty’s Ambassador here, that they propose to send a
minister to your respected Court with all convenient expedition, properly empow-
ered to treat upon affairs of importance, and that we are in the mean time, instruct-
ed and authorised by Congress to solicit the friendship of your Court, to request
that it would afford no aid to their enemies, but use its good offices to prevent the
landing of troops by other powers to be transported to America for their destruc-
tion, and to offer the free commerce of the United States to the subjects of Prussia.
We have taken the earliest opportunity of obeying these commands. But
considering the great importance of establishing a free commerce between the two
countries as soon as possible, and confident that every objection may be obviated,
and the wished for intercourse opened and established on the most certain and
beneficial grounds to promote the interest of both countries, we propose that one of
us shall wait on your Excellency as soon as conveniently may be done, to explain
personally the situation of America, the nature, extent, and importance of its com-
merce, and the methods by which it may be carried on with Prussia to mutual ad-
vantage. In the proposed interview, we are confident the difficulties mentioned by
your Excellency may be surmounted, and a very considerable part of American
commerce be turned to Prussia, by measures neither dangerous nor expensive.
We have the honor to be, &c. B. FRANKLIN,
SILAS DEANE, ARTHUR LEE.
11. James Lovell to Silas Deane.
* Mr Deane’s Recall.
York, 8th December, 1777. Sir, By accident I find myself called upon singly
to execute the duty of the committee of foreign affairs, in communicating to you an
order of Congress, of this day, respecting your return to America;
470 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [ºff. Lee to Com.
The order stands in need of no comment from the committee to elucidate it;
and being drawn up in terms complimentary to your abilities of serving these Uni-
ted States upon your arrival here, I take pleasure in conveying it: being, sir, your
very humble servant. JAMES LOVE LL.
12. From Count de Vergennes to the President of Congress.
- Approbatory of Mr Deane’s Conduct in France.
Versailles, the 25th March, 1778. Sir, Mr Deane being about to return to
America, I embrace the occasion with pleasure to give my testimony to the zeal,ac-
tivity, and intelligence with which he has conducted the interests of the United
States, by which he has merited the esteem of the king my master, and for which
his Majesty has been pleased to give him marks of his satisfaction. Mr Deane
will be able to inform Congress of the disposition of the king towards the United
States. The engagements formed with his Majesty, will doubtless satisfy their
wishes; the king on his part is not only convinced, that they are founded on prin-
ciples unalterable, but also that they will contribute to the happiness of both na-
tions. I have the honor to be, &c. DE VERGENNES,
13. From Count De Vergennes to Silas Deane,
Commendatory of Mr Deane’s Conduct.
Versailles, 26th March, 1778. As I am not, Sir, to have the honor of seeing
you again before your departure, I pray you to receive here my wishes, that your
voyage may be short and happy, and that you may find in your own country the
same sentiments, which you have inspired in France. You need not, Sir, desire
any addition to those which I have devoted to you, and which I shall preserve for
you to the end of my life: they will be sureties to you of the true interests, which
I shall forever take in your happiness, as well as in the prosperity of your country.
The king, desirous of giving you a personal testimony of the satisfaction he
has in your conduct, has charged me to communicate it to the President of the
Congress of the United States. This is the object of the letter, which Mr Gerard
will deliver you for Mr Hancock. He will also deliver you a box with the king's
portrait. You will not, I presume, Sir, refuse to carry to your country the image
of its most zealous friend: the proof of this is in facts.
I have the honor to be, &c. DE VERGENNES.
14. Arthur Lee to the Committee of Foreign Affairs.
Propriety of determining the future Rank of the United States in their intercourse with
Foreign Powers. Extract.
Paris, April 2d, 1778. Gentlemen, The conclusion of the treaties here has
ended the powers of our commission. Whatever character it may please Congress
to give to their respresentatives in future, must be specified by new powers, and
letters of credence to the Sovereign, with whom they are to act. The first exam-
ple of this kind will be material, in determining the future rank of the United
States of America among other sovereign nations. Since the treaty of Munster,
Venice and the United Provinces have had their rank as crowned sovereigns, I
presume the United States of America will not think a lower rank competent to
their dignity, and to the importance they must command in the balance of European
Phila. July 1, 1777] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 4.71
power. For I am satisfied, that in a few years that balance must be in their hands.
Whatever orders Congress are pleased to give on this subject, their Ministers
must support with firmness and inflexibility, at first, to prevent any disagreeable
disputes for the future. I have the honor to be, &c. ARTHUR LEE.
15. Arthur Lee to Count de Vergennes.
Explanation of the 12th art. of the Treaty.
Chaillot, June 14th, 1778. Sir, It was with great pleasure I heard the expla.
nation, which your Excellency did me the honor to give me yesterday relative to
the 12th article of the Commercial Treaty; that it was meant to comprehend only
provisions, and not the whole of our exports to his Majesty’s Islands, and that denrees
the word employed, signifies eatables, not merchandise. It relieved the apprehen-
sions I had entertained, that the having set in that article the whole of our produce
against one of your productions would seem unequal, would therefore give uneasi-
ness in Congress, and prevent that unanimity in their approbation of the treaty,
which the wise and liberal principles on which it is planned deserve; and which I
most sincerely wished it might receive. *
Upon referring, however, to the words of the treaty, I find they are denrees et
marchandise, so that the words appear, by I know not what accident, to have been
different from, and, to mean more than you intended. I lament extremely that no-
thing of this explanation passed in our conference and correspondence with M. Ge-
rard on this and the preceding article. Yet I am not without hope, that Congress
will rather trust to the equity of your Court for reducing the article to its intended
equality, than gratify our enemies by an appearance of dissension in ratifying the
treaties.
Reciprocity and equality being the principles of the treaties, and duration the
object, your Excellency will, in my judgment, have an opportunity of strengthening
the confidence and ties between us, by offering to remove words of a latitude not
intended, and of an inequality, which must be seen and create dissatisfaction.
I have the honor to be, &c. ARTHUR LEE.
16. Instructions to William Lee.
Commissioners to the Courts of Vienna and Berlin—solicit the acknowledgment of
the Independence of the States.
Philadelphia, July 1st, 1777. Sir, Herewith you will receive Commissions
from the Congress of the United States of North America, authorising and ap-
pointing you to represent the said Congress as their Commissioner at the Courts
of Vienna and Berlin. ...You will proceed with all convenient expedition to those
Courts; visiting that first, which, on consultation with the Commissioners at the
Court of France, shall be judged most proper. You will lose no time in announ-
cing in form to those Courts the declaration of Independence made in Congress on
the fourth of July, 1776. The reasons of this act of Independence are so strongly
adduced in the declaration itself, that further argument is unnecessary. As it is of
the greatest importance to these States, that Great Britain be effectually obstructed
in the plan of sending of sending German and Russian troops to North America,
you will exert all possible address and vigor to cultivate the friendship, and pro-
cure the interference of the Emperor and of Prussia. To this end you will pro-
472 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Hancock, Lee.
pose treaties of friendship and commerce with these powers, upon the same com-
mercial principles as Were the basis of the first treaties of friendship and com-
merce proposed to the Courts of France and Spain, by our Commissioners, and
which were approved in Congress the seventeenth day of September, 1776, and
not interfering with any treaties, which may have been proposed to, or concluded
with, the Courts abovementioned. For your better instruction herein, the Com-
missioners at the Court of Versailles will be desired to furnish you, from Paris,
with a copy of the treaty originally proposed to Congress, to be entered into with
France, together with the subsequent alterations that have been proposed on either
side.
You are to propose no treaty of commerce to be of longer duration, than the
term of twelve years from the date of its ratification by the Congress of the United
States. And it must never be forgotten, in these commercial treaties, that recip-
rocal and equal advantages to the people of both countries be firmly and plainly
secured.
There being reasons to suppose, that his Prussian Majesty makes commerce
an object, you will not fail to place before him, in the clearest light, the great ad-
vantages, that may result from a free trade between the Prussian dominions and
North America.
You will seize the first favorable moment to solict, with decent firmness and
respect, an acknowledgement of the independence of these States, and the public
reception of their Commissioner as the representative of sovereign States. The
measures you may take in the premises, and the occurrences of your negotiation,
you will communicate to Congress by every opportunity.
It may not be improper to observe, that these instructions, and all others,
which you may receive from time to time, should be kept as secret as circumstances
will admit. JOHN HANCOCK, President of Congress.
17. Wiltiam Lee to the President of Congress.
Open Acknowledgment of the Independence of the U. S. by the Court of France. Extract.
Paris, March 23d, 1778. Sir, To the enclosed copy of my last be pleased to
refer. I have the pleasing satisfaction of congratulating you and my country on
the independency of the thirteen United States of America being now openly ac-
knowledged by the Court of France, which must soon put a glorious end to all our
troubles. About fourteen days ago the French Minister in London formally avow-
ed to the British Ministry the treaty, which His Most Christian Majesty had
made with you, and on the 20th inst your Commissioners were, in form, introduc-
ed to the King and his Ministers at Versailles, as the representatives of a sovereign
State, and on Sunday last they were introduced to the Queen and the royal family.
I have already claimed the King of Prussia’s promise to acknowledge our In-
dependence as soon as France has done so; his answer I shall meet in Germany,
and as far as one can judge at present, there is a greater probability of my being
sooner openly received at Berlin than at Vienna, but on this head, and at this criti-
cal mement, it is impossible for any man in the world to form a decisive opinion,
becasue the issue will depend on events that are yet in the womb of time; there-
fore, all that is in prudence for me to do is, on the spot to seize the first opening
faris, Sept. 12,1778] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 473
that is made on either side in our favor; and I shall take care to give you the ear-
liest intelligence of every thing material, that occurs in my department.
I have the honor to remain, &c. WILLIAM LEE.
18. PWilliam Lee to the Committee of Foreign Affairs.
Retires from Vienna—Draught of a Treaty between Holland and the United States. Ext.
Paris, September 12th, 1778. Gentlemen, Since my last of the 30th of May,
when the war broke out between the Emperor and the King of Prussia, on consul-
tation with the French Ambassador at Vienna, it was agreed to be most advisable
for me to retire to Frankfort, and wait there until the several powers in Germany
and the rest of Europe had taken a decided line in this war, when we might be able
to direct our operations to the most advantage for America, since it was evident,
that neither the Court of Vienna, nor that of Berlin could, in their critical situation,
take an open part with us, for fear of throwing Hanover, with a body of thirty
thousand men, into the scale of the adversary, especially too as France had declared
a neutrality, on the urgent application of the House of Austria for aid, under the
treaties subsisting between them and France; to which however France replies with
truth, that the case does not exisit as specified in the treaty, which obliges them to
aid the House of Austria.
After my arrival at Frankfort, finding an opportunity offered to me of negotia-
ting a Treaty of commerce with the United States of Holland and West Friesland;
I embraced it, and have proceeded so far as to agree on the draught of a treaty, with
the regular representative of the Pensionary and Burgomasters of the city of Amster-
dam, of which I have not time to send you a copy by this conveyance, but I am
sure you would approve of it, as it contains all the substantially advantageous arti-
cles of the commercial treaty with France, and some beneficial and agreeable addi-
tions.
So far, the business has been conducted on both sides with great Secrecy,
which is absolutely necessary in order to procure final success with the United
States here, for though the city of Amsterdam and the States of Holland pay, it is
supposed, about five sixths of the whole taxes for the support of the government,
which consequently gives them very powerful weight and influence, yet they have
no power, by their constitution, of entering into such a treaty, without the concur-
rence of the other United States, in some of which the Prince of Orange has an
over due influence, and all the world knows his blood connexions with the king
of England, as well as that he has the same designs against his country, that
have been attempted to be carried into execution against us, and which he hopes to
succeed in by the aid of his cousin of England, with whom he is in the strictest
intimacy. This renders secrecy of the last importance, until the patriots in Hol-
land have secured success, before the business is agitated in the General Assembly
of the States, where it must come, to have full authority.
Here I find myself embarrassed, because I have no power to sign such a treaty
and I know not how to determine as yet about communicating it, in the present situ-
ation of things, to those who have a power to sign it in your name; because it is
well known that some of the most important negociations and proceedings here, re-
lative to your aſſairs, have sometime past been very speedily communicated in En-
gland, and I have not yet been able to learn that the old channel is stopped. I shall,
, 60
47% T}IPLOMATIC WRITING. [Franklin, Deane.
however, proceed in the manner, that shall, on the maturest reflection, appear the
best to forward the wishes of Congress, and advance the prosperity of our country.
In a week or ten days I shall return to my station in Germany, and watch with
careful attention over my charge there, and when any thing material occurs you
* shall be duly advised. I have the honor, &c. WILLIAM LEE.
19. B. Franklin, and S. Deane to the President of Congress.
Treaty of Amity and Commerce, and of Alliance, concluded and signed. Extract.
Passy, 8th February, 1778. Sir, We have now the great satisfaction of ac-
quainting you and the Congress, that the treaties with Franee arc at length comple-
ted and signed.* The first is a treaty of amity and commerce, much on the plan
of that projected in Congress; the other is a treaty of alliance, in which it is stipu-
lated, that in case England declares war against France, or occasions a war by at-
tempts to hinder her commerce with us, we should then make common cause of it,
and join our forces, and councils, &c. The great aim of this treaty is declared to
be to “establish the liberty, sovereignty and independency, absolute and unlimited,
of the United States, as well in matters of government as eommerce;” and this is
guarantied to us by France, together with all the countries we possess, or shall
possess at the conclusion of the war; in return for which the States guaranty to
France, all its possessions in America. We observe to you, and with pleasure,
that we have found throughout this business, the greatest cordiality in this Court;
and that no advantage has been taken, or attempted to be taken of our present diffi-
culties, to obtain hard terms from us; but such has been the King’s magnanimity
and goodness, that he has proposed none which we might not readily have agreed
to in a state of full prosperity and established power. The principle laid down as
the basis of the treaty, being as declared in the preamble, “the most perfect equali-
ty and reciprocity,” the privileges in trade, &c. are mutual, and none are given to
France, but what we are at liberty to grant to any other nation.
On the whole, we have abundant reason to be satisfied with the good will of
this Court, and of the nation in general, which we therefore hope will be cultivated
by the Congress, by every means which may be establish the Union, and render
permanent. We have the honor to be, &e. B. FRANKLIN, S. DEANE.
* For the Treaty of Amity and Commeree, and of Alliance, see vol. 1, from pages 34 to
64. The Letter of Credence (the first on record in our political annals) furnished by the Revo-
lutionary Congress to the three Commissioners, who negotiated these treaties, is as follows:
“The Delegates of the United States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode
Island, Connecticut, New-York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia,
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, to all who shall see these presents, send Gree-
ting:--Whereas a trade, upon equal terms, between the subjects of his most Christian Majesty,
the King of Prance and the people of these States, will be beneficial to both nations;–1&now
ye, therefore, that we, confiding in the prudence and integrity of Benjamin Franklin, one of
the Delegates in Congress, from the State of Pennsylvania, and President of the Convention
of the said State, &c. Silas Deane, now in France, Iate a Delegate from the State of Connecti-
cut; and ſlºthºr Lee, barrister at law, have appointed and deputed, and by these presents do
appoint and depute them, the said Benjamin Franklin, Silas Deane, and ſlrthur Lee, our
Commissioners, giving and granting to them, the said Franklin, Deane, and Lee, or any two
of them, and in case of the death, absence, or disability of any two, or any one of them, ſult
power to communicate, treat, agree and conclude with his most Christian Majesty, the King
of France, or with such person or persons, as shall by him be for that purpose authorized, of
and upon a true and sincere friendship, and a firm, inviolable and universal peace for the de-
fence, protection, and safety of the navigation and mutual commerce of the subjects of his most
Christian Majesty, and the people of the United States, and to do all other things, which may
yonduce to those desirable ends, and promising in good faith to ratify whatsoever our said
Commissioners shall transact in the premises. Done in Congress, in Philadelphia, the thir-
tieth-day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six.”
&ond, ſlug.9, 1783) DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 473
20. Henry Laurens to the Ministers of the United States at flaris.
Conference with Mr Fox, and the Duke of Portland. Extract.
London, August 9th, 1783. Gentlemen, I arrived in London late in the night
of the 3d, and on the 5th had a conference with Mr Fox, which I committed to wri-
ting as soon as it had ended. I shall give it in a short dialogue,as the best way; not
pretending to accuracy in cvery word,but fully preserving the sense and substance:
Mr Fox. I suppose, Mr L. you wish to forward the ratification of the provi-
sional articles.
L. I could wish that was done, Sir, but it is not the particular business I have
in charge.
1'. I understood from Mr Hartley's letter, which you sent me, that it was;
but he docs not speak positively.
L. No, Sir, the only business I have in charge, is to inquire, whether a Minis-
ter from the United States of America would be properly received at this Court.
F. Most undoubtedly, sir; I could wish that there was one here at present; I
think we have lost much time from a want of a Minister from your side.
L. Then, Sir, will you be so good as to ask his Majesty, and inform me!
F. I will take the King's pleasure to-morrow, and you shall her from me ; I
suppose there is already a conditional appointment of some person now in Burope.
L. Not that I know of, though I do not know the contrary, but I have an ex-
cellent opportunity of writing to Congress, and I have no doubt an appointment
will be made immediately.
F. That is unlucky; there must be two crossings of the ocean then ; if a
Ministcr of Congress had been here, we might have done our business in half the
time we have already spent, but I shall certainly inform you tomorrow; this is the
vcry time a Minister from your people is most necessary.
L. Though I have nothing particularly in charge czcept the business already
mentioned, I regret the delay of both the commercial and definitive treaty. We had
flattered ourselves with hopes in March and April, that both would have been
finished in a few days.
F. Why, as to a definitive treaty, I cannot sec any necessity for one, or not
immediately. The provisional articles are to be inserted, and to constitute a treaty;
a ratification of those, I apprehend, will answer all the purposes of a definitive
treaty; they may be made definitive. The case with respect to France and Spain
differs widely; several articles in our preliminarics with them refer to a definitive
treaty.
L. I agree with you, Sir, that the provisional articles, mutually ratified, may,
fy the consent of the parties, be made definitive; but there may be additional
articles suggested and agreed to for the mutual benefit.
F. 'That is true; but I do not see any at present. I very much regret the want
of a Minister from America.
L. Permit me, Sir, to ask you, is it intended by the proclamation of the 2d of
inly, to exclude American ships from the West India trade, between the United
States and the British islands!
F. Yes, certainly, it was so intended, in order that we might have something
to treat ſor, and this will be a subject for a commercial treaty.
On the 6th, I waited upon his Grace, the Duke of Portland. His grace was
cqually clear and positive as Mr Fox had declared himself, that a Minister from the
United States of America would be well received at this court, and also regretted
that an appointment had not carlier taken place. I touched upon the commercial
and definitive treaty, referred to assurances in March and April, intimated my ap-
prehensions of permicious cſſocts, which might arise from excluding American
ships from a freedom botwoon the United States and the British West lndia Islands,
widing what I had learnt from Doctor Franklin of the commerce intended by the
4.76 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Laurens, Franklin.
Court of France, between our America and the French Islands. I can only say,
the Duke seemed to wish that every thing had been settled to mutual satisfaction,
and hoped that every thing would soon be settled.
I have the honor to be, &c. HENRY LAURENS.
21. Instructions to B. Franklin, as Minister Plenipotentiary to France.
We, the Congress of the United States of North America, having thought it
proper to appoint you their Minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of His Most
Christian Majesty, you shall in all things, according to the best of your knowledge
and abilities, promote the interest and honor of the said States, at that Court, with a
particular attention to the following instructions:
1. You are immediately to assure His Most Christian Majesty, that these
States entertain the highest sense of his exertions in their favor; particularly by
sending the respectable squadron under the Count d’Estaing, which would proba-
bly have terminated, the war in a speedy and honorable manner, iſ unforeseen and
unfortunate circumstances had not, intervened:
You are further to assure him, that they consider this speedy aid not only as
a testimony of his Majesty’s fidelity to the engagements he has entered into, but
as an earnest of that protection, which they hope from his power and magninmity,
and as a bond of gratitude to the union, founded on mutual interest.
2. You shall, by the earliest opportunity, and on every necessary occasion,
assure the King and his Ministers, that neither the Congress, nor any of the States
they represent, have at all swerved from their determination to be independent in
July,”6. But as the declaration was made in the face of the most powerful fleet and
army, which could have been expected to operate against them, and without any
the slighest assurance of foreign aid, so, although in a defenceless situation, and
harrassed by the secret machinations and designs of intestine foes,they have, under
the exertions of that force, during those bloody campaigns, persevered in their
determination to be free. And that they have been inflexible in this determination
notwithstanding the interruption of their commerce, the great sufferings they have
experienced from the want of those things, which it procured, and the unexampled
barbarity of their enemics.
3. You are to give the most pointed and positive assurances, that although
the Congress are earnestly desirous of peace, as well to arrange their finances and
recruit the exhausted state of their country, as to spare the further effusion of blood,
yet they will faithfully perform their engagements, and afford every assistance in
their power to prosecute the war for the great purposes of the alliance.
4. You shall endeavor to obtain the King's consent to expunge from the treaty
of commerce the eleventh and twelfth articles, as inconsistent with that equality
and reciprocity, which form the best security to perpetuate the whole.
5. You are to exert yourself to procure the consent of the Court of France,
that all American scamen, who may be taken on board of British vessels, may, if
they choose, be permitted to enter on board of American vessels. In return for
which, you are authorized to stipulate, that all Frenchmen who may be taken on
board of British vessels, by vessels belonging to the United States, shall be deli-
Vered up to persons appointed for that purpose by His Most Christian Majesty.
Passy, Sept.13,1781] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 4.77
6. You are also to suggest to the Ministers of His Most Christian Majesty
the advantage, that would result from entering on board the ships of these States
British seamen, who may be made prisoners, thereby impairing the force of the enc-
my, and strengthening the hands of his ally.
7. You are also to suggest the fatal consequences, which would follow to
the commerce of the common enemy, if, by confining the war to the European and
Asiatic seas, the coasts of America could be so far freed from the British fleets, as
to furnish a safe asylum to the frigates and privateers of the allied nations and their
prizes. -
8. You shall constantly inculcate the certainty of ruining the British fisheries
on the Banks Newfoundland, and consequently the British Marine, by reducing
Halifax and Quebec; since, by that means they would be exposed to alarm and
plunder, and deprived of the necessary supplies formerly drawn from America.
The plan proposed to Congress for compassing these objects is herewith transmit-
ted for your more particular instructions. *
9. You are to lay before the Court the deranged state of our finances, togeth-
er with the causes thereof; and show the necessity of placing them on a more res-
pectable footing, in order to prosecute the war with vigor on the part of America.
10. You are, by every means in your power, to promote a perfect harmony,
concord, and good understanding, not only between the allied powers, but also be-
tween and among their subjects, that the connexion so favorably begun may be per-
petuated.
11. You shall in all things take care not to make any engagements, or stipu-
dations, on the part of America, without the consent of America previously obtained.
We pray God to further you with his goodness in the several objects hereby
recommended; and that he will have you in his holy keeping.
Done at Philadelphia, the 26th day of October, 1778.
By the Congress. H. LAURENS, President.
22 B. Franklin to the President of Congress.
European Powers have adopted the rule that Free Ships make Free Goods. Extract.
Paris, May 31st, 1780. Sir, Whatever may formerly have been the law of
nations, all the neutral powers at the instance of Russia seem at present disposed
to change it, and to enforce the rule that free ships shall make free goods, except
in the case of contraband. Denmark, Sweden, and Holland, have already ac-
ceded to the proposition, and Portugal is expected to follow. France and Spain,
in their answers, have also expressed their approbation of it.
With great respect, &c. B. FRANKLIN.
*s
23. B. Franklin to the President of Congress.
Interview with the Count de Vergennes, on communicating his instructions relative to the
negotiations, and the letter of Congress to the King. Extract.
Passy, September 13th, 1781. Sir, I duly received the two letters your ex-
cellency did me the honor of writing to mc, both datcd the 19th of June, together
with the letter addressed to the King and the three CommissionCrs, with the instrue-
tions relative to the negociations for peace. I immediately went to Versailles and
prescntcd the letter, which was graciously received. I communicated also to
478 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Franklin.
Count de Vergennes a copy of your instructions after having decyphered them.
He read them while I was with him, and expressed his satisfaction with the unre-
served confidence placed in his Court by the Congress, assuring me that they new-
er would have cause to regret it, for that the King had the honor of the United
States at heart, as well as their welfare and independence. Indecd this has already
been manifested in the negociations relative to the Plenipotentiaries, and I have
had so much experience of his Majesty’s goodness to us, in the aid aſſorded us from
time to time, and of the sincerity of this upright and able Minister, who never
promised me anything which he did not punctually perform, that I cannot but think
the confidence well and judiciously placed, and that it will have happy cffects.
I have communicated to Mr Adams and to Mr Jay the purport of your des-
patches. Mr Adams already had received the same; by the first safe conveyance I
shall acquaint the Congress with the steps that have been taken in the negociation.
At present I would only say, that the settling preliminarics meets with diſficulty,
and will probably take much time, partly from the remotencss of the mediators, so
that any relaxation of our warlike preparations in expectation of a speedy peace, will
be imprudent as it may be pernicious.
I wish, that a consul general may soon be appointed for this kingdom; it would
ease me of abundance of troublesome business to which I am not equal, and which
interferes with my own important functions.
I have the honor to be, &c. IB. FRANKLIN,
24. B. Franklin to Robert R. Livingston.
The Swedish Ambassador expresses a wish to treat with Dr. Franklin. Extract.
Passy, June 25th, 1782. The Ambassador from Sweden to this Court applicd
to me lately to know, if I had powers that would authorise my making a treaty
with his master in behalf of the United States.
Recollecting a general power, that was formerly given to me with the other
Commissioners, I answered in the affirmative. He scemed much pleased,
and said the King had directed him to ask the question, and charged him
to tell me that he had so great esteem for me, that it would be a particular satisfac.
tion to him to have such a transaction with me. I have perhaps some vanity in re-
peating this; but I think too, that it is right that Congress should know it, and judge
iſ any use may be made of the reputation of a citizen for the public service. In
case it should be thought ſit to cmploy mo in that business, it will be well to sond
a more particular power, and proper instructions. The Ambassador added, that it
was a pleasure to him to think, and he hoped it would be remembered, that Sweden
was the first power in Europe, which had voluntalily oſcred its fricndship to the
United States without being solicitcd. This aſſair should be talked of as little as
possible till completed. I have the honor to be, &c. B. FRANKLIN.
25. Eactract from Franklin’s Journal.
Mr Grenville receives full Powers, Authorising him to Treat with any other Prince of State.
Suggests a doubt whether Great Britain will allow America to be designated by the
expression State, Extract.
Passy, June 15, 1782, Sir, Mr Grenville came, and acquainted me with the
return of his courier, and that he had brought the full powers. That he, Mr Gren-
ville, had becn at Versailles, and left a copy with Coulit de Vergennes. That the
Passy, Dec. 5, 1782] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 479
instrument was in the same terms with the former, except that after the power to
treat with the King of France, or his Ministers, there was an addition of words, im-
porting a power to treat with the Ministers of any other Prince or State whom it
might concern. That Count de Vergennes had at first objected to these general
words, as not being particular cnough, but said he would lay it before the King, and
communicate it to the Ministers of the belligerent powers, and that Mr Grenville
should hear from him on Monday. Mr Grenville added, that he had further in-
formed Count de Vorgennes of his being now instructed to make a proposition as
a basis for the intended treaty, viz. the peace of 1763.
That the proposition intended to be made under his first powers, not being then
received, was now changed, and instead of proposing to allow the independence of
America, on condition of England’s being put into the situation she was in at the
peace of 1763, he was now authorised to declare the Independence of America pre-
vious to the treaty, as a voluntary act, and to propose separately as a basis the treaty
of 1763. This also Count de Vergennes undertook to lay before the King, and
communicate to me.
Mr Grenville then said to me, he hoped all difficulties were now removed, and
that we might proceed in the good work. I asked him if the enabling bill was pass-
ed? He said, no. It passed the Commons, and had been once read in the House
of Lords, but was not yet completed. I remarked, that the usual time approached
for the prorogation of Parliament, and possibly this business might be omitted.
He said there was do danger of that, the Parliament would not rise this year till
the middle of July; the India affairs had put back other business which must be
done, and would require a prolongation of the session till that time. I then observ-
ed to him, that, though we Americans considered ourselves as a distinct indepen-
dent power, or State, yet, as the British Government had always, hitherto, affect-
cd to consider us only as rebellious subjects, and as the enabling act was not yet
passed, I did not think it could be fairly supposed, that his Court intended by the
general words, any other Prince or State, to include a people whom they did not
allow to be a State; and that, therefore, I doubted the sufficiency of his power as to
treating with America, though it might be good as to Spain and Holland. He re-
plied, that he himself had no doubt of the sufficiency of his power, and was willing
to act upon it. I then desired te have a copy of the power, which he accordingly
promised me. B. FRANKLIN.
26. Benjamin Franklin to Robert I?. Livingston.
History of the Negotiations—The principal Preliminaries between France and England
agreed to. Extract.
Passy, December 5th, 1782. Sir, Much of the summer has becn taken up in
objecting against the powers given by Great Britain, and in removing those objec-
tions. The not using any expressions, that might imply an acknowledgment of
our independence, seemed at first industriously to be avowed. But our refusing
otherwise to treat, at length induced them to get over that difficulty, and then we
came to the point of making propositions. Those made by Mr Jay and me before
the arrival of the other gentlemen, you will find in the paper A, which was
sent by the British Plenipotentiary to London for the King's consideration. After
some weeks, an under secretary, Mr Strachey, arrived, with whom we had much
480 DIPLOMATIC writing. [Franklin olivingston,
contestation about the boundaries and other articles which he proposed and we
settled; some of which he carried to London, and returned with the propositions,
some adopted, others omitted or altered, and new ones added, which you will see
in paper B. We spent many days in disputing, and at length agreed on and sign-
ed the preliminaries, which you will see by this conveyance. The British Minis-
ter struggled hard for two points, that the favors granted to the royalists should be
extended, and all our fishery contracted. We silenced them on the first, by threat,
ening to produce an account of the mischief done by those people; and as to the
second, when they told us they could not possibly agree to it as we requested it,
and must refer it to the Ministry in London, we produced a new article to be refer-
red at the same time, with a note effacts in support of it, which you have, C.—
Apparently, it seemed, that to avoid the discussion of this, they suddenly changed
their minds, dropped the design of recurring to London, and agreed to allow the
fishery as demanded.
You will find in the preliminaries some inaccurate and ambiguous expressions,
that want explanation, and which may be explained in the definitive treaty, and as
the British Ministry excluded our proposition relating to commerce, and the Amer-
ican prohibition of that with England, may not be understood to cease, merely by
our concluding a treaty of peace, perhaps we may then, if the Congress shall think
fit to direct it, obtain some compensation for the injuries done us as a condition of
our opening again the trade. Every one of the present British Ministry has, while
in the Ministry, declared the war against us as unjust, and nothing is clearer in
reason, than that those who injure others by an unjust war, should make full repa-
ration. They have stipulated too, in these preliminaries, that in evacuating our
towns, they shall carry off no plunder, which is a kind of acknowledgment that
they ought not to have done it before.
The reason given us for dropping the article relating to commerce, was, that
some statutes were in the way, which must be repealed before a treaty of that kind
could be well formed, and that this was a matter to be considered in Parliament.
They wanted to bring their boundary down to the Ohio, and to settle their loy.
alists in the Illinois country. We did not choose such neighbors.
As soon as I received the commission and instructions for treating with Sweden,
I waited on the Ambassador here, who told me he daily expected a courier on that
Subject. Yesterday he wrote a note to acquaint me, that he would call on me to-
day, having something to communicate to me. Being obliged to go to Paris, I
waited on him, when he showed me the full powers he had just received, and I
showed him mine. We agreed to meet on Wednesday next, exchange copies, and
proceed to business. His commission has some polite expressions in it, to wit:
“that his Majesty thought it for the good of his subjects to enter into a treaty of
amity and commerce with the United States of America, who had established their
independence, so justly merited by their by their courage and constancy;” or to
that effect. I imagino this treaty will be soon completed; if any diſficulty should
arise, I shall take the advice of my colleagues.
I am now cntering on my 78th year; public business has engrossed 50 of them;
I wish now to be, for the little time I have left, my own master. If I live to see
this peace concluded, I shall bog leave to remind the Congress of their promise
Passy, Dec. 17, 1782 DIPLOMATIC VWRITING. 48i
then to dismiss me. I shall be happy to sing with old Simeon, “Now lettest thou
thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation 1’’
With great esteem, &c. B. FRANKLIN.
27. B. Franklin to Count de Vergennes.
Informing him that a Passport has been received from England for the Washington. Extract.
Passy, December 15th, 1782. Sir, I have the honor to acquaint your Excel-
lency, that our courier is to set out tomorrow at ten o’clock, with the despatches we
send to Congress, by the Washington, Captain Barney, for which ship we have
got a passport from the King of England. If you would make any use of this
conveyance, the courier shall wait upon you tomorrow at Versailles, and receive
your orders. With respect, &c. B. FRANKLIN.
Copy of a Passport given to the ship Washington, to carry over the Preliminary:Articles:
George the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland,
Defender of the Faith, and so forth. To all Admirals, Vice Admirals, Captains, Command-
ers of our ships of war, or privateers, Governors of our forts and castles, customhouse comp-
trollers, searchers, &c. to all and singular our officers, and military and loving subjects whom
it may concern, greeting: Our will and pleasure is, and we do hereby strictly charge and re-
quire you, as we do likewise pray and desire the officers and minisiers of all Princes and
States, in amity with us, to permit and suffer the vessel called the Washington, commanded
by Mr Joshua Barney, belonging to the United States of North America, to sail from either of
the ports of France, to any port or place in North America, without any let, hinderance, or
molestation whatsoever; but, on the contrary, affording the said vessel all such aid and assist-
ance as may be necessary. -
Given at our Court of St. James, the tenth day of December, 1782, in the 23d year of our
reign. By his Majesty’s command: T. TOWNSHEND.
28. Count de Vergennes to B. Franklin.
Expresses his astonishment at the despatching of the Washington. Complains that the Pre-
liminaries have been concluded without any communication with France.
Versailles, December 15th, 1782. Sir, I cannot but be surprised, Sir, that
after the explanation I have had with you, and the promise you gave, that you
would not press the application for an English passport for the sailing of the packet
Washington, that you now inform me, you have received the passport, and that at
ten o'clock tomorrow morning your courier will set out to carry your despatches.
i am at a loss, Sir, to explain your conduct and that of your colleagues on this oc-
casion. You have concluded your preliminary articles without any communica-
tion between us, although the instructions from Congress prescribes, that nothing
shall be done without the participation of the King. You are about to hold out a
certain hope of peace to America, without even informing yourself on the state of
the negotiation on our part. • * 3.
You are wise and discreet, Sir; you perfectly understand what is due to pro-
priety; you have all your life performed your duties. I pray you to consider, how
you propose to fulfill those, which are due to the King! I am not desirous of en-
larging these reflections, I commit them to your own integrity. When you shall
be pleased to relieve my uncertainty, I will entreat the King to enable me to an-
swer your demands. I have the honor to be, &c. DE VERGENNES.
29. B. Franklin to Count de Vergennes.
Causes of the sailing of the Washington.—No peace will take place between England and
America without the concurrence of France.
Passy, December 17th, 1782. Sir, I received the letter your Excellency did
me the honor of writing to me on the 15th instant. The proposal of having a pass-
61
482 I)[PI.OMATIC WRITING. [Livingston
port from England was agreed to by me the more willingly, as I at that time had
hopes of obtaining some money to send in the Washington, and the passport would
have made its transportation safer, with that of our despatches, and of yours also,
if you had thought fit to make use of the occasion. Your Excellency objected, as
I understood it, that the English Ministers by their letters sent in the same ship,
might convey inconvenient expectations into America. It was therefore, I pro-
posed not to press for the passport, till your preliminaries were also agreed to.—
They have sent the passport without being pressed to do it, and they have sent no
letters to go under it, and ours will prevent the inconvenience apprehended. In a
subsequent conversation, your Excellency mentioned your intention of sending
some of the King's cutters, whence I imagined, that detaining the Washington was
no longer necessary; and it was certainly incumbent on us to give Congress as
early an account as possible of our proceedings, who will think it extremely strange
to hear of them by other means, without a line from us. I acquainted your excel-
lency, however, with our intention of despatching that ship, supposing you might
possibly have something to send by her.
Nothing has been agreed in the preliminaries contrary to the interests of France;
and no peace is to take place between us and England, till you have concluded
yours. Your observation is however, apparently just, that in not consulting you
before they were signed, we have been guilty of neglecting a point of bienseance.
But as this was not done from want of respect for the king, whom we all love and
honor, we hope it will be excused, and that the great work, which has hitherto
been so happily conducted, is so nearly brought to perfection, and is so glorious to
his reign, will not be ruined by a single indiscretion of ours. And certainly the
whole edifice sinks to the ground immediately, if you refuse on that account to
give us any further assistance.
We have not yet despatched the ship, and I beg leave to wait upon you on
Friday for your answer.
It is not possible for any one to be more sensible than I am, of what I and
every American owe to the king, for the many and great benefits and favors he
has bestowed upon us. All my letters to America are proofs of this; all tending
to make the same impressions on the minds of my countrymen, that I felt in my
own. And I believe, that no Prince was ever more beloved and respected by his
own subjects, than the King is by the people of the United States.
The English, Ijust now learn, flatter themselves that they have already divided us.
I hope this little misunderstanding will therefore be kept a secret, and that they
will find themselves totally mistaken. With great respect, &c. B. FRANKLIN.
30. Robert R. Livingston to the Commissioners.
General Satisfaction with the Preliminary Articles.—Remarks on the 5th Article.—Regrets
the signing of the Treaty without communication with the French Court, and concer-
ning of the Separate Article.
Philadelphia, March 25th, 1783. Gentlemen, I am now to acknowledge the
favor of your joint letter by the Washington, together with a copy of the Prelimi-
nary Articles; both were laid before Congress. The Articles have met with their
warmest approbation, and have been generally seen by the people in the most fa-
vorable point of view.
Phila., Mar. 25, 1783] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 483
The steadiness manifested in not treating without an express acknowledg-
ment of your independence previous to a treaty is approved, and it is not doubted
but it accelerated that declaration. The boundaries are as extensive as we have a
right to expect; and we have nothing to complain of with respect to the fisheries.
My sentiments as to English debts you have in a former letter. No honest man
could wish to withhold them. A little forbearance in British creditors, till people
have recovered in part from the losses sustained by the war, will be necessary to
render this Article palatable, and indeed to secure more effectually the debt. The
Article relative to the loyalists is not quite so accurately expressed as I could wish
it to have been. What, for instance, is intended by real British subjects? It is
clear to me that it will operate nothing in their favor in any State in the Union,
but as you made no secret of this to the British Commissioners, they will have
nothing to charge you with; and indeed the whole clause seems rather to have
been inserted to appease the clamor of these poor wretches, than to satisfy their
wants. Britain would have discovered more candor and magnanimity in paying to
them three months’ expense of the war establishment, which would have been an
ample compensation for all their losses, and left no germ of dissatisfaction to bud
and bloom and ripen into discontents here. Another mad Administration may
think the noncompliance of the Legislatures with the recommendations of Con-
gress on this subject, a sufficient cause for giving themselves and us new troubles.
You however were perfectly right in agreeing to the Article; the folly was theirs,
who did not either insist upon more, or give up this.
But, Gentlemen, though the issue of your treaty has been successful, though I
am satisfied that we are much indebted to your firmness and perseverance, to your
accurate knowledge of our situation, and of our wants for this success, yet I feel
no little pain at the distrust manifested in the management of it, particularly in
signing the treaty without communicating it to the Court of Versailles till after the
signature, and in concealing the Separate Article from it even when signed. I
have examined with the most minute attention all the reasons assigned in your
several letters to justify these suspicions. I confess they do not appear to strike
me so forcibly as they have done you; and it gives me pain, that the character for
candor and fidelity to its engagements, which should always characterise a great
people, should have been impeached thereby, The concealment was in my opin-
ion absolutely unnecessary; for had the Court of France disapproved the terms you
had made, after they had been agreed upon, they could not have acted so absurdly
as to counteract you at that late day; and thereby put themselves in the power of
an enemy, who would certainly betray them, and perhaps justify you in making
terms for yourselves.
The Secret Article is no otherwise important, than as it carries in it the seeds
of enmity to the Court of Spain, and shows a marked preference for an open ene-
my. It would in my opinion, have been much better to have fixed on the same
boundaries for West Florida, into whatever hands it ſell, without showing any
preference, or rendering concealment necessary; since all the arguments in favor
of the cession to England would then have operated with equal force, and nothing
have been lost by it; for there can be no doubt, that whether Florida shall at the
close of the war be ceded to England or to Spain, it will be ceded as it was held
484 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [John ..?dams
by Britain. The Separate Article is not, I suppose, by this time a secret in Eu-
rope; it can hardly be considered as such in America. The Treaty was sent out
to the General with this Article annexed by Sir Guy Carleton, without the small-
est injunction of secrecy; so that I dare say it has been pretty generally read at
head quarters. Congress still conceal it here. I feel for the embarrassment ex-
planations on this subject must subject you to, when this secret is known to your
allies. I have the honor to be, Gentlemen, &c. ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON.
31. Count de Vergennes to B. Franklin.
Regret at the Departure of Franklin.
Versailles, May 22d, 1785. Sir, I have learnt with much concern of your re-
tiring, and of your approaching departure for America. You cannot doubt but
that the regrets, which you will leave, will be proportionate to the consideration
you so justly enjoy.
I can assure you, Sir, that the esteem the King entertains for you, does not
leave you anything to wish, and that his Majesty will learn with real satisfaction,
that your fellow citizens have rewarded, in a manner worthy of you, the important
services that you have rendered them.
I beg, Sir, that you will preserve for me a share in your remembrance, and
never doubt the sincerity of the interest I take in your happiness. It is founded
on the sentiments of attachment of which I have assured you, and with which H
have the honor to be, &c. DE VERGENNES.
32. John Adams to the President of Congress.
Duties of Diplomatic Agents and Consuls. Extract.
Paris, June 29th, 1780. Sir, The consuls, as well as the foreign Ministers,
should all be instructed to transmit to Congress, written accounts of the civil and
military constitutions of the places where they are, as well as all the advantages
for commerce with the whole world especially with the United States. These let-
ters preserved, will be a repository of political and commercial knowledge, that in
future times may be a rich treasure to the United States. To these consuls, the
commercial concerns of the public should be committed, and the vessels of war.
I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
ſº-
33. John Adams to the Count de Vergennes.
Necessity of a Public Minister at Vienna. Extract.
Paris, July 19,1781. It is impossible that there should be a treaty at Vien-
na between Great Britain and the people of America, whether they are called United
Statee or American Colonies, unless both appear there by representatives, who
must be authorised by commissions or full powers, which must be mutually exchan-
ged, and consequently admitted to be, what upon the face of them they purport to
be. The commission from the United States for making peace, which has been in
Europe almost two years, is that of a Minister Plenipotentiary, and it authorises
him to treat only with Ministers vested with equal powers. If he were to appear
at Vienna, he would certainly assume the title and character of a Minister Plenipo-
tentiary, and could enter into no treaty or conference with any Minister from Great
Britain, until they had mutually exchanged authentic copies of their full powers.
Hague, Oct.8, 1782] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 485
This it is true, would be an implied acknowledgement of his character and title, and
of those of the United States too; but such an acknowledgment is indispensable
because without it there can be no treaty all. In consequence he would expect to
enjoy all the prerogatives of that character, and the moment they should be denied
him, he must quit the Congress, let the consequences be what they might.
I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN AT) AMS.
34. John JAdams to Robert R. Livingston.
Is introduced to the Foreign Ministers at a dinner made in Honor of the United States by the
French Ambassador.——Receives visits in a private character from the Spanish Minister.
The Hague, April 23d, 1782. Sir, I ought not to omit to inform Congress,
that on the 23d of April, the French Ambassador made an entertainment for the
whole Corps Diplomatique, in honor of the United States, at which he introduced
their Minister to all the foreign Ministers at this Court.
There is nothing, I suppose, in the whole voluminous ceremonial, nor in all the
idle farce of etiquette, which should hinder a Minister from making a good dinner
in good company, and therefore I believe they were all present, and I assure you
I was myself as happy as I should have been, if I had been publicly acknowledged
a Minister by every one of them; and the Duc de la Vauguyon more than compensa-
ted for all the stiffness of some others, by paying more attention to the new brother
than to all the old fraternity.
Etiquette, when it becomes too glaring by aſſectation, imposes no longer cither
upon the populace or upon the courtiers, but becomes ridiculous to all. This will
soon be the case everywhere with respect to American Ministers. To see a Minis-
ter of such a State as and assume a distant mysterious air towards a
Minister of the United States, because his Court has not yet acknowledged their in-
dependence, when his nation is not half equal to America in any one attribute of
sovereignty, is a spectacle of ridicule to any man who sees it.
I have had the honor of making and receiving visits in a private character from
the Spanish Minister here, whose behavior has been polite enough. He was
pleased to make me some very high compliments upon our success here, which he
considers as the most important and decisive stroke which could have been struck
in Europe. I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN A DAMS.
35. John Adams to Robert R. Livingston.
The treaty of Commerce, and the Convention concerning Recaptures executed.—Renarks on
some of the clauses, and some rejected articles. Extract.
The Hague, October 8th, 1782. Sir, at twelve o’clock to-day I proceeded,
according to appointment, to the State-House, where I was received with the usual
formalities, at the head of the stairs, by M. Van Santheuvel, a Deputy from the
Province of Holland, and M. Van Linden, the first noble of Zealand, and a Deputy
from that Province, and by them conducted into the Chamber of Business, (chambre
de besogne) an apartment belonging to the Truce Chamber, (chambre de treve) where
were executed the treaty of commerce and the convention concerning recaptures,
after an exchange of full powers.
Several propositions were made to me, which I could not agree to, and several
Were made on my part, which could not be admitted by the States. The final re-
sult contained in the treaty, is as near the spirit of my instructions as I could ob-
486 1) IPLOMATIC WRITING. [John Adams
tain, and I think it is nothing materially variant from them. The Lords, the Dep-
uties, proposed to me to make the convention a part of the treaty. My answer
was, that I thought the convention, which is nearly conformable with that lately
made with France, would be advantageous on both sides; but as I had no special
instructions concerning it, and as Congress might have objections, that I could not
foresee, it would be more agreeable to have the convention separate; so that Con-
gress, if they should find any difficulty, might ratify the treaty without it. This
was accordingly agreed to. It seemed at first to be insisted on, that we should
be confined to the Dutch ports in Europe, but my friend, M. Van Berkel, and the
merchants of Amsterdam, came in aid of me, in convincing all, that it was their
interest to treat us upon the footing gentis amicissimae, in all the parts of the world.
Upon the whole, I think the treaty is conformable to the principles of perfect
reciprocity, and contains nothing, that can possibly be hurtful to America, or offen-
sive to our allies, or to any other nation, except Great Britain, to whom it is in-
deed, without a speedy peace, a mortal blow.
The rights of France and Spain are sufficiently secured by the twenty-second
article; although it is not in the very words of the project, transmitted me by Con-
gress, it is the same in substance and effect. The Duc de la Vauguyon was very
well contented with it, and the States were so jealous of unforeseen consequences
from the words of the article as sent me by Congress, and first proposed by me, that I
saw it would delay the conclusion without end. After several conferences, and
many proposals, we finally agreed upon the article as it stands, to the satisfaction
of all parties.
The clause reserving to the Dutch their rights in the East and West Indies,
is unnecessary, and I was averse to it, as implying a jealousy of us. But as it im-
plies too a compliment to our power and importance, was much insisted on, and
amounted to no more than we should have been bound to without it, I withdrew
my objection.
The proviso of conforming to the laws of the country, respecting the external
show of public worship, I wished to have excluded; because I am an enemy to
every restraint in a matter so delicate and sacred as the liberty of conscience; but
the laws here do not permit Roman Catholics to have steeples to their churches,
and these laws could not be altered. I shall be impatient to receive the ratification
of Congress, which I hope may be transmitted within the time limited.*
I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
John Adams to Itobert R. Livingston.
Preliminary Treaty.—Desires to resign his Commission. Extract.
Paris, December 4th, 1782. Sir, it is with much pleasure, that I transmit
you the preliminary treaty between the King of Great Britain and the United
States of America. The Mississippi, the western lands, Sagadehoe, and the fish-
eries, are secured as well as we could, and I hope what is done for the refugees
will be pardoned.
As the objects, for which I ever consented to leave my family and country,
are thus far accomplished, I now beg leave to resign all my employments in Europe.
They are soon enumerated; the first, is my commission to borrow money in Holland,
and the second, is my credence to their High Mightinesses. These two should
* Sec page 134, Vol.1, for this treaty at large,
Hague, July 31, 1783] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 487
be filled up immediately, and as Mr.Iaurens was originally designated to that coun-
try, and my mission there was merely owing to his own misfortune, I hope that
Congress will send him a full power for that court.
The commission for peace I hope will be fully executed before this reaches
you. But, if it should not, as the terms are fixed, I should not choose to stay ic.
Europe, merely for the honor of affixing my signature to the definitive treaty, and
I see no necessity of filling up my place; but if Congress should think otherwise,
I hope they will think Mr Dana the best entitled to it.
With great esteem, I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
37. John Adams to Robert R. Livingson.
Conversation with the Sardinian Minister, who advises the sending of a Circular by Congress
to the European powers, giving an account of the Declaration of Independence, of the
acknowledgment by other powers, &c.
The Hague, July 31st, 1783. Sir, The last evening at Court, in the house in
the Grove, where all the foreign Ministers supped, the Count Montagnini de Mir-
abel, the Minister Plenipotentiary from the King of Sardinia, took an opportunity
to enter largely into conversation with me. The Count said that his advice to
Congress would be to write a circular letter to every power in Europe, as soon as
the definitive treaty should be signed and transmit with it a printed copy of a treaty.
In the letter, Congress should announce, that on the 4th of July, 1776, the United
States had declared themselves a sovereign State, under the style and title of the
United States of America; that France, on the 6th of February, 1778, had acknow-
ledged them; that the States-General had done the same on the 19th of April, 1782;
that Great Britain, on the 30th of November, 1782, had signed with them a treaty
of peace, in which she had fully acknowledged their sovereignty; that Sweden had
entered into a treaty with them, on the 5th of February, 1783; and that Great Britain
had concluded the definitive treaty under the mediation of the two Empires, if that
should be the fact, &c. Such a notification to all the other powers would be a reg-
ular procedure, a piece of politeness, which would be very well received, and the
letter would be respectfully answered by every power in the world, and these writ-
ten answers would be explcit, and undeniable acknowledgements of our sovereignty.
It might have been proper to make this communication in form, immediately
after the declaration of independence; it might have been more proper to do it after
the signature of the provisional treaty; but that it was expected it would be done
after the definitive treaty. That these circular letters might be transmitted to your
Ministers for peace, or such of them as may remain, or to any of your ministers in
Europe, to be by them delivered to the Ministers at the Court where they are, or
transmitted any other way. That Congress must be very exact in the etiquette of
titles, as this was indispensable, and letters could not be answered nor received
without it. That we might have these titles at the Court de Vergennes’ office with
precision, &c. I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
38. Ralph Izard to the Committee of Foreign Affairs.
Friendly disposition of the Tuscan Minister in France; advises a delay of Mr Izard’s
visit to Italy. Extract.
Paris, December 18th, 1777. Gentlemen, Since my letter of the 6th of Oct.
I have cultivated an intimacy with the Tuscan Minister, resident at this Court.—
488 DIP LOMATIC WRITING.. [Jay's Instructions
He is a man of honor, of considerable abilities, and extremely friendly to our
country. I proposed to him that I should immediately set out for Italy, and de-
sired his opinion and advice. He dissuaded me from executing my intentions for
the present, assured me of the good disposition of the Grand Duke towards us, and
promised me to use his utmost endeavors to promote our interest with him. He
thought, that my presence at this time might produce some embarrassment at this
Court, which would not long be the case. He is since gone to Florence, and I am
convinced, that no services that he can render the States will be withheld.
This gentleman is a great favorite, and I am well assured is more in the confi-
dence of the Grand Duke than any of his Ministers. I flatter myself, therefore,
that I have acted according to the wishes of Congress, in conforming to his advice.
I am, &c. RALPH IZARD.
39. Ralph Izard to Henry Laurens.
- Titles of American Ministers in Europe. Extract.
Paris, April 11, 1778. The Commissioners at this Court have not yet been
received into the Corps Diplomatique, because they have not had proper letters of
credence from Congress.
When those letters are sent to them,you will be so good as to let them be sent to
me and also to Mr William Lee. The title of Commissioner is not at present used
as formerly, at the Courts of Europe. I will venture to give you my opinion pri-
vately on this subject, which is, that the representatives from the States of America
at the Courts of France and Spain should be ambassadors, and, at the others, Minis-
ters Plenipotentiary. The last title is in general use: the persons possessed of it
take rank below envoys, and therefore I would prefer it because it will probably
prevent all disputes. I mention this solely to yourself, and you will either make
use of it or not, as you think proper. I have the honor to be, &c. R. IZARD.
40. John Jay’s Instructions at the Court of Madrid.
Directing him to insist on the Navigation of the Mississippi—The Boundary.--Florida.
In Congress, October 4th, 1780. On the report of a Committee to whom
were referred certain instructions to the delegates of Virginia by their constituents,
and a letter of 26th of May, from the honorable John Jay, Congress unanimously
agreed to the following instructions to the honorable John Jay, Minister Plenipo-
tentiary of the United States of America, at the Court of Madrid:
That the said Minister adhere to his former instructions, respecting the right
of the United States of America to the free navigation of the river Mississippi into
and from the sea; which right, if an express acknowledgment of it cannot be ob-
tained from Spain, is not by any stipulation on the part of America, to be relin-
quished. To render the treaty to be concluded between the two nations permanent,
nothing can more effectually contribute, than a proper attention, not only to the
present, but the future reciprocal interests of the contracting powers.
The river Mississippi being the boundary of several States in the Union, and
their citizens, while connected with Great Britain, and since the revolution, having
been accustomed to the free use thereof, in common with the subjects of Spain,
and no instance of complaint or dispute having resulted from it, there is no reason
Madrid, Nov 21, irst DIPLOMATIC writing. 489
to fear, that the future mutual use of the river by the subjects of the two nations,
actuated by friendly dispositions, will occasion any interruption of that harmony
which it is the desire of America, as well as of Spain, should be perpetual. That
if the unlimited freedom of the navigation of the river Mississippi, with a free port
or ports below the 31st degree of north latitude, accessible to merchant ships, can-
not be obtained from Spain, the said Minister in that case be at liberty to enter
into such equitable regulations as may appear a necessary security against contra-
band; provided the right of the United States to the free navigation of the river be
not relinquished, and a free port or ports as above described be stipulated to them.
That with respect to the boundary alluded to in his letter of the 26th of May
last, the said Minister be, and hereby is instructed, to adhere strictly to the boun-
daries of the United States as already fixed by Congress. Spain having by the
treaty of Paris, ceded to Great Britain all the country to the northeastward of the
Mississippi, the people inhabiting these States, while connected with Great Britain,
and also since the revolution, have settled themselves at divers places to the west-
ward near the Mississippi, are friendly to the revolution, and being citizens of these
United States, and subject to the laws of those to which they respectively belong,
Congress cannot assign them over as subjects to any other power.
That the said Minister he further informed, that in case Spain shall eventually
be in possession of East and West Florida, at the termination of the war, it is of
the greatest importance to these United States to have the use of the waters run-
ning out of Georgia through West Florida into the Bay of Mexico, for the purpose
of navigation, and that he be instructed to endeavor to obtain the same, subject to
such regulations as may be agreed on between the contracting parties; and that as
a compensation for this, he be and hereby is empowered to guaranty the posesssion
of the said Floridas to the crown of Spain.
41. Mr Jay to Mr Livingston.
Interview with the Count de Florida Blanca; the Count excuses the delays on account of the
sickness of . M. del Campo, and declines entering on any diplºmatic business—M.
del Campo declines the conference, under pretence of ill health; and afterwards on the
plea of witnt of instructions. Extract.
Madrid, Nov 21, 1781. As the Minister could not see me on Saturday even-
ing, it was not till Monday evening the 10th of December that I had an opportu-
nity to converse with him.
He began the conversation by observing, that I had been very unfortunate,
and had much reason to complain of delays, but that they had been unavoidable.
That M. del Campo had been appointed near three months ago to treat and confer
with me; that shortly after the Court removed from St Ildefonso that gentleman’s
health began to decline; and that his indisposition had hitherto prevented his at-
tending to that or any other business, but that he hoped by the time the Court should
return from Aranjues (to which the King was then about to make a little excursion)
he would be able to proceed on it, and that he should have the necessary instruc-
tions for the purpose.
I told the Count, that these delays had given me great concern, and that I
was very solicitous to be enabled to give Congress some positive and explicit in-
formation, on the business alluded to. He replied, that I must now conſer on
62
à90 pipi.OMATIC WRITING, [Carmichael to Livingston
those subjects with M. Del Campo, for that for his part his time and attention
were so constantly engaged by other matters, that he could not possibly attend to
this, especially while at Madrid, when he always enjoyed much less leisure than
at the Sitios. He then proceeded to congratulate me on our late success in Vir-
ginia; he assured me, that the King rejoiced sincerely in those events, and that he
himself was happy to see our affairs assume so promising an aspect. I was about
to descend to particulars, and to remind the Count of the various memorials, &c.
which still remain to be considered and despatched, when he mentioned he was en-
gaged for the rest of the evening in pressing affairs. This intimation put an end
to the conference.
On the 27th of December, I again waited on him for the same purpose. He
told me it was very uncertain when our conferences could commence, and that he
must first converse with the Count on the subject. I asked him whether he had
not received his instructions. He answered, he had not, for they were not as yet
completed, nor indeed as he believed as yet begun.
. In this state, things remained during the whole time the Court continued at
Madrid. I am, &c. JOHN JAY.
42. William Carmichael to Robert R. Livingston.
His Presentation at the court of Madrid. Extract.
St. Ildefonso, August 30th, 1783. Sir, Having waited on the Count de
Florida Blanca agreeably to his request, on my entry he took me by the hand and
told me, that he hoped I would now be satisfied, for that on conferring with the
King, his Majesty had been pleased to fix a day for my presentation; that no one
felt more sensibly than himself the happy conclusion of this affair, as well on ac-
count of his desire to show every possible respect to the United States, as from his
esteem for me. That the King, contrary to his expectations, had consented to
change the etiquette with respect to me on this subject, as “an extraordinary act
of royal good will,” and that he hoped, that his conduct on this occasion would
convince Congress of his Majesty's intentions to cultivate in a particular manner
their amity. I expressed in reply, the sense which I knew my constituents would
have of this proof of the king's amicable disposition, and of my gratitude to his ex-
cellency for the obliging interest which he took in what regarded me personally,
assuring him that I would take the earliest opportunity of transmitting to Congress
this additional proof of his Majesty’s desire to cultivate their friendship, and of his
excellency’s manner of fulfilling his Sovereign's intentions. I then asked him on
what day the King chose to receive me! He answered, the day after tomorrow,
(the 23d instant.) I expressed some concern that the Ambassador of France, then
at Madrid would not return before the time appointed for my reception. He replied,
that the King having named the day, no alteration could take place. To this I was
obliged to acquiesce. His Excellency then made me many professions of person-
al regard, which it is unnecessary to repeat, and which, perhaps, I should not even
hint at, if the French Ambassador, the Marquis de Lafayette and others had not
been witnesses on former occasions to similar assurances. I proceeded to mention
to his Excellency the different objects on which I had heretofore addressed him,
and prayed him to give me an opportunity, at the same time that I informed Con-
Ildefºso, Aug. 30, 1783) DIPLOMATIG WRITING. 491
gress of my presentation, to advise them also of the happy termination of them,
He begged me to pass him notes again, on these points, and assured me, that I
should receive such answers as would be agreeable and satisfactory to the States.
He continued to speak to me, in an open and friendly manner, of the obstacles
which a well intentioned Minister had to encounter, in the execution of his mea-
sures in this country. g
The same evening I informed the Ambassador of France by letter, that the
King had consented to my being presented, a circumstance on which he had al-
ways entertained doubts, although he has ever done every thing in his power, that
could be expected from his public and private character, to contribute to the suc-
cess of our negociation. Perhaps some expressions on the part of Congress,
testifying their sense of the zeal which this nobleman has manifested to further
their interests, may be ultimately productive of good effects at the Court of Ver-
sailles, if not here.
On the day appointed for my presentation, I waited on his Excellency, the
Count de Florida Blanca, and from his house, accompanied by his servant whom
he had the politeness to send with my own, I paid my visits to the principal offi-
cers and ladies of the palace. This ceremony finished, I went to the King's apart-
ments, where the Minister appointed me to meet him. When his Majesty arose.
from table, his Excellency presented me as Charge d’Affaires of the United States.
As I had been informed, that the King did not like long harangues, I contented
myself with expressing to his Majesty my happiness in being the first of my coun-
trymen who had the good fortune to assure him of their desire to cultivate his amity.
He answered me in a gracious manner, and with a smiling countenance, saying,
that he hoped I should have frequent occasions of making him the same assurances.
He then passed into the audience chamber to the Ambassadors and Ministers,
where, as several have informed me, he was pleased to speak favorably of me.
The royal family dining at the same hour and separately, the same etiquette
being observed, viz. the presentation after dinner, it required some days to finish
this business; the Count de Florida Blanca accompanying me more than three
quarters of an hour each day, with a politeness and good nature rarely found in
men who have so many important occupations in their hands. The Prince of
Asturias spoke of me during the dinner as of a person he had long known, and
when I was presented he told me so. The Princess, who was present, spoke to
me six or seven minutes in French and Spanish, and among other things said to
me, that I ought to like Spain, because she had been told, that I was much liked
by the Spaniards. I replied, that the only title I had to their esteem was my well
known regard for the nation. The other branches of the royal family received me
equally well.
The ceremonial of my presentation being finished, I waited on his Excellency,
the Count de Florida Blanca, to thank him for his obliging attentions in the course
of it, and took that opportunity of insinuating to him the propriety of his Catholic
Majesty's immediately naming a Minister to the United States. I had touched on
this subject formerly. He told me that he would speak to his Majesty, and inform
me of his intentions. I have the honor to be, &c. *
W. CARMICHAEL.
492 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [John Laurens
43. John Laurens to the President of Congress,
Confinement of Henry Laurens in the Tower. Extract.
Philadelphia, September 6th, 1781. Sir, in consequence of the desire of the
committee of conference on the subject of my mission to France, I do myself the
honor to communicate to Congress all the information I am possessed of relative
to the present situation of Henry Laurens, [then close prisoner in the Tower of
London] and the prospect of his enlargement or exchange. It appears from the
letter of a gentleman in London, who had access to him under certain restrictions,
that though the rigor of his confinement was in some degree abated, he still labored
under several interdictions and restraints, as unprecedented as illiberal, and that
the British Court still affected to consider him as amenable to their municipal laws,
and maintained the idea of a future trial.
After I had finished the general business with which Congress had charged
me, I consulted the several Ministers at the Court of France upon the proper
measures to be taken, when such a flagrant violation of the laws of nations had been
offered in the person of a public Minister, and solicited their intervention and as-
sistance. They all declared, that however anxious they were to restore to his
country a citizen, so valuable by his services, they had not the least hope, that any
benefit would be derived from their interference, the British Court being as little
disposed to gratify the Court of France, as they were to gratify the United States;
and the unanimous opinion of these gentlemen ſurther was, that nothing would de-
termine the British to pursue a reasonable conduct in the present case, but the most
exact retaliation on the part of Congress. For this purpose they advised, that one
or more British prisoners of sufficient note and importance to cause a sensation by
their own complaints, or those of their friends, to their Court, should be held as
security for the safety of Mr Laurens, and that their mode of confinement and treat-
ment should invariably follow the rule of the conduct of the British government
towards him. I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN LAURENS.
44. Dumas to the "resident of Congress.
Past Scrvices.
The Hague, July 25th, 1780. Sir, The 21st of March last I had the honor to
write your Excellency a long letter on my own concerns, of which I annex here
an extract. 1 add here, that when I received the first commission of the committee
on the part of Congress, dated in December, 1775, in which they honored me with
their orders and credentials, I did not solicit to be employed: I did not even think
cf it. But chosen and named, by this respectable body, in a manner as unexpect-
ed as it was definite and authentic,” to serve essentially the United States my ar-
dent thoughts and life were consecrated with zeal to the cause of the United States.
Persuaded that it was the cause of humanity, of liberty, and of virtue, I have sacri-
ced every thing to this noble service, during nearly five years, with all possible
zeal and fidelity. The Congress also testified to me soon after, that they were well
satisfied with my services. I have corresponded assiduously since that time with
the committee of Foreign Affairs, with the Plenipotentiaries of the United States
at Paris, and with a number of other servants of America. I have raised up, cement-
ed and nourished in Holland a considerable party in their favor, whereby I have
Paris, May 22, 1786] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 493
drawn upon myself the hatred of a party more powerful, which wishes to see me
perish, and which has already done me all the wrong and all the mischief of which
it was capable. I have participated in the adverse fortune of America, in the just
confidence that the United States and their Congress will have my interest at heart
as I have constantly and successfully had theirs, and as their magnanimity, their
dignity, and their honor require in the eyes of the European public.
I have yet fully this confidence; and it is this which caused me to solicit, more
than a year since, in several of my letters to the Committee of Foreign Affairs, a
formal confirmation of my agency on the part of Congress, for my safety and quiet.
I beg, Sir, that you will second my request and obtain for me a resolution as favora-
ble as my demand is just.
I know that some Americans, whom I honor in other respects, have entertained
and propagated the idea, that a commission of the honorable Committee of Foreign
Affairs was not so valid as one of Congress. Onc of them said so to me. I will not,
Sir, give myself up to an ideaso injurious, as to think, that Congress would refuse
to ratify what their Committee has done, and the engagements it has made, but
this body is not always composed of the same persons; it has many other affairs;
it may forget me, and I may be cruelly supplanted, abandoned, and consequently
at the age of sixty years, ruined with my family, without resources and without
means. I put, then, my cause into the hands of your Excellency, to endeavor to
obtain for me, as speedily as possible, the satisfaction I desire, and to send me the
commission I solicit. The service of the United States requires it, and this will
not interfere with the powers of Minister Plenipotentiary, who may be sent here;
on the contrary, I shall be useful to him, if God spares my life.
I have the honor to be, with respect, &c. DUMAS.
45. Robert I?. Livingston to C. W. F. Dunas.
Impropriety of a foreign Envoy engaging in the parties of the country where he resides. Ex,
Without date. Sir, I take the liberty to remind you, that your public char-
acter [of American political Agent] puts you in a delicate situation with respect
to them [the Dutch Patriots], that as a foreign nation, whatever we may wish,
we have no right to express those wishes, or in any way to interfere in the inter-
nal disputes of our allies; that our conduct should show, that we were the enemy
of no party, except so far as their measures were inimical to us. You will not,
Sir, consider this as a reproof, for I have not the smallest reason to believe that
you have not made these reflections yourself, and acted conformably thereto. On
the contrary, I rather conclude, that you have; from the long habit which you have
been of conducting public affairs which require prudence and delicacy. I only
mention it, therefore, as a caution which will not probably, but may possibly be
necessary to one who is animated by the spirit of freedom, and may as a patriot be
hurried beyond the limits we should prescribe to our ministers.
I am &c. {-º-e R. R. LIVINGSTON.
46. From Thomas Jefferson to John Jay.
Recommends M. Dumas for a Diplomatic Situation. Extract.
Paris, May 22, 1786. Sir, The duty has been imposed on me of making the
following communication to Congress.
It is necessary for me previously to observe, that though the government of the
United Netherlands have both an ordinary and extraordinary Ambassador here, yet
494, DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Jefferson,
the patriotic party now decisively possessed of all the powers of government have.
sent hither a Rhingrave de Salm, as possessing plenary confidence, to treat with
this Court on some matters not yet made known to the public. His character and
credit accordingly are so well known here, that passing by the regular ambassadors,
they are actually in negotiation with him. w
He took occasion to speak with me to-day, on the subject of Mr. Dumas: after
saying much in his favor, he assured me that Congress could not oblige the patriotic
party more, as by naming Dumas to their diplomatic appointment at the Hague; and
further that should they have anything interesting to do there, there was no other
man,who could do it so effectually as Mr. Dumas.
I wished to avoid flattering his expectations and there fore mentioned to him the
resolution of Congress, confining their diplomatic appointments to the citizens of
the United States.
He seemed to admit they could not expect him to be made Minister Plenipo-
tentiary, but asked if it would not be possible to give him the character of Resident.
I told him we were in the usage of appointing only one character inferior to
that of Minister Plenipotentiary which was that of Charge d'Affairs: that I was
far from presuming to say, that could be obtained in the present case; but that one
other difficulty occurred to me in that moment. I observed that they had a Minister
Plenipotentiary with Congress; and that Congress naming for their Court only a
Charge d’Affaires might perhaps be considered disrespectſul, and might occasion
the recall of their Minister. He assured me it would not; nay, that it should not.
We are, continued he, but a party, and therefore cannot make a formal declaration
on this subject, but we know how far we can undertake; and if you please, the mem-
bers of our party shall go and make declaration privately, before the French ambas-
sador at our Court, that nothing amiss shall be conceived of it, and that our Minister
shall not be affected by it. I told him this would not be desired. He asked me
if I thought Count de Vergennes writing a second letter on this subject would be of
service?
I told him I could not suppose a repetition of his application could be material.
My object in avoiding a second letter from the Count de Vergennes, as well
as the declaration before the French ambassador, was, that embarrassments might
not be multiplied if Congress should not think proper to comply with their requests.
He concluded by desiring I would urge this matter to Congress. -
It seems certain that Mr. Dumas has rendered himself very useful to the Gov-
ernments of both France and Holland, in the late negotiations. It was natural,
therefore, that these Governments should provide for him.
I know not how it has happened that we are resorted to on the occasion, unless,
perhaps, it is the particular wish of Mr. Dumas to receive this species of reward.
Be this as it may, the reigning party in the United Netherlands, and the Gov-
ernment of this country, commit themselves on this application; and it becomes a
matter of calculation, in which their favor, and the occasions we may have for it, are
to be weighed against the sacrifices the present applications call for.
To pronounce on this, would be beyond my province, which is merely that
of being the channel of communication; this being desired in form, I supposed it
my duty to comply with. I have the honor to be, &c. T. JEFFERSON.
Supetersb. Apr.25, 1783] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 495
47. Francis Dana to Robert R. Livingston.
Interview with Count Ostermann, who declares that the Empress could not receive a Minis-
ter from the United States till the conclusion of the definitive treaty between the bellige-
rents, &c.
St. Petersburg, April 25th, 1783. Sir, In consequence of my second letter to
the Vice Chancellor, of the 21st instant, he sent me a verbal message with his
compliments on the 23d in the morning, and desired to see me at four o'clock in the
afternoon. I waited upon him accordingly, and had a conference with him upon
the subject of my mission. He began by saying that he had received the letters I
had done him the honor to write him; that her Majesty had been invited by the
Courts of Versailles, Madrid, and London, to mediate in conjunction with the Em-
peror, at the conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace between them; that till
those affairs were arranged, and the definitive treaty signed, her Majesty could not,
consistent with her character of mediator, receive a Minister from America with-
out the consent of those powers; that the treaty of America was provisional only,
and dependent upon those arrangements; and though there was no doubt but they
would take place, and that the definitive treaty would be concluded, yet, till that
was done, her Majesty could not consider me in my character as the Minister of
America. -
Here he made a long pause, as if waiting for an answer, but knowing that the
whole had not yet come out, I made no attempts to reply. He then added, that he
supposed my letter of credence bore date before the acknowledgment of the indepen-
dence of America by the King of Great Britain, and asked me if that was not the
fact. I told him that it must necessarily be so, as a sufficient time had not since
elapsed to receive one from America. He then said, that when the above arrange-
ments should be completed, if I should produce new letters of credence, bearing
date since the King of Great Britain had acknowledged the independence of
America, her Majesty would be very willing to receive me as the Minister of
America, but that it would be incompatible with that exact neutrality, which her
Majesty had hitherto observed, to do it before; that it would be irregular also for her
Majesty to admit a Minister from a power, whose letter of credence bore date
before she had acknowledged the independence of that power; that besides, no
Minister had been received from America at the Court of Great Britain yet, and
that I must be sensible it would not be consistent for her Majesty to receive one
before the King of Great Britain had done it. Here he stopped again; and know-
ing that he had gone through his whole subject, which comprises these simple
matters only, viz. }
1st. That her Majesty could not, consistent with the character of a media-
tor as above, receive a Minister from the United States, till the conclusion-of the
definitive treaty between. France, Spain, and Great Britain;
, 2dly. That she could not do it even then, consistent with the laws of neutrality,
while his letter of credence bore date prior to the acknowledgment of‘their indepen-
dence by the King of Great Britain;
3dly. That she could not do it regularly, while his letter of credence boredate
before she herself had acknowledged their independence;
4thly. That she could not do it consistently before a Minister had been recei-
ved from the United States in Great Britain—
496 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [F. Dana.
I desired him to favor me with a note containing the substance of his answer,
as it was of great importance, and much in the affairs of this sort depended upon
the very expressions; that with the fairest intentions, I might misrepresent some
parts of it through forgetfulness, and that I would deliver him my observations upon
it in writing for consideration, when the exact state of the matter would be known.
Finding, as I had expected, that he declined this I began my reply with a preface
of this sort: the answer, which your Excellency has given me on the part of her
Imperial Majesty, is wholly unexpected, not only to myself, but to the United
States. I cannot therefore, take upon me to say anything upon it from instructions.
I beg you would be pleased to consider whatever I may say as my private senti-
ments; whether they will accord with those of my Sovereign, I am not certain.
At this great distance, Imust use my best discretion in all such extraordinary cases.
I have no design to oppose myself to her Majesty's pleasure, whatever that may be;
but only to make some observations upon the answer, that if they are of any weight,
they may be taken into consideration, as I have no doubt they will be. I would beg
to take this occasion to express the high respect, which the United States enter-
tain for her Imperial Majesty, and their sincere desire to cultivate her friendship;
that they considered her as one of the first sovereigns of the world, and, in a man-
ner, the great legislator of nations by her system of neutrality, which they had
early highly applauded, and had made the principles of it the invariable rules of
their conduct during the war; that, animated with sentiments of this kind, they
wished to give some strong proofs of a distinguished attention and consideration
for her Majesty’s person and government. With this view, they had early named
a Minister to reside near her, as a compliment to the Sovereign who presided over
the Neutral Confederation with so much glory; that he might improve the earliest
occasion to display his character, which the course of events should afford.
From these dispositions, they were naturally led to expect, as they had interi-
ded, that her Imperial Majesty would be the first of the neutral powers, which
should receive a Minister from them; that as to the objections, which had been
made to my present reception, I begged leave to observe, that the present mediation
differed from the former one, which had been tendered by their Imperial Majes-
ties, in two essential respects, that that was tendered during the continuance of
hostilites, and that there was a proposition in it, which materially concerned the
United States, but in this there was no question relative to them; that their nego-
tiations with Great Britain had been conducted apart from those of the other belli-
gerent powers, and were brought to a happy conclusion. I here took up all the
facts stated to him in my second letter of the 21st. inst. and enlarged upon them.
I added to them, the bill pending before the House of Commons in the beginning
of March, for regulating a commercial intercourse between Great Britain and
America, as between States, in fact, and absolutely independent, and that the bill
itself recited, that the King had concluded a peace with them, and expressly de-
clared the vessels of their citizens should be admitted into all the ports of Great
Britain, as the vessels of other independent States, that all were agreed to consi-
der them as such. From these matters, I drew the same conclusion as is men-
tioned in that letter. -
This closed my observations upon the first article. As to the second, I went
Paris, June 1, 1784] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 497
over the reasons contained in my letter of the 22d instant to you, urging strongly
the four first, but passing gently over the rest. Upon the third, it was to be obser-
ved, that the mode of expression “before her Majesty had acknowledged the inde-
pendence of America,” seemed to lead beside the matter. That there was no ques-
tion in the acknowledgment of that independence. The only question was,whether
her Majesty would receive a Minister from the United States, who now presents
himself. The United States do not ask the acknowledgment of their indepen-
dence, nor have they a wish, nor do they claim a right to impose their Minister
upon any Sovereign. Every Sovereign will judge, whether it is for the interest of
his empire to receive the Minister of another, and may do this without deciding
upon the perfect rights of that other. This is rather what I would have said,
than what I did say upon that point. I could not fully advance the idea, as he
several times prevented me, by returning to the matter he had before spoken upon,
as if he saw what I intended to say and wished to avoid it. The fourth and last
point was chiefly answered by the arguments used upon the first. I did not, howe-
ver, forget the distance of the countries as the only probable cause of that delay.
Thus, Sir, I have given you a clear idea of a conference, which rests wholly
upon my memory, and which had continued an hour wanting a few minutes, as far
as I am able to do. Other arguments occurred to me in the time, which might
have been urged, but I was apprehensive of obtruding too much upon the patience
of the Vice Chancellor, whose view it must be considered was rather to communi-
cate the answer, than to discuss the points of it. *&
I have the honor to be, &c. FRANCIS DANA,
48. From David Hartley to Benjamin Franklin.
Defects of form in the ratification of the treaty by Congress.
Paris, June 1, 1784. Sir, I have the honor to inform you, that I have trans-
mitted to London the ratification on the part of Congress of the Definitive Treaty
of peace, between Great Britain and the United States of America; and I am ordered
to represent to you, that a want of form appears in the first paragraph of that
instrument, wherein the United States are mentioned before his Majesty, contrary
to the established custom in every treaty, in which a crowned head and a republic
are parties. It is likewise to be observed, that the term definitive articles is used
instead of definitive treaty, and the conclusion appears likewise deficient, as it is
neither signed by the President, nor is it dated, and consequently, is wanting in
some of the most essential points of form necessary towards authenticating the
validity of the instrument.
I am ordered to propose to you, sir, that these defects in the ratification should
be corrected, which might very easily be done, either by signing a declaration in
the name of Congress for preventing the particular mode of expression, so far as it
relates to precedency in the first paragraph, being considered as a precedent to be
adopted on any future occasion, or else by having a new copy made out in America,
in which these mistakes should be corrected, and, which might be done without
any prejudice arising to either of the parties from the delay.
I am, sir, with great respect, &c. DAVID HARTLEY.
63
493 pIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Franklin
45. B. Franklin to David Hartley.
Answers to Objections made in the preceding Letter. -
Passy, June 2, 1784. Sir, I have considered the observations you did me the
honor of communicating to me, concerning certain inaccuracies of expression, and
supposed defects of formality, in the instrument of ratification, some of which are
said to be of such a nature as to affect the validity of the instrument.
The first is, “that the United States are named before his Majesty, contrary to
the established custom observed in every treaty in which a crowned head and a re-
public are the contracting parties.” With respect to this, it seems to me we should
distinguish between that act in which both join, to wit, the treaty, and that which
is the act of each separately, the ratification. It is necessary, that all the modes
of expression in the joint act should be agreed to by both parties, though in their
separate acts each party is master of, and alone unaccountable for its own mode.—
And, on inspecting the treaty, it will be found that his Majesty is always regularly
named before the United States. Thus, “ the established custom in treaties be-
tween crowned heads and republics,” contended for on your part, is strictly observ-
ed; and the ratification following the treaty contains these words: “Now knew ye,
that we, the United States in Congress assembled, having seen and considered the
definitive articles aforesaid, have approved, ratified and confirmed, and by the
presents do approve, ratify and confirm the said articles, AND EVERY PART AND
CLAUSE THEREOF,” &c. Hereby all those articles, parts and clauses, wherein the
King is named before the United States, are approved, ratified and confirmed, and
this solemnly under the signature of the President of Congress, with the public
seal affixed by their order, and countersigned by their Secretary.
No declaration on the subject more determinate or more authentic, can possibly
be made or given, which, considered, may probably induce his Majesty’s Ministers
to waive the proposition of our signing a similar declaration, or of sending back the
ratification to be corrected in this point, neither appearing to be really necessary.
I will, however, if it be still desired, transmit to Congress the observation, and the
difficulty occasioned by it, and request their orders upon it. In the meantime I
may venture to say, that I am confident there was no intention of affronting his
Majesty, by their order of nomination; but it resulted merely from that sort of com-
plaisance, which every nation seems to have for itself, and of that respect for its
own government, customarily so expressed in its own acts, of which the English,
among the rest, afford an instance, when, in the title of the King, they always name
Great Britain before France.
The second objection is, that the term definitive articles is used instead of defini-
tive treaty.” If the words definitive treaty,had been used in the ratification instead of
definitive articles, it might have been more correct, though the difference seems not
great nor of much importance, as in the treaty itself it is called the present Defini-
tive Treaty. *
The other objections are, “that the conclusion likewise appears deficient, as it is
neither signed by the President, nor is it dated, and consequently is wanting in some
of the most essential points of form necessary towards authenticating the validity
of the instrument.” The situation of seals and signatures, in public instruments,
differs in different countries, though all equally valid; for when all the parts of an
Paris, Oct. 11, 1785] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 499
instrument are connected by a ribband, whose ends are secured under the impression
of the seal, the signature and seal, wherever placed, are understood as relating to and
authenticating the whole. Our usage is, to place them both together in the broad
margin near the beginning of the piece, and so they stand in the present ratification,
the concluding words of which declare the intention of such signing and sealing to
be giving authenticity to the whole instrument, viz: “ In testimony whereof, We
have caused the seal of the United States to be hereunto affixed; Witness his Ex-
cellency Thomas Mifflin, Esquire, President;” and the date supposed to be omit-
ted, perhaps from its not appearing in figures, is nevertheless to be found written
in words at length, viz.: “this fourteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord
one thousand seven hundred and eighty-four,” which made the figures unnecessary.
With great esteem and respect, &c. B. FRANKLIN.
50. Extract from the Secret Journal of Foreign Affairs, touching an insult offered Monsieur
de Marbois. A letter from the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania was read
in the following words:
His Excellency the president of Congress.
Philadelphia, May 28th, 1784. Sir, some days ago an insult was offered
by a Frenchman [Longchamps] to M. de Marbois, in the hotel of the Minister
of France; and afterwards an assault was made upon him by the same person in
a street of this city. The offender has been arrested by our direction, under the war-
rant of a judge of the Supreme Court, and is now confined in the common prison,
where we have ordered him to be detained. Our respect for Congress induces us
to inform them of this affair; and we should have done ourselves the honor of ma-
king the communication sooner, but that the criminal was not in confinement till
yesterday. We should be much pleased to be favored with the sentiments of
Congress upon this business, being extremely desirous that our proceedings may
correspond with their judgement, and to testify our determined resolution with
all our powers to maintain the dignity of the United States, to preserve the public
repose, to assert the law of nations, and to manifest our entire regard for the repre-
sentatives of the sovereignty of the Union. With perfect esteem, J. DICKINSON.
Whereupon the following was moved by Mr Hand, seconded by Mr Montgomery:
That Congress highly approve the determined resolution of the Supreme Ex-
ecutive Council of the State of Pennsylvania to maintain the dignity of the United
States, to preserve the public repose, to assert the law of nations, and manifest
their entire regard for the representatives of the sovereignty of the Union, expres-
sed by their letter of the 28th instant.”
51. Thomas Jefferson to John Jay.
Portugal, &c. Extract.
Paris, Oct. 11 1785. Sir,Considering the treaty with Portugal as among the most
interesting to the U.S. I, some time ago, took occasion, at Versailles, to ask of the
Portuguese Ambassador, if he had yet received from his Court an answer to our
letter. He told me he had not, but that he would make it the subject of another etter.
Two days ago his Secretaire d’Ambassade, called on me with a letter from his Min-
ister to the Ambassador, in which was the following paragraph, as he translated it to
me, and I committed it to writing from his mouth: “In relation to the information
500 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. - [Jefferson.
which your Excellency gave us, as to the conversation with the American Minis-
ter, that power should be already persuaded, that in effect from the manner in
which their ships have been received here, it follows as a consequence, that his
Majesty would have great satisfaction, in maintaining perfect harmony and good
correspondence, with the United States. But it would appear proper to begin by
the reciprocal nomination, by the two parties, of persons bearing at least the charac-
ter of agents, who would mutually inform their constituents, of whatever might
lead to the knowledge of the interests of the two nations, without prejudice to
either. It is the first step which appears suitable to be taken, to attain the end
proposed.”
By this it would seem that this power is more disposed to persue a train of
negociation similar to that which Spain has done. I consider this answer as deft-
nitive of all further measures under our commission to Portugal. That to Spain
was superseded by proceedings in another line; that to Prussia is concluded by ac-
tual treaty; to Tuscany will probably be so; and perhaps to Denmark; and these,
I believe, will be the sum of the effects of our commissions for making treaties of
alliance. England shews no disposition to treat. France, should her ministers
be able to keep the ground of the arret of August, 1784,against the clamors of hermer-
chants, and should they be disposed hereafter to give us more, it is not probable
she will bind herself to it by treaty, but keep her regulations dependent on her own
will.
Sweden will establish a free port at St. Bartholomews, which, perhaps, will
render any new engagements on our part unnecessary. Holland is so immovable
in her system of colonial administration, that as propositions to her on that subject
would be desperate, they had better not be made.
I repeat it, therefore, that the conclusion of the treaty with Prussia, and the
probability of others with Denmark, Tuscany, and the Barbary States, may be ex-
pected to wind up the proceedings of the general commissions.
I think that in possible events, it may be advantageous to us, by treaties with
Prussia, Denmark and Tuscany, to have secured ports in the Northern and Medi-
terranean Seas. I have the honor to be, &c. TH: JEFFERSON
52. Th: Jefferson to the Count De Vergennes.
Commercial Reciprocity. Extract.
Paris, November 20th, 1785. Sir, I found here, on my return from Fontaine-
bleau, the letter of October 30th, which your Excellency did me the honor there of
informing me, had been addressed to me at this place; and I shall avail myself of
the first occasion of transmitting it to Congress,who will receive,with great pleasure,
these new assurances of the friendly sentiments, which his Majesty is pleased to
continue towards the United States.
I am equally persuaded they will pay the most serious attention to that part of
your Excellency’s letter, which mentions the information you have received, of cere
tain acts or regulations of navigation and commerce, passed in some of the United
States, which are injurious to the commerce of France. In the meantime, I wish
to remove the unfavorable impressions which those acts seems to have made, as if
they were a departure from the reciprocity of conduct stipulated by the treaty of
Feb’y 6th, 1778. The effect of that treaty is to place each party, with the other,
Paris, 1787] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 501
always on the footing of the most favored nation. But those who framed the acts,
probably, did not eonsider the treaty as restraining either from discriminating be-
tween foreigners and natives. Yet this is the sole effect of these acts. The same
opinion as to the meaning of the treaty, seems to have been entertained by this
Government, both before and since the date of thsse acts. For the arret of the
King’s Council, of August 30th, 1784, furnishes an example of such a discrimi-
nation between foreigners and natives importing salted fish into his Majesty’s do-
minions in the West Indies, by laying a duty on that imported by foreigners, and
giving out the same bounty to native importers. This opinion shews itself more
remarkably in the late arrets of the 18th and 25th of September, which, increasing
to excess the duty on foreign importations of fish, into the West Indies, giving
double in bounty on those of the natives, and thereby rendering it impossible for
the former to sell in competition with the latter, have, in effect, prohibited the im-
portation of that article, by the citizens of the United States.
Both nations, perhaps, may come into the opinion that their friendship and
their interest may be better eemented by approaching the condition of their citizens
reciprocally, to that of natives, as a better ground of intercourse than that of the
Amost favored nation. I am, &c. TH: JEFFERSON.
53. From the Chevalier de la Luzerne to the President of Congress
Luzerne’s Recall.
Paris, 1787. The king having thought proper to destine me to another service
#han that of Minister Plenipotentiary near Congress, I have the honor of addres-
sing to you my letter of recall, and of requesting that it may be presented to that
assembly.
The advantage which I enjoyed for six years, of negotiating upon the great-
est and most important affairs with Congress, an intimate knowledge of those
great statesmen and patriots, who successively composed that illustrious body,
are sure guarantees of the respect and admiration which I entertain for them.
I shall never forget that the most pleasing moments of my life, have been
those, when charged with the management of the interests of the two great allies,
I have been so fortunate as to see constantly, the most perfect confidence and har-
mony prevail. Prosperity as well as adversity have served to bind still closer
the ties of our union, founded on justice; and what has perhaps never happened
before in an alliance of this nature, not for a single moment has a coolness or unea-
siness existed; but it has been crowned by the most brilliant, the most glorious,
and the most useful of revolutions. Never shall I forget the marks of personal
confidence, which I have received from Congress on various occasions. Absent
from them, I console myself with the reflection, that my successor, by his zeal and
talents, will easily place my feeble services in oblivion. -
Condescend, sir, to be the interpreter of my sentiments to that illustrious as-
sembly, over which you preside, my unceasing prayers shall henceforth be offered
up for a nation, whose firmness and patriotism have caused the admiration of the
universe. Accept, sir, individually, &c. DE LA LUZERNE.
502 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. John Jay.
54. Consular Ea:emptions.
Duties on tea and silk sent as presents from Canton.
Office of Foreign Affairs, September 25, 1787. The Secretary of the United States for
Department of Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred a letter of the 16th Aug. 1787, from
Sir John Temple, the British Consul General, reports--
That this letter states, that a relation at Canton sent him in the Hope, lately
arrived at this port, a small box of tea, and a piece of silk, for Lady Temple's use,
that he sent for them, and that the Collector returned for answer, that as there was
no treaty of commerce subsisting between his Britannic Majesty and the seStates,
Sir John must pay the impost or duties charged upon such articles by the Govern-
ment of the State of New-York. Sir John requests to be informed, whether or
not it be right and proper for him to pay the duties so demanded.
Two things in this letter merit attention—first, the implied claim of the Consul
to an exemption from duties; and secondly, the reason assigned by the Collector for
demanding the ordinary duties in the present case.
The respect due from nation to nation, and from Sovereign to Sovereign, has
introduced among civilized nations the general custom and usage of exempting
Ambassadors and public Ministers from duties and imposts. The only question
on this point which merits attention is, whether Consuls are to be considered in
this light.
In the opinion of your secretary, Consuls are not, by the laws or usage of na-
tions, considered or treated as public Ministers, and therefore that they are not enti-
tled to the exemptions in question either here or elsewhere.
It would seem, from the collector’s answer, that he considers the other Con-
suls, between whose nations and the United States treaties of commerce exist, as
entitled to such exemptions; and therefore, your secretary is inclined to think it
would be expedient for Congress to correct that mistakc. It appears from general ex-
perience, that this privilege to Ambassadors and Ministers has produced many incon-
veniences, and is attended with great abuse—in so much, that some nations have
found it necessary to take measures to guard against and check them. In France,
it is usual for Ministers to report the articles intended to be introduced, and the
Government pays the duties to the farmers; and a late instance of an Ambassador
at the court of London, importing 800 dozen of wine at one time, for the use of
his table, and shortly after disposing of 500 dozen of them to grocers, has called
the attention of the Ministry to the necessity of establishing regulations on the
subject; but what they will be is not yet decided. If such inconveniences result
from such a privilege to a few Ambassadors and Ministers, men high in office
and reputation, and whose situations render such practices particularly indecent
and improper, it is easy to foresee how much greater and more extensive evils
would result from similar indulgencies to the numerous Consuls to be found in
every commercial country, to admit them.
It is submitted, therefore, to the consideration of Congress, whether (with-
out taking any particular notice of Sir John's case) it would not be proper to re-
solve as follows, viz:
Whereas doubts have in certain instances arisen, whether foreign Consuls,
residing in the United States, are entitled to an exemption from such legal imposts
dranjuez, May 6, 1789] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 503
and duties on Merchandizes by them imported, for their own use, as are payable
by other subjects of their respective nations.
Resolved, That no Consuls, of any nation, are entitled to such exemptions in
the United States. ſº
All which is submitted to the wisdom of Congress. JOHN JAY.
, 55. From John Jay to Mr Gardoqui.
Present from a Foreign Power.
New York, March 1, 1786. Dear Sir, I have received the letter which you
did me the honor to write yesterday, informing that instead of granting a permit,
as you requested for me to purchase and export a horse, his Majesty has been plea-
sed to order one to be sent to you for me. This is indeed doing a favor in a royal
manner; it demands my sincere and respectful acknowledgments, and I shall take
the liberty of requesting the Count de Florida Blanca to express to the King the
sense I entertain of it.
I ought, however, to apprize you, that I do not consider myself at liberty to
accept the horse without the previous permission of Congress. I shall immediate-
ly lay your letter before them, and acquaint you without delay of the answer they
may be pleased to give.
Your application for the permit was friendly and obliging; accept my thanks
for it, and be assured of the esteem and regard with which I have the honor to be,
&c. JOHN JAY.
56. From Count de Florida Blanca to Wm. Carmichael.
Relative to the rank and powers of Don Diego de Gardoqui. Extract.
St. Laurens, 7th October, 1784. Sir As the U. States have not conferred
upon you any other title than that of Charges d’Affairs, Don Diego de Gardoqui
will only have the same: but notwithstanding it is not usual in Europe, for sove-
reigns to give credentials to mere Charges d’Affairs, yet, considering the circum-
stances of this commission, he will have credentials from his Majesty to the Uni-
ted States; and the King chooses as a mark of distinction which they merit, that
it shall be in every respect similar to what his Majesty gives to the Ministers
which he sends to the United Provinces of the low countries, with this exception
only, that the latter are in French, and Mr Gardoqui's will be in Spanish.
His Majesty hopes no difficulty will occur in the reception of Don Diego de
Gardoqui; and in his presenting his credentials to Congress with proper formality
—but although attention has thus been paid to what might happen, he will carry
a letter of credence to the President of Congress, that by means thereof, and of
the full powers given by his Majesty, the execution of his commission may not be
delayed on account of points of etiquette.
THE COUNT DE FLORIDA BLANCA.
57. From Wm. Carmichael to John Jay.
Negotiation with Spain. Extract.
Aranjuez, May 6th, 1789. Sir, he [F. Blanca] recapitulated animatedly the
good offices which we had received from this country, our treatment in their ports
as the most favored nation the satisfaction given to the complaints of individuals, our
50% DIPLOMATIC writing. [Adams to Jay.
treaty with Morocco, his late Maj esty’s firm intentions to employ for the States any
influence he might have with the other Barbary Powers. In return for all which,
this court had experienced a delay and an indifference on our part, little correspond-
ing with the views it had in sending Mr Gardoqui to America. It was in vain to
interrupt, indeed I thought it better not to do it; he continued, that our delay and
indifference were not the only cause of complaint, that he had received proofs of an-
other nature of the ill will of the United States. I immediately desired to know
what these were, for that it often happened that misconceptions arose from mistaken
notions of the persons who gave information; I prayed his Excellency to have the
goodness to communicate to me candidly the intelligence he had received that I
might have an opportunity of giving such explanations, as I was convinced I should
be able to do from my knowledge of the desire of my constituents to cultivate the
friendship of his Catholic Majesty. I could, however, draw nothing from him
but general expressions, and a recapitulation of the abovementioned. He added,
that Mr Gardoqui had received every instruction necessary to conclude a conven-
tion with the United States, but that unaccountable delay and aversion on our part
had rendered the measures taken here ineffectual. I in vain endeavored to enter
into explanations and discussions on these points, he constantly interrupted me in
saying “all that I can tell you is, that Spain only desires to receive from the Uni-
ted States that the same treatment that it has evinced towards them.” As he
opened the door in finishing this sentence, I was constrained to leave him.
I have the honor to be, &c. W. CARMICHAEL.
*
58. From John Adams to John Jay.
South American Affairs. Extract.
Grosvenor Square, May 28, 1786. Dear Sir, An agent from South America,
was not long since arrested at Rouen in France, and has not since been heard of.
Another agent, who was his associate, as I have been told, is here, and has applied
to Government for aid. Government, not in a condition to go to war with Spain,
declines having any thing to do with the business. But if application should be
made to rich individuals, and profitable prices offered, for twenty or thirty thous-
and stands of arms, a number of field pieces, a few battering cannon, some mortars,
a good deal of ammunition, clothing, &c., do you think that in this capital of mam-
mon, they might not be obtained? I might mention names and facts, which have
been communicated to me. But my information is not official nor authentic enough
for this. It is sufficient to say, that an office like that, once undertaken by Mr
Beaumarchais, would not probably be refused by all men here.
You are probably better informed than I can pretend to be of the disturbances
which took place in the Spanish provinces of South America, during the late war,
of the pacification of them, and of the complaints and discontents which now pre-
vail. It is a fixed opinion in many minds here, that a revolution in South America
would be agreeable to the U.States,and it is depended on that we shall do nothing to
prevent it, if we do not exert ourselves to promote it, I shall decline entering far
into this speculation which is out of my depth. But I must venture to say, that
Portugal is bound by a treaty of 1778, to assist Spain in such a case. France
must assist her, from the family compact, and for a still more weighty reason, viz:
Fondon, June10, 1785] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 505
to prevent England from getting too rich and powerful by it; and Holland is now
bound by treaty to France, and perhaps to Spain. We should be very cautious
what we do. For England will certainly reap the greatest advantage, as she will
supply, with her manufactures, all South America, which will give her a sudden
wealth and power, that will be very dangerous to us. -
That British Ambassadors will very soon endeavor to excite the two Empires
and Denmark, to an alliance, for the purpose of setting the Spanish and Portuguese
colonies free, is very probable, as an inducement they may agree to assist in open-
ing the Danube and the navigation by the Dardanelles. The object of the next
war, I think, will be the liberty of commerce in South America, and the East In-
dies. We shall be puzzled to keep out of it. But I think we ought if we can.—
England would gain the most by such a turn in affairs, by the advantages she has
over other nations in the improvements of her manufactures, commerce and marine,
and England, unfortunately, we cannot trust. -
With great and sincere esteem, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
59. From John Adams to John Jay.
Introduction to the Queen. Speech to her Majesty. Queen’s reply. Reasons for sending
an account of these formalities home. Extract.
Bath Hotel, Westminster, June 10, 1785. Sir, Yesterday, the ninth of the
month, I was presented to the Queen,* by my Lord Aylesbury, her Lord Chamber-
lain, having been attended to his Lordship and introduced to him by the master of
the ceremonies. The Queen was attended by her ladies, and I made my compli-
ments to her Majesty in the following words:
“Madam, Among the many circumstances which have rendered my mission
to his Majesty desirable to me, I have ever considered it as a principal one, that I
should have an opportunity of making my court to a great Queen, whose royal vir-
tues, and talents, have ever been acknowledged and admired in America, as well
as in all nations of Europe, as an example to Princesses and the glory of her sex.
Permit me, Madam, to recommend to your Majesty's royal goodness, a rising em-
pire and an infant virgin world. Another Europe, Madam, is rising in America.
To a philosophical mind, like your Majesty’s, there cannot be a more pleasing
contemplation, than this prospect of doubling the human species, and augmenting,
at the same time, their prosperity and happiness. It will in future ages be the glo-
ry of these kingdoms to have peopled that country, and to have sown there those
seeds of science, of liberty, of virtue, and permit me, Madam, to add, of piety,
which alone constitute the presperity of nations,and the happiness of the human race,
“After venturing upon such high insinuations to your Majesty, it seems to be
descending too far, to ask, as I do, your Majesty’s royal indulgence to a person,
who is indeed unqualified for courts, and who owes his elevation to his distinguish-
ed honor of standing before your Majesty, not to any circumstances of illustrious
birth, fortune, or abilities, but merely to an ardent devotion to his native country,
and some little industry and perseverance in her service.”
The Queen answered me in these words: “I thank you, Sir, for your civilities
to me and my family, and am glad to see you in this country.”
The Queen then asked me if I had provided myself with a house. I answered,
I have agreed for one, Madam, this morning. She then made her courtesy, and #
64 *See pages 377 and 380.
506 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Adams to Jay,
made my reverence and retired into the drawing room, when the King, Queen, Prin-
cess Royal and the younger Princess, her sister, all spoke to me very obligingly.
I attended until the drawing room was over, and then returned home.
It has been necessary, in order to guard against false reports and malicious
fictions, to reduce to writing what was said in my audience of the King and Queen,
and it is the custom of all Ministers to transmit these compliments to their courts.
I transmit them to you in cypher, that they may be exposed to as little criticism
as possible, as the Court knew very well that the eyes of all nations were fixed up-
on these audiences. It may be fairly concluded from them that it is the intention
of the Royal family and of Ministers to treat America like other foreign powers;
but our inferences can go no farther. With esteem, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
60. From John Adams to John Jay.
Impressment of American Seamen.
London, September 22, 1787. Dear Sir, There was yesterday in the river, an
impress of seamen, and several American vessels had their men taken from them.
An application was made to me this morning, by a master of a ship from New
York, and I instantly wrote a letter to Lord Carmarthen, and went in person
to White Hall to deliver it. His Lordship read the letter, and the represen-
tation to me from the Captain, and after some conversation on the subject, as-
sured me that he would take measures to have the men restored, and precautions
against such mistakes in future. With respect, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
61. From John Adams to John Jay.
Lord Carmarthen expresses a wish for a Commercial Treaty with the United States.
His opinion of the New Constitution. Extract.
Grosvenor Square, February 14, I788. Dear Sir, At the last conferences at
White Hall, which were last Thursday, Lord Carmarthen thought proper to ex-
press a wish that this country had some sort of treaty of commerce with the United
States of America, that it might be no longer necessary to take new measures from
time to time, which looked hard. This observation his Lordship made, alluding
to Mr Grenville’s motion in the house of commons, for making the regulation of
the intercourse between America and the West India islands perpetual. His
Lordship then immediately said, “I presume, Mr Adams, that the States will all
immediately adopt the new constitution, I have read it with pleasure, it is very well
drawn up.” All this oracular utterance was to signify to me what has all along
been insinuated, that there is not as yet any national government, but that as soon
as there shall be one, the British court will vouchsafe to treat with it. You will
see by the Morning Chronicle of the 12th of February, enclosed, that Mr Gren-
ville’s speech is in the same strain, so that we may conclude it to be the concerted
language of the cabinet. It is unnecessary for me to make any reflections upon it;
the argument that arises out of it, in favor of the new constitution, and a prompt
acceptance of it, is but one among many. France and Holland furnish as many
reasons as England. Mr Jefferson must soon follow my example, and return to
America, if that constitution is not accepted by all the States, and what will be
the consequence of the clamors of all the officers in France, who are creditors, of
all the notables who may be pleased to cast reflections, and of all our creditors is
&ondon, June26, 1787] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 507
Holland, for want of payment of interest and principal as they become due, must
be left to every American citizen seriously to consider.
With great esteem and regard, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
62. John Adams to John Jay.
Thinks there will be no Commercial Treaty until England is made to feel its necessity. Ar-
guments of the English in defence of their system. How met by the Americans.
Bath Hotel, Westminster, June 26, 1785. Dear Sir, Although I have been
received here, and continue to be treated with all the distinction which is due to the
rank and title you have given me, there is, nevertheless, a reserve which convinces
me, that we shall have no treaty of commerce until this nation is made to feel the
necessity of it. I am every day astonished at the ignorance of all ranks of people
of the relation between this country and ours, cut bono they cry. To what end a
treaty of commerce, when we are sure of as much American trade as we have occa-
sion for, without it; the experiment has been tried, and the Americans have found
that they cannot supply themselves elsewhere; there must be quid pro quo, and
what have the United States to give in exchange for the liberty of going in their
own ships to our sugar colonies, and our colonies upon the continent! These smart
reasoners are answered, the Americans allow Britons to come in their own vessels
to all their ports in the United States, and this is more than a quid for your quo.
This is the true reciprocity, and while we allow you this liberty, we have a right
to demand it in return. But, replies the Briton, you cannot avoid this, you have
no government, you cannot agree to prohibit our ships and goods and goods, or to
lay duties on them; then, says the American, you give up the argument of reciproci-
ty, you confess that you are not willing to allow us a quid for your quo, are dispos-
ed to take advantage of our supposed disunion, to get unequal benefits from us; but
you will find yourselves disappointed in this disunion that you build so much upon,
nothing but too much good nature to you, and too high an opinion of your wisdom,
has prevented the States, hitherto, from uniting in a reciprocal discouragement of
your ships and goods, but when the Americans find themselves deceived, you will
soon see them too much united for your purposes. Such have been the dialogues
in conversation for a year or two, and these ignorant sophisms of the Britons will
never be confuted to any effect, until vigorous measures are taken by all the States
in concert. Whatever measures are taken, I should recommend them to be taken
Rupon this express proviso, to continue in force only until things shall be otherwise
settled by a treaty of commerce... With greatesteem, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
63. John Adams to John Jay.
Management of the Public Press.-American Commerce,
Grosvenor Square, Westminster, August 31, 1785. Sir, It is the practice of
Ministers here, when they have in contemplation a project of whose utility, practi-
cability, necessity, expediency, or popularity, they are doubtful, to set some Writer
to compose a pamphlet, or a number of writers to compose a paragraphs in the news-
papers. The pamphlets and paragraphs are read in the coffee houses,&c.other places
where the politicians assemble, by the ministerial runners who take down the ob-
servations they hear, and report them to the Ministers. This method has been
‘508 DIPL(3MATIC WRITING. [Adams to Jay.
tried concerning the projected admission of American ships and oil, and the unani-
mous voice was found to be decidedly pronounced against it. This, however, was,
I presume, upon the presumption that the Americans could never unite in retalia-
tion; that it would be many years before they could act as a nation, and that the
United States, could never make a navigation act. This is the principle upon
which this nation after the peace, decided its judgment concerning the system that
ought to be adopted relatively to the United States. In conference with Mr Pitt,
I made this remark to him, I told him that since I had been in England, I had made
it my business to collect and read every thing which had been written and publish-
ed since the peace, upon the commercial relations between Great Britain and the
United States. That I found every one of these writers, who was for limiting and
restraining the American commerce by prohibitions, alien duties, &c. laid it down
as the fundamental principle of his system, that in all events this country was sure
of the American commerce, because we could not unite and act as a nation in any
retaliating prohibitions or duties. This idea had been first suggested to Lord Shef-
field by some of the American refugees, and had been communicated to the nation
by him and other writers, who took it from him without sufficient examination. I
.ventured to give Mr Pitt my opinions in very full terms, that this principle would be
found to be an erroneous one by experience, that time would shew that the English
nation had been misled in its judgment by this suggestion, which they had been too
prone to believe, but might find to be an error when it would be too late. It is,
however, by no means certain that the clearest refutation of that error, by the ut-
most unanimity in America, in any measures to defend their navigation, would now
alter the public voice and public opinion here. The public is not to be easily
reasoned out of a settled opinion, though it might have been easy, in the season of
it, to have reasoned it into the settlement of a different opinion. -
The papers are now filled with paragraphs, which an attentive reader may per-
ceive are inserted, in order to feel out the sentiments of the people concerning a
treaty of commerce with France, with Spain, with America, concerning the new
Hanoverian engagements in Germany, and concerning the posts, negroes, debts,
tories and all other points in dispute with the United States; they are disguised in
such a manner, that it is scarcely possible to discover how the Minister inclines;
nevertheless, some of them are in such a strain, and discover such and anxiety
about the treaties of commerce in negociation with France and Spain, that I suspect-
ed they (the Ministry) have made some propositions to those Courts, and are
anxious both to know whether they will be accredited or not, and how they will be
received by the British and Irish nations, if they should be accepted; a few months
time will remove their and our solicitude upon this head.
I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
*mms
64. From John Adams to John Jay.
Audience of leave of his Majesty.—Address to the King.—Reply of his Majesty.
Grosvenor Square, February 21, 1788. Dear Sir, Yesterday I had my audi-
ence of leave to his Majesty. I shall not trouble you with any particulars, of the
previous steps to obtain this audience (which you know are always troublesome
£nough) nor with any detail of the conversation, farther than the public is imme.
N. P. May 8, 1788] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 509
diately interested in it. The substance of my address to his Majesty was no more
than a renewal of assurances in behalf of the United States, of their friendly dis-
positions, and of their continued desire to cultivate a liberal intercourse of com-
merce, and good offices with his Majesty’s subjects and States, thanks for the
protection and civilities of his court, and good wishes of prosperity to his Majesty,
his royal family, his subjects and dominions. The King's answer to me, was in
these words: “Mr Adams, you may with great truth assure the United States
that whenever they shall fulfil the treaty, on their part, I, on my part, will fulfil it
in all its particulars. As to yourself, I am sure I wish you a safe and pleasant
voyage, and much comfort with your family and friends.”
This was the answer in ceremony. His Majesty was then pleased to ask me
many questions about myself and my family, how long I had been absent from
them, &c. which were intended, I suppose to be very gracious and flattering, but
were of no consequence to the public, and, therefore, will be here omitted. It now
remains to take leave of the Queen and the Princesses, the cabinet Ministers, and
corps diplomatique, a species of slavery, more of which I believe has fallen to my
share, than ever happened before to a son of liberty; and I much fear, that the
omission of a letter of recall, and the offence taken at it in Holland, will oblige me
to go over to the Hague to repeat the same tedious ceremonies there. At this sea-
son of the year, so near the equinox, to have the passage from Harwich to Helvoet
to cross twice, is a punishment for sins to me unknown.
With much affection, &c. JOHN ADAMS.
65. From James Duane to John Jay.
Encloses a copy of the judgment against Wessels, for violation of the privileges of a Minister
Plenipotentiary.
New-York, Office of Mayoralty, August 8, 1788. Sir, I have the honor to
enclose you a copy of the judgement, this day pronounced by the court against
Wessels, a constable, for the violation of the privileges of his Excellency Mr Van
Berckel, Minister Plenipotentiary of their High Mightinesses, the States Gene-
ral of the United Netherlands, at this Court. He accordingly stands committed
to the common jail. I have the honor to be, &c. JAMES DUANE.
City and County of New-York, ss. At a court of general sessions of the peace,
holden at the City Hall, in and for the city and county of New-York, before James
Duane, Esquire, Mayor; Richard Varick, Esquire, recorder; and William W.
Gilbert, Esquire, Alderman, of the city of New-York, and their associates, jus-
tices of the peace of the State of New-York, assigned to keep the peace within
the said city and county, on Friday the 8th day of August, 1788.
The people of the State of New-York versus John Wessels. The defendant,
having at the last sessions been indicted for assaulting and falsely imprisoning
James Van Antwerp, a servant of his Excellency the Minister of the United Neth-
erlands, contrary to the law of nations and the privileges of Ambassadors, and the
defendant having then plead thereto not guilty, comes now into court and prays
leave to retract his plea, pleads guilty, and submits to the mercy of the court.—
Whereupon it is ordered that he be committed to the common jail of this city and
county, there to remain for the space of three calendar months.
Extract from the minutes, ROBERT BENSON, Clerk.
510 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Jay, Jefferson.
66. From John Jay to P. J. Van Berckel,
Exemplary punishment of Wessels.
Office for Foreign Affairs, Aug. 8th 1788. Sir, the paper herewith enclosed
was this moment transmitted to me by the Mayor of the City. You will perceive
from it, that the constable who violated your privileges, has been subject to exem-
plary punishment. It is the more severe upon him, as he is in indigent circum-
stances, and has a family dependent on him. I flatter myself that the conduct of
the court on this occasion will meet with your approbation: and as there is reason
to expect, as the nature and extent of the privileges in question will in future be
better known, that due respect will uniformly be paid to them.
With great respect and consideration, &c. - JOHN JAY.
67. From Thomas Jefferson to John Jay.
Letter received from a Brazilian on the emancipation of his country. Extract.
Marseilles, May 4, 1787. Sir, My journey in this part of the country, has
procured me information which I will take the liberty of communicating to Congress.
In October last I received a letter dated Montpelier, October 2nd, 1786, announc-
ing to me that the writter was a foreigner, who had a matter of very great conse-
quence to communicate to me, and desired I would indicate the channel through
which it might pass safely. I did so. I received, soon after, a letter in the fol-
lowing words, omitting only the formal parts:
“I am a Brazilian, and you know that my unhappy country groans under a
most dreadful slavery, which becomes more intolerable since the era of your glor-
ious independence—the barbarous Portuguese sparing nothing to make us unhappy
for fear that we should follow your steps. And as we know that these usurpers
against the law of nature and of humanity, have no other thoughts than of crushing
us, we are determined to follow the striking example which you have given us; and
consequently to break our chains, and to bring to life liberty, which is now dead
and oppressed by physical force, which is the only power Europeans have over Ame-
rica. But as Spain will not fail to join Portugal, it is necessary that a nation
should join us. And notwithstanding the advantages we have for defence, we
cannot do it, or at least it would not be prudent for us to run any hazard, without
being sure of success. Your nation, sir, is, we think, that which should most
suitably assist us, because it is her that has given us the example; and also, be-
cause nature has made us inhabitants of the same continent, and has consequently
constituted us, in some sort, countrymen. We are ready, on our part, to furnish
all the funds that may be necessary, and show, at all times, our gratitude towards
our benefactors. This is the substance of my intentions, and it is to fulfil this com-
mission, that I am now in France, as I could not do it in America without exciting
some suspicions. It is for you to judge if they can be realized. And in case you
should wish to consult your nation on the subject, I am enabled to give all the in-
formation that you may think necessary.
“ Montpelier, 21 Nov.” I have the honor to be, &c. TH: JEFFERSON.
Paris, Feb. 4, 1789] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 51 i
68. From Thomas Jefferson to John Jay.
Arrest of Mr. Barclay, American Consul, for debt, and liberation by the Parliament of
Bourdeaux. Conversation with the Minister on the subject.
Paris, June 21, 1787. Sir, Mr. Barclay has probably informed you of his hav-
ing been arrested in Bourdeaux, for a debt contracted in the way of his commerce;
he immediately applied to the parliament of that place, who ordered his discharge,
this took place after five days actual imprisonment. I arrived at Bourdeaux a few
days after his liberation; as the Procureur General of the King had interested him
self to obtain it, with uncommon zeal, and that too on public principles, I thought
it my duty to wait on him, and return him thanks; I did the same to the Presi-
dent of the Parliment, for the body over which he presided. What would have
been an insult in America, being an indispensable duty here. You will see by the
enclosed printed paper, on what ground the Procureur insisted on Mr. Barclay's
liberation; those on which the Parliament ordered it are not expressed. On my ar-
rival here, I spoke with the Minister on the subject; he observed, that the character
of Consul is no protection in this country against process for debt; that, as to the
character with which Mr. Barclay had been invested at the Court of Morocco, it
was questionable, whether it could be placed on the diplomatic line, as it had not
been derived immediately from Congress; that, if it were, it would have covered
him to Paris only, where he had received his commission, had he proceeded direc-
tly thither, but that his long stay at Bourdeaux, must be considered as terminating
it there. I observed to him, that Mr. Barclay had been arrested almost immedi-
atly on his arrival at Bourdeaux, but he says, that arrest was made void by the Par-
liament, and still he has continued there several weeks; true, I replied, but his ad-
versaries declared they would arrest him again the moment he should be out of
the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Bourdeaux,and have actually engaged the Mare-
chaussee on the road, to do it; this seemed to impress him; he said he could obtain
a letter of sauf conduit, which would protect him to Paris, but that immediately on
his arival here, he would be liable to arrest. I asked him if such a letter could not
be obtained to protect him to Paris and back to Bourdeaux, and even to America?
He said, that for that, the consent of the greater part of his creditors would be ne-
cessary, and even with this, it was very doubtful whether it could be obtained.
Still, if I should furnish him with that consent, he would do what should depend
on him. I am persuaded he will, and have written to Mr. Barclay to obtain the
consent of his creditors, This is the footing on which this matter stands at present-
I have the honor to be, &c. TH: JEFFERSON.
69. From Thomas Jefferson to John Jay.
Relative to the misconduct of the Count de Moustier. Representation to the Count de Mont-
morin. Leave of absence will probably be given to M. de Moustier. M. Ternant will
be sent over as Charge d’Affaires.
Paris, February 4, 1789. Sir, I had before understood, through different chan-
nels that the conduct of the Count de Moustier was politically and morally offen-
sive. It was delicate for me to speak on the subject to the Count de Montmorin.
The invaluable mediation of our friend, the Marquis de la Fayette, was, therefore,
resorted to, and the subject explained, though not pressed. Later intelligence,
shewing the necessity of pressing it, it was yesterday resumed, and represented
through the same medium, to the Count de Montmorin, that recent information
512 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [ſiashington's Proclºn.
proved to us, that his Minister's conduct had rendered him personally odious in
America, and might even influence the dispositions of the two nations; that his
recall was become a matter of mutual concern; that we had understood he was
instructed to remind the new government of their debt to this country, and he was
in the purpose of doing it in very harsh terms; that this could not increase their
desire of hastening payment, and might wound their affections; that, therefore,
it was much to be desired that his discretion should not be trusted to, as to the
form in which the demand should be made, but that the letter should be written
here, and he instructed to add nothing, nor was his private conduct omitted. The
Count de Montmorin was sensibly impressed. He very readily determined, that
the letter should be formed here, but said that the recall was a more difficult busi-
ness; that as to Moustier they could not recall him from that Ministry, without gi-
ving him another, and there was no vacancy at present. However, he would
hazard his first thoughts on the subject, saving the right of correcting them by
further consideration. They were these, that there was a loose expression in one
of de Moustier's letters, which might be construed into a petition for leave of ab-
sence; that he would give him permission to return to France; that it had been
before decided, on the request of the Marquis de la Luzerne, that Otto should go
with him to London; that they would send a person to America as Charge d’Af-
faires, in place of Otto, and that, if the President (General Washington) approved
of him, he should be afterwards made Minister. He had cast his eye on Colonel
Ternant, and desired the Marquis to consult me, whether he would be agreeable.
At first I hesitated, recollecting to have heard Ternant represented in America, as
an hypochondriac, discontented man, and paused for a moment between him and
Bartholemy, at London, of whom I have heard a great deal of good. However,
I concluded it safer to take one whom we knew and who knew us. The Marquis
was decidedly of this opinion. Ternant will see that his predecessor is recalled
for unconciliatory deportment, and that he will owe his own promotion to the appro-
bation of the President. He established a solid reputation in Europe, by his con-
duct when Generalissimo of one of the United Provinces, during their late dis-
turbances; and it is generally thought that if he had been put at the head of the
principal province, instead of the Rhingrave de Salm, he would have saved that
cause. Upon the whole, I believe you may expect that the Count de Moustier
will have an immediate leave of absence, which will soon after become a recall in
effect. I will try also, to have the Consuls admonished as to the line of conduct
they should observe. I have now that of assuring you of the sentiments of sin-
cere esteem and respect, &c. TH: JEFFERSON.
70. President’s Proclamation of JVeutrality.
Whereas it appears, that a war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia,
Great Britain, and the United Netherlands on the one part, and France on the other;
and the duty and interest of the U. States require, that they should with sincerity
and good faith adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial towards the bel-
ligerent powers: I have, therefore, thought fit, by these presents, to declare the dis-
position of the U. States to observe the conduct, aforesaid, towards these powers'
respectively; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the U. States, carefully to avoid
Phila. Ap. 22, 1793.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 513
all acts and proceedings, whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene
such dispositions. And I do, hereby, also, make known, that whosoever of the
citizens of the U. States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture
under the laws of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hortilities against
any of the said powers, or by carrying to any of them, those articles, which are
deemed contraband by the modern usages of nations, will not receive the protection
of the U. States against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have
given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs, to cause prosecutions to be
instituted against all persons, who shall, within the cognizance of the Courts of
the U. States, violate the laws of nations with respect to the powers at war, or
any of them.
In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America
to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the
city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, one thousand seven hundred
and ninety-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the
seventeenth. - [L. S.] GEORGE WASHINGTON.
By the President, TH. JEFFERSON. -
71. Circular addressed to the Foreign Ministers, on Promulgating the above.
Sir-As far as the public gazettes are to be credited, we may presume that
war has taken place among several of the nations of Europe, in which France, Eng-
land, Holland and Prussia are particularly engaged. Disposed ourselves to pur-
sue steadily the ways of peace, and to remain in friendship with all nations, the
President of the United States has thought it expedient, by the proclamation of
which I enclose you a copy, to notify this disposition to our citizens, in order to in-
timate to them the line of conduct for which they are to prepare, and this he has
done without waiting for a formal notification from the belliegerent powers. He
hopes that those powers, and your nation in particular, will consider this early
precaution as a proof the more candid,as it has been unasked, of the sincere and im-
partial intentions of our country, and that what is meant merely as a general in-
timation to our citizens, shall not be construed to their prejudice in any courts of
admiralty, as if it were conclusive evidence of their knowledge of the existence of
war, and of the powers engaged in it. Of this we could not give them conclusive
information, because we have it not ourselves, and till it is given to us in form, and
so communicated to them, we must consider all their acts as lawful, which would
have been lawful in a state of peace.
Mr Ternant, Mr Van Berckel, Mr Hammond.
72. M. Duplaine’s Eacequatur Revoked.
George Washington, President of the United States of America, to all whom
it may concern:—The Sieur Antoine Charbonnet Duplaine, heretofore having pro-
duced to me his commission as Vice Consul for the Republic of France within the
States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, and having thereon
received from me an exeguatur, bearing date the 5th day of June 1793, recogni-
sing him as such, and declaring him free to exercise and enjoy such functions,
powers and privileges as are allowed to vice consuls of the French Republic by
the laws, treaties and conventions in that case made and provided; and the said
65
514 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [Jay's Instr. to London
Sieur Duplaine having, under colour of his said office, committed sundry encroach-
ments and infractions on the laws of the land, and particularly having caused a
vessel to be rescued with an armed force, out of the custody of an officer of justice,
who had arrested the same by process from his court; and it being, therefore, no
longer fit nor consistent with the respect and obedience due to the laws, that the
said Sieur Duplaine should be permitted to continue in the exercise and enjoyment
of the said functions, privileges, and powers, these are, therefore, to declare, that
I do no longer recognise the said Antoine Charbonnet Duplaine, as Vice Consul of
the Republic of France in any part of these United States, nor permit him to exer-
cise or enjoy any of the functions, powers, or privileges allowed to the Vice Con-
suls of that nation; and that I do, hereby, wholly revoke and annul the said exe-
quatur, heretofore given, and do declare the same to be absolutely null and void,
from this day forward. In testimony whereof, I have caused these letters to be
made patent, and the seal of the United States of America to be hereunto affixed-
Given under my hand, this day of in the year of our
Lord 1793, and of the Independence of the United States of America, the eighteenth.
By the President: TH: JEFFERson. GEORGE WASHINGTON.
73. Mr Jay’s Instructions to the Court of London.
Extract. April, 1794.
The mission upon which you are about to enter, as Envoy Extraordinary
to the Court of London, has been dictated by considerations of an interesting and
pressing nature. 1.
You will doubtless avail yourself of these to convince Mr. Pinckney, our Min-
ister in ordinary there, of the necessity of this measure, and will thus prevent any
wound to his sensibility. He may be assured that it is the impression which will
naturally accompany this demonstration of the public sentiment, and not the smal-
lest abatement of confidence in him, which has recommended a special appoint-
ment. Nor will any of his usual functions be suspended, except so far as they may
be embraced in the present commission. It would be unnecessary to add, but for
the sake of manifesting this fact, and removing difficulties which may arise in your
own breast, that you will communicate with him without reserve.
A full persuasion is entertained that throughout the whole regotiation you will
make the following its general objects: tó keep alive in the mind of the British Min-
ister that opinion, which the solemnity of a special mission must naturally inspire,
of the strong agitations excited in the people of the United States by the disturbed
condition of things between them and Great Britain; to repel war, for which we
are not disposed, and into which the necessity of vindicating our honour and our
property may, but can alone drive us; to prevent the British ministry, should they
be resolved on war, from carrying with them the British nation; and, at the same
time, to assert, with dignity and firmness, our rights, and our title to reparation
for past injuries. -
You will mention, with due stress, the general irritation of the United States
at the vexations, spoliations, captures, &c. and being on the field of negotiation,
you will be more able to judge than can be prescribed now, how far you may state
the difficulty, which may occur in restraining the violence of some of our exasper-
ated citizens.
Monroe's Instin, 1794] DIPLOMATIG WRITING. 515
If the British Ministry should hint any supposed predilection in the United
States for the French nation, as warranting the whole or any part of these instruc-
tions, you will stop the progress of this subject as being irrelative to the question
in hand. It is a circumstance which the British nation have no right to object to; be-
cause we are free in our affections, and independent in our government. But it may
be safely answered, upon the authority of the correspondence between the Secre-
tary of State and Mr Hammond, that our neutrality has been scrupulously observed.
In this negotiation as to the treaty of peace, we have been amused by trans-
ferring the discussions concerning its inexecution and infractions from one side of
the Atlantic to the other. In the meantime, one of the consequences of holding the
posts has been much bloodshed on our frontiers by the Indians, and much expence.
The British Government having denied their abetting of the Indians, we must of
course acquit them. But we have satisfactory proofs (some of which, however,
cannot, as you will discover, be well used in public,) that British agents are guilty
of stirring up, and assisting with arms, ammunition, and warlike implements,
the different tribes of Indians against us. It is incumbent upon that Government
to restrain those agents; or the forbearance to restrain them cannot be interpreted
otherwise than as a determination to countenance them. It is a principle from
which the United States will not easily depart, either in their conduct towards oth-
er nations, or what they expect from them, that the Indians dwelling within the
territories of one, shall not be interfered with by the other.
It may be observed here, as comprehending both of the foregoing points, that
the United States testify their sincere love of peace by being nearly in a state of
war, and yet anxious to obviate absolute war by friendly advances; and if the desire
of Great Britain to be in harmony with the United States be equally sincere, she
will readily discover what kind of sensations will at length arise, when their trade
is plundered; their rescources wasted in an Indian war; many of their citizens ex-
posed to the cruelties of the savages; their rights by treaty denied; and those of
Great Britain enforced in our Courts. But you will consider the inexecution and
infraction of the treaty as standing on distinct ground from the vexations and spo-
liations; so that no adjustment of the former is to be influenced by the latter.
It is referred to your discretion whether, in case the two preceding points
should be so accommodated as to promise the continuance of tranquillity between
the United States and Great Britain, the subject of a commercial treaty may not be
listened to by you, or even broken by the British ministry.
74. Mr Monroe's Instructions to the Republic of France.
Extract.
Philadelphia, June 10, 1794. Sir, You have been nominated as the successor
of Mr Gouverneur Morris, in the office of minister plenipotentiary of the United
States of America to the Republic of France, from a confidence, that while you
keep steadily in view the necessity of rendering yourself acceptable to that govern-
ment, you will maintain the self respect due to your own. In doing the one and
the other of these things, your own prudence and understanding must be the guides:
after first possessing yourself of the real sentiments of the Executive relative to
the French nation.
,516 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Monroe's Inst.to Fr.
The President has been an early and decided friend of the French Revolution;
and whatever reason there may have been, under our ignorance of ſacts and policy,
to suspend an opinion upon some of its important transactions, yet is he immuta-
ble in his wishes for its accomplishment; incapable of assenting to the right of
any foreign prince to meddle with its interior arrangements; and persuaded that
success will attend their efforts; and particularly, that union among themselves is
an impregnable barrier against external assaults. We have pursued neutrality
with faithfulness; we have paid more of our debt to France than was absolutely
due, as the Secretary of the Treasury asserts, and we should have paid more
if the state of our affairs did not require us to be prepared with funds for the pos-
sible event of war. We mean to continue the same line of conduct in future, and
to remove all jealousy with respect to Mr. Jay's mission to London, you may say,
that he is positively forbidden to weaken the engagements between this country
and France. It is not improbable, that you will be obliged to encounter on this
head, suspicions of various kinds. But you may declare the motives of that mis-
sion to be, to obtain immediate compensation for our plundered property, and res-
titution of the posts.
Should you be interrogated about the treaty of commerce, you may reply that
it has never been proposed to us by M. Fauchet. As to anything else concerning
it, you will express yourself not to be instructed, it being a subject to be negoti-
ated with the government here.
In like manner, if a treaty of alliance, or if the execution of the guaranty of
the French Islands by force of arms, should be proposed, you will refer the Re-
public of France to this side of the water. In short, it is expected, with a sure
reliance on your discretion, that you will not commit the United States by any
specific declaration, except where you are particularly instructed, and except, too
in giving testimony of our attachment to their cause.
It is important that no public character of the United States should be in
France which is not acceptable. You will inquire into the consulships, and inform
how they are approved, and whether they be deserving. Although the President
will avoid, as much as possible, to appoint any obnoxious person consul, it may
happen otherwise, and must be considered as accidental. Mr Alexander Duvernat
goes for Paris in the quality of vice consu), and Mr Fauchet said that he had
nothing to object to him. §
Consulates are established in every port of France where they are conceived
useful. But perhaps you may find it advisable to mark out some other places
for such offices.
It is recommended that no business of consequence be carried on verbally, or
in writing, but in your own language.
The minister of each nation has a right to use his national tongue, and few
men can confide in their exactness when they do business in a foreign one. But
great care is necessary in the choice of interpreters when they are to be resorted to.
It is a practice of great utility to note down every conversation of conse-
quence which you hold, immediately after retirement; and the Executive will ex-
pect to receive copies of what shall be thus written.
With every wish, &c. EDMUND RANDOLPH.
JMonroe's Recall] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 517
75. Mr Monroe to the Secretary of State.
Extract.
Paris, December 22, 1795. Sir: The Count Carletti, late envoy, &c. from
Tuscany, left Paris some four or five days since. He had refused going until he
had heard from the Grand Duke; and remained, notwithstanding the reiterated
orders of the directoire. Finally, however, he was ordered to depart in twenty-
four hours, (this was not done before as I stated my last) with intimation that
force would be used to compel him, in case he did not. He still held out, howe-
ver, the flag of defiance. The twenty-four hours expired, at which moment a
commissary, with a carriage from the Government, waited to receive his orders for
departure; or in other words, to take the Count by force, and conduct him safe
beyond the bounds of the republic; which was accordingly done. The diplomatic
corps was summoned, by a member either averse to this peremptory mode of pro-
ceeding, or friendly to the Count, to interfere with directoire in his behalf: but
several members of that corps were of opinion, that, although sometimes a
demand is made on the Government of a minister who gives offence, to recall him,
yet there is no obligation on the Government offended, by the law of nations, to
take that course; but that it may take any other, and even upon slight occasions,
to rid itself of him, more prompt and summary, if it thinks fit; and, in consequence,
no steps was taken by the diplomatic corps on the subject.
76. Mr J.Monroe to the Directory, on presenting his Letter of Recall.
On the 30th of December, 1796. -
I have the honor to present you with my letter of recall from the President
of the United States of America, which closes my political functions with the
French republic; and I have likewise the honor to add, that I am instructed by the
President to avail myself by this occasion to renew to you, on his part, an assur-
ance of the solicitude which the United States feel for the happiness of the French
republic. Ç
In performing this act, many other considerations crowd themselves upon my
mind. I was a witness to a Revolution in my own country. I was deeply pene-
trated with its principles, which are the same with those of your Revolution. I
saw, too, its difficulties; and remembering these, and the important services ren-
dered us by France upon that occasion, I have partaken with you in all the perilous
and trying situations in which you have been placed.
It was my fortune to arrive among you in a moment of complicated danger
from within and from without; and it is with the most heartfelt satisfaction that, in
taking my leave, I behold victory and the dawn of prosperity upon the point of
realizing, under the auspices of a wise and excellent constitution, all the great
objects for which, in council and the field, you have so long and so nobly conten-
ded. The information which I shall carry to America of this state of your affairs
will be received by my countrymen with the same joy and solicitude for its contin-
uance, that I now feel and declare for myself. *
There is no object which I have always had more uniformly and sincerely at
heart, than the continuance of a close union and perfect harmony between our two
nations, I accepted my mission with a view to use my utmost efforts to increase
and promote this object, and I now derive consolation in a review of my conduct,
518 DIPLOMATIC writing. [Property of Rivers.
from the knowledge that I have never deviated from it. Permit me, therefore, to
express an earnest wish that this harmony may be perpetual.
I beg leave to make to you, citizen directors, my particular acknowledgments
for the confidence and attention with which you have honored my mission during
its continuance, and at the same to assure you that, as I shall always take a deep
and sincere interest in whatever concerns the prosperity and welfare of the French
republic, so I shall never cease, in my retirement, to pay you, in return for the at-
tention you have shown me, the only acceptable recompense to generous minds,
the tribute of a grateful remembrance.
77. Answer of the President of the Directory.
On Mr Monroe’s Recall.
Mr Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America: By presenting
this day to the executive directory your letters of recall, you offer a very strange
spectacle to Europe. France, rich in her freedom, surrounded by the train of her
victories, and strong in the esteem of her allies, will not stoop to calculate the
consequences of the condescension of the American Government to the wishes of
its ancient tyrants. The French republic expects, however, that the successors
of Columbus, Raleigh, and Penn, always proud of their liberty, will never forget
that they owe it to France. They will weigh in their wisdom the magnanimous
friendship of the French people, with the crafty caresses of perfidious men, who
meditate to bring them again under their former yoke. Assure the good people of
America, Mr Minister, that, like them, we adore liberty; that they will always pos-
sess our esteem, and find in the French people that republican generosity which
knows how to grant peace, as well as to cause its sovereignty to be respected.
As for you, Mr Minister Plenipotentiary, you have combated for principles;
you have known the true interests of your country—depart with our regret. We
restore, in you, a representative to America; and we preserve the remembrance of
the citizen whose personal qualities did honor to that title.
*
78. Opinion of E. Randolph on the Property of Rivers, to T. Jefferson.
On the Seizure of the Ship Grange in Bay of Delaware. Extract.
Phila. May 15, 1793. The high ocean, in general, it is true, is unsusceptible of
becoming property. It is a gift of nature, manifestly destined for the use of all man-
kind—inexhaustible in its benefits—not admitting metes and bounds. But rivers
may be appropriated, because the reverse is their situation. Were they open to
all the world, they would prove the inlets of perpetual disturbance and discord;
would soon be rendered barren by the number of those, who would share in their
products; and moreover, may be defined:
“A river, considered merely as such, is the property of the people, through
whose lands it flows, or of him under whose jurisdiction that people is.” Grot. b.
2. c. 2. s. 12. -
“Rivers might be held in property; though neither where they rise, nor where
they discharge themselves be within our territory, but they join to both, or the sea.
it is sufficient for us, that the larger part of water, that is, the sides, is shut up in
our banks, and that the river, in respect of our lands, is itself small and insignifi-
Randolph, 1793] I}{PLOMATIC WRITING. 519
cant.” Grot. b. 2. c. 3. s. 7, and Barbeyrac, in his note, subjoins, that neither of
those is necessary.
“Rivers may be the property of whole states.” Puff. b. 3. c. 3 s. 4.
“To render a thing capable of being appropriated, it is not strictly necessary,
that we should enclose it, or be able to enclose it within artificial bounds, or such
as are different from its own substance; it is sufficient, if the compass and extent
of it can be any way determined. And therefore, Grotius hath given himself a
needless trouble, when, to prove rivers capable of property, he useth this argument,
that although they are bounded by the land at neither end, but united to the others
or sea; yet it is enough, that the greater part of them, that is, their sides, are enclos-
ed.” Puff. b. 4. c. 5. s. 3. -
“When a nation takes possession of a country in order to settle there, it pos-
sesses everything included in it, as lands,lakes,rivers,” &c. Wattel,b. 1. c. 22. s. 226.
To this list might be added Bynkershoek and Selden. But the dissertation of
the former, de dominio maris, cannot be quoted with advantage in detachment; and
the authority of the latter on this head may, in the judgment of some, partake too
much of affection for the hypothesis of mare clausum. As Selden, however, sinks in
influence on this question, so must Grotius rise, who contended for the mare liberum;
and his accurate commentator, Rutherforth, confirms his principles in the following
passage; “A nation, by settling upon any tract of land, which at the time of such
settlement had no other owner, acquires, in respect of all other nations, an exclusive
right of full or absolute property, not only in the land, but in the waters likewise,
that are included within the land, such as rivers, pools, creeks or bays. The abso-
lute property of a nation, in what it has thus seized upon, is its right of territory.”
2 Ruth. b. 2. c. 9. s. 6.
Congress too have acted on these ideas, when in their collection laws, they
ascribe to a state the rivers, wholly within that state.
But suppose that the river was dried up, and the bay alone remained, Gro-
tius continues the argument of the 7th section, of the 3d ehapter, of the 2d book
above cited, in the following words:
“By this instance it seems to appear, that the property and dominion of the
sea might belong to him, who is in possession of the lands on both sides, though
it be open above as a gulf, or above and below, as a strait; provided it is not so great a
part of the sea, that, when compared with the lands on both sides, it cannot be
supposed to be some part of them. And now, what is thus lawful to one king or
people, may be also lawful to two or three, if they have a mind to take possession
of a sea, thus enclosed within their lands; for it is in this manner, that a river,
which separates two nations, has first been possessed by both, and then divided.”
The gulfs and channels, or arms of the sea are, according to the regular course,
supposed to belong to the people, with whose lands they are encompassed.” Puff.
b. 4. c. 5. S. 8. -
Valin, in b. 5. tit. 1. p. 685, of his commentary 6n the marine ordonnance of
France, virtually acknowledges, that particular seas may be appropriated. After
reviewing the contest between Grotius and Selden, he says, “S'il (Selden) s'en
fut done tenula, ou plutot, s'il eut distingue l'ocean des mers particulers, et meme
dans l'ocean, l'entendue demer, qui doitetre censee appattenir aux souverains des
cotes, qui en sont baignees, sa victoire eut ete complette.” E. RANDOLPH.
520 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Treaty Power.
79. From President Washington to House of Representatives.
- Treaty-making Power. Extract. March 30. 1796.
Having been a member of the General Convention, and knowing the princi-
ples on which the constitution was formed, I have ever entertained but one opin-
ion on this subject; and from the first establishment of the government to this
moment, my conduct has exemplified that opinion, that the power of making trea-
ties is exclusively vested in the President, by and with the advice and consent of
the Senate, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur. and that every
treaty so made and promulgated, thenceforward became the law of the land. It is
thus that the treaty making power has been understood by foreign nations; and in
all the treaties made with them, we have declared, and they have believed, that
when ratified by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, they
became obligatory. In this construction of the constitution, every House of Re-
presentatives has heretofore acquiesced; and until the present time, not a doubt or
suspicion has appeared to my knowledge, that this construction was not the true
one. Nay, they have more than acquiesced; for till now, without controverting
the obligation of such treaties, they have made all the requisite provisions for car-
rying them into effect. - -
There is reason to believe that this construction agrees with the opinions en-
tertained by the state conventions, when they were deliberating on the constitution;
especially by those who objected to it, because there was not required in commer-
cial treaties the consent of two-thirds of the whole number of the members of the
Senate, instead of two-thirds of the Senators present, and because in treaties res-
pecting territorial and certain other rights and claims, the concurrence of three-
fourths of the whole number of the members of both Houses respectively was not
made necessary.
It is a fact declared by the General Convention, and universally understood,
that the constitution of the United States was the result of a spirit of amity and mutu-
al concession. And it is well known that under this influence, the smaller states were
admitted to an equal representation in the Senate, with the larger States; and this
branch of the government was invested with great powers; for on the equal par-
ticipation of those powers the sovereignty and political safety of the smaller
States were deemed essentially to depend.
If other proofs than these, and the plain letter of the constitution itself, be
necessary to ascertain the point under consideration, they may be found in the
journals of the General Convention, which I have deposited in the office of the
Department of State. In those journals it will appear that a proposition was
made “ that no treaty should be binding on the United States which was not rati-
by a law;” and that the proposition was explicitly rejected.
As, therefore, it is perfectly clear to my understanding, that the assent of the
House of Representatives is not necessary to the validity of a treaty, as the trea-
ty with Great Britain exhibits, in itself, all the objects requiring legislative pro-
vision, and on these the papers called for can throw no light; and as it is essen-
tial to the due administration of the government, that the boundaries fixed by
the constitution between the different deparments, should be preserved—a just re-
gard to the constitution, and to the duty of my office, under all the circumstances
of this case, forbid a compliance with your request. GEO. WASHINGTON.
G. Morris, 1793] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 52 f
80. To the Minister Plenipotentiary of Great Britain.
Representation on the Western Posts.
Philadelphia, June 19, 1793. Sir, I had the honour to address you a letter,
on the 29th of May was twelvemonth, on the articles still unexecuted of the treaty
of peace between the two nations. The subject was extensive and important, and
therefore rendered a certain degree of delay, in the reply, to be expected. But it
has become such, as naturally to generate disquietude. The interest we have in
the western posts, the blood and treasure which their detention costs us daily, can-
not but produce a correspondent anxiety on our part. Permit me, therefore, to ask,
when may I expect the honour of a reply to my letter, and to assure you of the sen-
timents of respect, with which I have the honor to be, &c. TH: JEFFERSON.
81. Geo. Hammond to Th; Jefferson Secretary of State.
Western Posts.
Phila. June 20, 1793. Sir, There is one passage in your letter of yesterday,
sir, of which it becomes me to take some notice.—The passage I allude to is that
wherein you mention “the blood and treasure which the detention of the western
posts costs the United States daily.” I cannot easily conjecture the motives in .
which this declaration has originated. After the evidence that this government
has repeatedly received of the strict neutrality observed by the king’s governors
of Canada, during the present contest between the United States and the Indians,
and of the disposition of those officers to facilitate, as far as may be in their power,
any negociations for peace, I will not for a moment, imagine, that the expression
I have cited was intended to convey the insinuation of their having pursued a dif-
ferent conduct, or that it had any reference to those assertions, which have
been lately disseminated, with more than usual industry, through the public prints
in this country,that the western posts have been used,by the government of Canada,
as the medium of supplying military stores to the Indians now engaged in war
with the United States.
I can assure you, sir, that if the delay on the part of my country, in the execu-
tion of certain articles of the treaty of peace, is such as to create disquietude in this:
government, I also experience similar impressions with respect to those articles
which have, hitherto, not been carried into effect by the United States; as I am
perpetually receiving complaints from the British creditors, and their agents in this
country, or if their inability to procure legal redress in any of the courts of law in
one or two of the southern states; in which states the greatest part of the debt re-
maining due to the subjects of Great Britain still continues to existin the same con-
dition as that in which it was at the conclusion of the war.
I have the honor to be, &c. GEO: HAMMOND.
82. T. Jefferson to G. Morris, at Paris.
Remonstrance to the French Government on M. Genet’s illegal proceedings in the U. S. Ext.
Philadelphia, August 16, 1793. Sir, The violation of all the laws of
order and morality which bind mankind together, would be an unacceptable
offering to a just nation. Recurring then only to recent things, after so af.
flicting a libel, we recollect with satisfaction that in the course of two years, by un-
ceasing exertions, we paid up seven years arrearages and instalments of our debt
66
522 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [Ongenet's Conduct,
to France, which the inefficacy of our first form of government had suffered to be ac-
cumulating: that pressing on still to the entire fulfilment of our engagementss, we
have facilitated to Mr Genet the effect of the instalments of the present year, to
enable him to send relief to his fellow citizens in France, threatened with famine;
that in the first moment of the insurrection which threatened the colony of St. Do-
mingo, we stepped forward to their relief with arms and money, taking freely on
ourselves the risk of an unauthorized aid, when delay would have been denial; that
we have received, according to our best abilities, the wretched fugitives from the
catastrophe of the principal town of that colony, who escaping from the swords and
flames of civil war, threw themselves on us naked and houseless, without food or
friends, money or other means, their faculties lost and absorbed in the depth of their
distresses; that the exclusive admission to sell here the prizes made by France on
her enemies, in the present war, though unstipulated in our treaties, and unfounded
in her own practice, or in that of other nations, as we believe; the spirit manifested
by the late grand jury in their proceedings against those who had aided the enemies
of France with arms and implements of war; the expression of attachment to his
nation, with which Mr Genet was welcomed, on his arrival and journey from south
to north, and our long forbearance under his gross usurpations and outrages of the
laws and authority of our country, do not bespeak the partialities intimated in his
letters. And for these things he rewards us by endeavors to excite discord and dis-
trust between our citizens and those whom they have entrusted with their govern-
ment; between the different branches of our government; between our nation and
his. But none of these things, we hope, will be found in his power. That friend-
ship, which dictates to us to bear with his conduct yet awhile, lest the interest of
his nation here should suffer injury, will hasten them to replace an agent, whose
dispositions are such a misrepresentation of theirs, and whose continuance here is
inconsistent with order, peace, respect, and that friendly correspondence which we
hope will ever subsist between the two nations. His government will see too that
that the case is pressing. That it is impossible for two sovereign and independent
authorities to be going on within our territory, at the same time, without collision.
They will foresee that if Mr Genet perseveres in his proceedings, the consequences
would be so hazardous to us, the example so humiliating and pernicious, that we
may be forced even to suspend his functions before a successor can arrive to continue
them. If our citizens have not already been shedding each others blood, it is not
owing to the moderation of Mr Genet, but to the forbearance of the government.—
It is well known that if the authority of the laws had been resorted to, to stop the
Little Democrat, its officers and agents were to have been resisted by the crew of
the vessel, consisting partly of American citizens. Such events are too serious, too
possible, to be left to hazard, or to what is worse than hazard, the will of an agent
whose designs are so mysterious. Lay the case then immediately before his go-
vernment; accompanying it with assurances, which cannot be stronger than true,
that our friendship for the nation is constant and unabating; that, faithful to our
treaties, we have fulfilled them in every point to the best of our understanding; that
if in any thing, however, we have construed them amiss, we are ready to enter into
candid explanations, and to do whatever we can be convinced is right; that in op-
posing the extravagances of an agent, whose character they seem not sufficiently to
C. C. Pinckney, 1796] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 523
have known, we have been urged by motives of duty to ourselves, and justice to
others, which cannot but be approved by those who are just themselves; and, final-
ly, that, after independence and self-government, there is nothing we more sincere-
ly wish than perpetual friendship with them. I have the honor to be, &.
TH: JEFFERSON.
83. Opinion of the Secretary of State, JMr Randolph, in 1793,
On the hostile armament, organized in Kentucky, against Louisiana. Extract.
That foreigners should meddle in the affairs of a government where they
happen to be, has scarcely ever been tolerated, and is often very severely punish-
ed. That foreigners should point the force of a nation against its will, to objects
of hostility, is an invasion of its dignity, its tranquillity, and even safety. Upon
no principle can the individuals on whom such guilt shall be fixed, bid the govern-
ment to wait until their numbers shall defy the ordinary animadversions of law,
and until they are incapable of being subdued by the force of arms. Nor is this
offence of foreigners expiated or lessened by an appeal to a presumed right in the
citizens of Kentucky to enlist under such banners without the approbation of their
country. In a government instituted for the happiness of the whole, with a clear
delineation of the channels in which the authority derived from them, must flow,
can a part only of the citizens wrest the sword from the hands of those magistrates,
whom the whole have invested with the direction of military power! They may,
it is true, leave their country, they may take arms and provisions with them, but
if these acts be done not on the ground of mere personal liberty, but of being re-
tained in a foreign service for purposes of enmity against another people, satisfac-
tion will be demanded, and the state, to which they belong, cannot connive at their
conduct without hazarding a rupture. The laws have rendered it lawful for the
President, in case of invasion, to call forth the militia, or to issue his orders for
that purpose to such officer of the militia as he shall think proper. They have
empowered him to call forth the militia of one state for the suppression of an insur-
rection in another, under certain circumstances, and to subdue by the militia any
combinations against the laws which may be too powerful for ordinary judicial
proceedings.
84. General Pinckney to the Secretary of State.
Non-reception of the American Minister by the French Directory. Extract.
Paris, Dec. 20th, 1796. M. De la Croix on the 21st Frimaire, wrote to Mr.
Monroe, and informed him, “ that he had laid before the directory, the copy of his
letters of recall, and of the letters of credence of M. Pinckney, whom the Presi-
dent of the United States had named to succeed him in quality of minister pleni-
potentiary of the said states near the French Republic.” From the character with
which I was invested, must be apparent both to the directory and to the minister
of foreign affairs, and that in that character, I was entitled to the protection of the
laws of nations, whether the directory received me or not: If they permitted me to
remain until I heard from my government, I was under the protection of those laws:
If they ordered me to quit the territories of the Republic, I was still entitled to
letters of safe conduct, and passports on my journey out; that this was the case
even with Ministers of belligerent powers, much more ought it to apply between
us who were at peace. He said, supposing M. De la Croix had been mistaken in
524, DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [T. Pickering, 1797.
having desired my letters of credence, in seeing me, in his laying those letters of
credence before the directory, such mistake of the minister could not be binding on
the directory. I replied that it was impossible for me to admit that the minister
of foreign affairs had committed a mistake in his official duty; he was held forth
to the world as minister, all his acts must be accredited as performed within the
line of his duty and under a competent authority; and that his letter to Mr Monroe,
showed he was desirous that the established usage should be complied with. He
said he did not allege that there was a mistake; he had only for argument sake,
urged a supposition which might be unfounded; that he would communicate what
I mentioned to M. De la Croix; I desired him at the same time to inform De la
Croix, that I requested whatever further passed might be in writing, that no mis-
takes might happen, by verbal communication, and that I might know explicitly,
what were the intentions of the directory. Since this conversation I have not
heard from the directory, or any of the ministers or agents. C. C. PINCKNEY.
85. Mr C. C. Pinckney to the Secretary of State.
Disclosing an attempt, by a lady, to procure a gratuity from the American Ministers, for the
restoration of Friendship between France and the United States. Extract.
Paris, December 21, 1797. On the twentieth of December, a lady” who is
well acquainted with M. Telleyrand, expressed to me her concern, that we were
still in so unsettled a situation: “But,” adds she, “why will not you lend us
money? If you would but make us a loan, all matters would be adjusted:” and,
she added, “When you were contending for your revolution, we lent you mo-
ney.” I mentioned the very great difference there was between the situation of
the two countries at that period and the present; and the very different circum-
stances under which the loan was made us, and the loan was now demanded from
us. She replied, “We do not make a demand; we think if more delicate that
the offer should come from you: but M. Talleyrand has mentioned to me (who am
surely not in his confidence) the necessity of your making us a loan: and I know
that he has mentioned it to two or three others; and that you have been informed
of it; and I will assure you, that if you remain here six months longer, you would
not advance a single step further in your negotiations, without a loan.” “If that
is the case,” I replied, “we may as well go away now.” “Why that possibly,”
said she, “might lead to a rupture, which you had better avoid; for we know we
have a very considerable party in America, who are strongly in our interest.”
There is no occasion to enter into a further detail of the conversation. I have only
noted this part of it as expressive of what I believe (as far as relates to the loan,
and a party in America in their favor) to be the sentiments of the French govern-
ment with regard to us. CHARLES COTESWORTH PINCRNEY.
86. Secretary of State to Mr Pinckney, at Paris.
French depredations on Neutrals.-Modification of the Mutual Guaranty, &c.—Belligerents
leaving Ports, &c. Extract.
Philadelphia, June 12, 1797. Although the reparation for losses, sustained
by the citizens of the United States, in consequence of irregular or illegal captures,
or condemnations, or forcible seizures, or detentions, is of very high importance,
* Understood to be Mad. de Villette, the Belle et Bonne of Voltaire—connected with the
W. X. Y. Z. conversations.
Depredºm on Neutrals] DIPLOMATIG WRITING. 525
and is to be pressed with the greatest earnestness, yet it is not to be insisted on as
an indispensable condition of the proposed treaty. You are not, however, to re-
nounce those claims of our citizens, nor to stipulate that they be assumed by the
United States, as a loan to the French government.
In respect to the alterations of the commercial treaty with France in the two
cases, which have been principal subjects of complaint on her part, viz. ene-
mies’ property in neutral ships, and the articles contraband of war; although France
can have no right to claim the annulling of stipulations at the moment, when by
both parties they were originally intended to operate, yet, if the French govern-
ment presses for alterations, the President has no difficulty in substituting the
principles of the law of nations, as stated in the 17th and 18th articles of our com-
mercial treaty with Great Britain, to those of the 23d and 24th articles of our com-
mercial treaty with France; and in respect to provisions and other articles, not
usually deemed contraband, you are to agree only on a temporary compromise, like
that in the 18th article of the British treaty, and of the same duration. If, however,
in order to satisfy France, now she is at war, we change the two important articles
before mentioned, then the 14th article of the French treaty, which subjects the
property of the neutral nation, found on board enemies’ ships, to capture and con-
demnation, must of course be abolished.—Great Britain has often claimed a right,
and practised upon it, to prohibit neutral nations carrying on a commerce with her
enemies, which has not been allowed in time of peace. On this head, it will be
desirable, to come to an explicit understanding with France, and, if possible, to
obviate the claim by an express stipulation.
Such extensive depredations have been committed on the commerce of neutrals,
and especially of the United States, by the citizens of France, under pretence that
her enemies (particularly Great Britain) have done the same things, it will be
desirable to have it explicitly stipulated, that the conduct of an enemy towards a
neutral power shall not authorize or excuse the other belligerent power in any
departure from the law of nations, or the stipulations of the treaty: especially that,
the vessels of the neutral nation shall never be captured, or detained, or their pro-
perty confiscated, or injured, because bound to or from an enemy’s port, except the
case of a blockaded port, the entering into which may be prevented, according to
the known rule of the law of nations. And it may be expedient to define a block-
aded place or port to be one, actually invested by land, or naval forces, or both,
and that no declaration of a blockade shall have any effect without such actual
investment. As a substitute for the reciprocal guaranty may be proposed a mutu-
al renunciation of the same territories and possessions, that were subjects of the
guaranty and renunciation in the sixth and eleventh articles of the treaty of alliance.
Such a renunciation, on our part, would obviate the reason assigned in the instruc-
tion to M. Genet, before cited, of future danger from the rapidly growing power of
the United States. But if France insists on the mutual guaranty, it will be neces-
sary to aim at some modification of it. The existing engagement is of that kind,
which, by writers on the law of nations, is called a general guaranty; of course
the casus foederis can never occur except in a defensive war. The nature of this
obligation is understood to be, that when a war, really and truly defensive, exists,
the engaging nation is bound to furnish an effectual and adequate defence in co-ope.
b26 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [T. Pickering,1799.
ration with the power attacked: whence it follows, that the nation may be required
in some circumstances to bring forward its whole force. On the part of the United
States, instead of troops or ships of war, it will be convenient to stipulate for a
moderate sum of money, or quantity of provisions, at the option of France. The
provisions to be delivered at our own ports in any future defensive wars. The
sum of money, or its value in provisions, ought not to exceed two hundred thou-
sand dollars a year during any such wars. The reciprocal stipulation, on the
part of France, may be to furnish annually the like sum of money, or an equivalent
in military stores, and clothing for troops, at the option of the United States, to
be delivered in the ports of France. Particular caution, however, must be used
in discussing this subject, not to admit any claims on the ground of the guaranty
in relation to the existing war, as we do not allow that the casus foederis applies
to it. And if the war should continue after your arrival in France, and the ques-
tion of the guaranty should not be mentioned on her part, you may yourselves, be si-
lent on the subject, if you deem it most prudent. The ports of the United States being
frequented by the vesels of different belligerent powers, it became necessary to
regulate the times of their sailing. The President, therefore, adopted what was
understood to be the received rule in Europe, and ordered, that after the sailing of
a vessel of one of the belligerent powers, twenty-four hours should elapse before
an armed vessel of the enemy of the former should set sail. This rule has been
duly respected by the armed vessels of France and Great Britain.
On the supposition, that a treaty will be negotiated to alter and amend the
treaties, which now exist between France and the United States, the following
leading principles, to govern the negotiation, are subjoined; that no aid be stip-
ulated in favor of France during the present war. That no engagement be made
inconsistent with the obligations of any prior treaty. That no stipulation be made
under colour of which tribunals can be established within our jurisdiction, or per-
sonal privileges claimed by French citizens, incompatible with the complete sove-
reignty and independence of the United States, in matters of policy commerce and
government. T. PICKERING.
87. From the Secretary of State to Judge Bee.
Surrender of Thos. Nash, alias Jonathan Robbins, a British Subject, charged with Mutiny.
Department of State, Philadelphia, June 3d, 1799.-Sir, Mr Liston, the
minister of his Britannic majesty, has requested, that Thomas Nash, who was a
seaman on board the British frigate Hermoine, and who he is informed is now a
prisoner in the jail of Charleston, should be delivered up. I have stated the mat-
ter to the President of the United States. He considers an offence committed on
board a public ship of war, on the high seas, to have been committed within the
jurisdiction of the nation to whom the ship belongs. Nash, is charged, it is un-
derstood, with piracy and murder, committed by him, on board the abovementioned
British frigate, on the high seas, and consequently “within the jurisdiction” of
his Britannic majesty; and therefore, by the 27th article of the treaty of amity
with Great Britain, Nash ought to be delivered up, as requested by the British
minister, provided such evidence of his criminality be produced, as by the laws of
the United States, or of South Carolina, would justify his apprehension and com-
mitment for trial, if the offence has been committed within the jurisdiction of the
JMadison, 1804] i)IPLOMATIC WRITING. 527
United States. The President has in consequence hereof authorized me to com-
municate to you “his advice and request” that Thomas Nash may be delivered up
to the Consul or other agent of Great Britain, who shall appear to receive him.
I have the honor to be, &c. TIMOTHY PICKERING.
The Honorable Thomas Bee, Esq. judge of the district of South Carolina.
NoTE. Nash was, according to this request, delivered up to the British authorities.
88. From the Secretary of State, J JMadison, to J. Monroe, at London.
Right of Search—Impressment. Extract,
Washington, January 5, 1804. We consider a neutral flag, on the high seas,
a safeguard to those sailing under it. Great Britain, on the contrary, asserts a
right to search for, and seize her own subjects; and under that cover, as cannot but
happen, are often seized and taken off, citizens of the United States, and citizens
or subjects of other neutral countries, navigating the high seas, under the protec-
tion of the American flag.
Were the right of Great Britain, in this case, not denied, the abuses flowing
from it, would justify the United States in claiming and expecting a discontinuance
of its exercise. But the right is denied, and on the best grounds.
Although Great Britain has not yet adopted, in the same latitude with most
other nations, the immunities of a neutral flag, she will not deny the general free-
dom of the high seas, and of neutral vessels navigating them, with such exceptions
only as are annexed to it by the law of nations. She must produce then such an
exception in the law of nations, in favor of the right she contends for. But in
what written and received authority will she find it? In what usage except her
own will it be found? She will find in both, that a neutral vessel does not protect
certain objects denominated contraband of war, including enemies serving in the
war, nor articles going into a blockaded port, nor, as she has maintained, and as:
we have not contested, enemy’s property of any kind. But no where will she
find an exception to this freedom of the seas, and of neutral flag, which justifies
the taking away of any person, not an enemy, in military service, found on board
a-neutral vessel.
If treaties, British as well as others, are to be consulted on this subject, it will
equally appear, that no countenance to the practice can be found in them. Whilst
they admit a contraband of war, by enumerating its articles, and the effect of a real
blockade by defining it, in no instance do they affirm or imply a right in any so-
vereign to enforce his claims to the allegiance of his subjects, on board neutral
vessels on the high seas. On the contrary, whenever a belligerent claim against
persons on board a neutral vessel, is referred to in treaties, enemies in military
service alone are excepted from the general immunity of persons in that situation;
and this exception confirms the immunity of those who are not included in it.
89. Mr Madison, Secretary of State, to Mr Monroe, at London.
lłritish East and West India Commerce.—Admission of Consuls. Extract.
Washington, March 5th, 1804. The treaty of 1794, so far as it relates to
commerce, having expired on the 1st day of October last, (that being the date of
the preliminary articles) the commercial intercourse between the two countries is
left to the regulations which the parties separately may think fit to establish. It
528 DIPLOMATIC WRITING iſ. Madison, 1807.
may be expected, however, that the friendship and mutual interest between them
will produce a continuance on both sides, of such regulations as are just and equal,
and an accommodation to those principles of such as, on either side, are otherwise
than just and equal. On the side of the United States, their commercial regula-
tions place Great Britain in every respect, on the footing of the most favored na-
tion. Great Britain cannot say as much with respect to hers. One instance at
least is explained in a letter from this Department to Mr King, of which a copy is
enclosed, in which you will see, that, although the act of parliament to which it
refers be no longer a breach of stipulation, it is not less a violation of equality than
it is of sound policy. With respect to the British West Indies, it is not known
that the United States are on a worse footing than other nations, whatever want of
reciprocity there may be to the liberal regulations of the United States. With
respect to the East India trade, it is understood that the treaty of 1794, by denying
to American vessels both the coasting branch of it, and a direct intercourse between
India and foreign countries, other than American, the United States were in both
instances placed on a worse footing than other nations, and even on a worse foot-
ing than they themselves enjoyed prior to the treaty. The expiration of the treaty,
and the friendly and favorable equality allowed by the United States to Great
Britain in every branch of their trade, ought certainly to restore what the treaty
suspended.
In my letter of I stated the reasonableness of admitting American
consuls in the dependencies of Great Britain, whenever and wherever the Ameri-
can commerce should be admitted. The principle urged in this case is applicable
to the East as well as to the West Indies.—During the last war an American
agent was informally at least allowed to reside at Calcutta and take care of the
trade of his countrymen. Mr Jacob Lewis, who was appointed to succeed him,
proceeded to London on his way thither, but peace having intervened, his appli-
cation for an exeguatur was refused. It is of real importance to our trade with
that country, that such a functionary should be permitted to reside in it; the more
so if it be true that the rule forbidding foreign factors to do so be enforced there.
Be so good as to sound the British government on this subject, and communicate
its sentiments for the information of the President.
90. Mr JMadison to Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, at London.
Blockades. Extract. Department of State, February 3, 1807.
Sir, On this subject, it is fortunate that G.Britain has already, in a formal com-
munication, admitted the principle for which we contend. It will be only necessary,
therefore, to hold her to the true sense of her own act. The words of the commu-
nication are, that vessels must be warned not to enter.” The term warn, techni-
cally imports a distinction between an individual notice to vessels, and a general
notice by proclamation, or diplomatic communication; and the terms not to enter,
equally distinguishes a notice at, or very near, the blockaded port, from a notice
directed against the original destination or the apparent intention of a vessel, no-
wise approaching such a port. -
Marginal Jurisdiction on the High Seas.
There could surely be no pretext for allowing less than a marine league from
the shore, that being the narrowest allowance found in any authorities on the law.
Blockades.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 529
of nations. If any nation can fairly claim a greater extent, the United States have
pleas which cannot be rejected; and if any nation is more particularly bound by
its own example not to contest our claim, Great Britain must be so by the extent
of her own claims to jurisdiction on the seas which surround her. It is hoped, at
least, that within the extent of one league you will be able to obtain an effectual
prohibition of British ships of war from repeating the irregularities which have
so much vexed our commerce, and provoked the public resentment; and against
which an article in your instructions emphatically provides. It cannot be too
earnestly pressed on the British government, that in applying the remedy copied
from regulations heretofore enforced against a violation of the neutral rights of
British harbours and coasts, nothing more will be done than what is essential to
the preservation of harmony between the two nations.
91. Mr Madison to Mr Thornton, British Chargé des Affaires.
- Blockadés.
Department of State, October 27, 1803. Sir, It will not escape your atten-
tion, that commodore Hood’s letter is dated no less than three months before it
could have the effect of a notification, [of Blockade] and that besides this remarka-
ble delay, the alleged blockade is computed from a date more than one month prior
to that of the letter itself. But these circumstances, however important it may be,
do not constitute the main objection to the proceeding of the British commander.—
His letter, instead of stating that a particular port or ports were blockaded, by a
force actually before them, declares, generally, two entire and considerable islands
to be in a state of blockade. It can never be admitted that the trade of a neutral
nation in articles not contraband can be legally obstructed to any place not actually
blockaded, or that any notification or proclamation can be of force, unless accom-
panied with an actual blockade. The law of nations is perhaps more clear on no
other point than of that of a seige or blockade, such as will justify a belligerent na-
tion in restraining the trade of neutrals. Every term, used in defining the case,
imports the presence and position of a force, rendering access to the prohibited place
manifestly difficult and dangerous. Every jurist of reputation, who treats with
precision this branch of the law of nations, refers to an actual and particular block-
ade. Not a single treaty can be found which undertakes to define a blockade, in
which the definition does not exclude a general or nominal blockade,by limiting it to
the case of a sufficient force so disposed as to amount to an actual and particular
blockade. To a number of such treaties Great Britain is a party. Not to multiply
references on the subject, I confine myself to the fourth article of the convention,
of June, 1801, between Great Britian and Russia, which having been entered into
for the avowed purpose “of settling an invariable determination of their principles upon
the rights of neutrality,” must necessarily be considered as a solemn recognition of an
existing and general principle and right, not as a stipulation of any new principle
or right limited to the parties themselves. The article is in the words following:
“That in order to determine what characterizes a blockaded port, that denomination
is given only to a port where there is, by the dispositions of the power which at-
tacks it with ships stationary or sufficiently near, an evident danger of entering.”
It cannot be necessary to dwell on the inconsistency of the kind of blockade declar-
ed by * Hood, with the principle laid down concerning the rights of neu-
530 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Blockades.
trality; or on the consequences of the principle on which a blockade of whole islands
by a few ships is founded, to the commerce and interests of neutral nations.
If the islands of Martinique and Guadaloupe,” the latter not less than two
hundred and fifty, and the former nearly one hundred and fifty miles in circumfe-
rence, and each containing a variety of ports, can be blockaded by detachments
from a commodore's squadron, it is evident that a very inconsiderable portion of
the British fleet may blockade all the maritime countries with which she is at war.
In a word such a principle completely sacrifices the rights of neutral commerce
to the pleasure or the policy of the parties at war. But it deserves to be particu-
larly remarked, that a power, to proclaim general blockades, or any blockade not
formed by the real presence of a sufficient force, to be exercised by officers at a
distance from the control of their government, and deeply interested in enlarging
the field of captures which they are to share, offers a temptation that must often
aggravate the evils incident to the principle itself. You will infer, sir, from these
observations, the serious Iight in which the President regards the proceeding
which is the subject of them; and will perceive the grounds on which the injuries
accruing from it to our commerce, will constitute just claims of indemnification
from the British government. To diminish the extent of these injuries as much
as possible, and to guard the good understanding and friendly relations of every sort
which are so desirable to both nations, against the tendency of such measures,
will, I venture to assure myself, be sufficient motive with you to employ the in-
terpositions with commodore Hood, which you may judge best adapted to the na-
ture of the case. I have the honor to be, &c. JAMES MADISON.
Edward Thornton, Esq. &c. &c. &c.
92. Mr Smith to JMr Pinkney, at London.
Paper Blockades.
Department of State, July 19, 1810. Sir From the complexion of the British
prints not to mention other considerations, the paper blockades may not be
abandoned. There is hence a prospect that the United States may be brought to
issue with Great Britain on the legality of such blockades. In such case, as it can-
not be expected that the United States, founded as they are in law and in right, can
acquiesce in the validity of the British practice; it lies with the British government
to remove the difficulty. In addition to the considerations heretofore stated to you
in former letters, you may bring to the view of the British government the retro-
spective operation of those diplomatic notifications of blockades, which consider a
notice to the minister as a notice to his government, and to the merchants, who are
at a distance of three thousand miles. It will recur to your recollection, that the pres-
ent ministry, in the debates of parliament, in opposition to the authors of the or-
ders of January, 1807, denied that they were warranted by the law of nations. The
analogy between these orders and the blockade of May, 1806, in so far as both re-
late to a trade between enemy ports, furnishes an appeal to the consistency of those
now in office, and an answer to attempts by them to vindicate the legality of that
blockade.
*NotE—Extract. Brit.Adm. Office, Jan. 5, 1804. Sir, I have their lordships’ commands.
to acquaint you, that they have sent orders to Com. Hood, not to consider any blockade of
Martinique and Guadaloupe, as existing, unless in respect of particular ports which may be
actually invested, and then not to capture vessels bound to such ports, unless they shall pre-
viously have been warned not to enter them. I am, &c. E. NEPEAN. G. Hammond, Esq.
Blockades.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 531
You may refer the British government to the characteristic definition of a
blockaded port, as set forth in their treaty with Russia, of June, 1801, the preamble
of which declares, that one of its objects was to settle “an invariable determination
of their principles upon the rights of neutrality.” * * * * *
Should the British government unexpectedly resort to the pretext of an acqui-
esence on the part of the United States in their practice, it may be remarked, that
prior to, as well as during the present administration, this government has invaria-
bly protested against such pretensions; and in addition to other instances heretofore
communicated to you, I herewith transmit to you an extract of a letter to the depart-
ment of state, of July 15, 1799, from Mr King, our minister at London, and also
such part of Mr Marshall’s letter to him, of the 20th September, 1800, as relates
to the subject of blockades. And it may moreover beurged, that the principle now
contended for by the United States was maintained against others, as well as Great
Britain, as appears from the accompanying copy of the letter to our minister at
Madrid in the year 1801. To this principle the United States also adhered when
a belligerent, as in the case of the blockade of Tripoli, as will be seen by the an-
nexed letter from the navy department. You will press on the justice, friendship
and policy of Great Britain,such a course of proceeding as will obviate the dilemma
resulting to the United States from a refusal to put an end to the paper blockades,
as well as the orders in council. I have the honour to be, &c. R. SMITH.
William Pinkney, &c. &c. &c.
93. Extract of a letter from JMr King to Lord Grenville.
Interpretation of the law of Blockade.
Downing Street, London, May 23, 1799. It seems scarcely necessary to ob-
serve, that the presence of a competent force is essential to Sonstitute a blockade;
and although it is usual for the belligerent to give notice to neutral nations when
he institutes a blockade, it is not customary to give any notice of its discontinuance;
and that,consequently,the presence of the blockading force is the natural criterion
by which the neutral is enabled to ascertain the existence of the blockade; in like
manner as the actual investment of a beseiged place is the only evidence by which
we decide whether the seige is continued or raised. A seige may be commen-
ced, raised, recommenced, and raised again, but its existence at any precise time
must always depend upon the fact of the presence of an investing army. This
interpretation of the law of blockade is of peculiar importance to nations situated
at a great distance from each other, and between whom a considerable length of
time is necessary to send and receive information.
94. Mr Marshall, Secretary of State, to Mr King, at London.
Principle of Blockade.
September 20, 1800. 2ndly. The right to confiscate vessels bound to a
blockaded port, has been unreasonably extended to cases not coming within the
rule, as heretofore adopted.
On principle it might well be questioned, whether this rule can be applied to
a place not completely invested by land as well as by sea. If we examine the
reasoning on which is founded the right to intercept and confiscate supplies design-
ed for a blockaded town, it will be difficult to resist the conviction; that its exten-
sion to towns invested by sea only is an unjustifiable encroachment on the rights of
neutrals. But it is not of this departure from principle, a depapture which has
532 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [R. Smith, 1804.
received some sanction from practice, that we mean to complain. It is, that ports,
not effectually blockaded by a force capable of completely investing them, have
yet been in a state of blockade, and vessels attempting to enter therein have been
seized, and on that account confiscated. -
This is a vexation proceeding directly from the government, and which may
be carried, if not resisted, to a very injurious extent. Our merchants have greatly
complained of it with respect to Cadiz and the ports of Holland.
If the effectiveness of the blockade be dispensed with, then every port of all the
belligerent powers may, at all times, be declared in that state, and the commerce of
neutrals be thereby subjected to universal capture. But if this principle be strictly
adhered to, the capacity to blockade will be limited by the naval force of the belli-
gerent, and, of consequence, the mischief to neutral commerce cannot be very ex-
tensive. It is, therefore, of the last importance to neutrals, that this principle be
maintained unimpared. -
I observe that you have pressed this reasoning on the British minister, who
replies, that an occasional absence of a fleet from a blockaded port ought not to
change the state of the place.
Whatever force this observation may be entitled to, where that occasional ab-
sence has been produced by accident, as a storm, which for a moment blows off the
the fleet, and forces it from its station, which station it immediately resumes, I am
persuaded, that where a part of the fleet is applied, though only for a time, to other
objects, or comes into port, the very principle, requiring an effective blockade, which
is, that the mischief can then only be co-extensive with the naval force of the belli-
gerent, requires, that during such temporary absence the commerce of neutrals to the
place should be free.” -
95. Mr Smith, Secretary of the Navy, to Commodore Preble.
What characterizes a Blockade. Extract.
Navy Department, Feb. 4, 1804. Sir, I am charged by the President to state
to you, what, in his opinion, characterizes a blockade. I have, therefore, to inform
you, that the trade of a neutral, in articles not contraband, cannot be rightfully ob-
structed to any port, not actually blockaded by a force so disposed before it, as to
create an evident danger of entering it, Whenever, therefore, you shall have thus
formed a blockade of the port of Tripoli, you will have a right to prevent any ves-
sel from entering it, and to capture for adjudication, any vessel that shall attempt
to enter the same, with a knowledge of the existence of the blockade. You will
however, not take as prize any vessel, attempting to enter the port of Tripoli,
without such knowledge; but in every case of an attempt to enter, without a pre-
vious knowledge of the existence of the blockade, you will give the commanding
officer of such vessel notice of such blockade, and forewarn him from entering.—
And if, after such a notification, such vessel should again attempt to enter the same
port, you will be justifiable in sending her into port for adjudication. You will,
sir, hence perceive that you are to consider your circular communication to the
neutral powers, not as an evidence that every person attempting to enter has pre-
vious knowledge of the blockade, but merely as a friendly notification to them of
the blockade, in order that they might make the necessary arrangements for the
discontinuance of all commerce with such blockaded ports.
Commodore Preble. - I am, &c. &c. R. SMITH,
Livingston, 1803] DIPLOMATIC wRITING, 533
96. James Madison to Messrs. Livingston & Monroe, at Paris.
From the Instructions for the Purchase of the Territory of Louisiana. Extract.
Washington, March 2, 1803. If, France shall inflexibly insist on an express
recognition to the above effect, (to wit: the right to exclude all nations, other than
the United States, from navigating the Mississippi,) it will be better to acquiesce
in it, than to lose the opportunity of fixing an arrangement, in other respects satis-
factory, taking care to put the recognition into a form, not inconsistent with our trea-
ties with Great Britain, or with an explanatory article, that may not improbably
be desired by her.” “It is hoped that the idea of a guaranty of the country
West of the Mississippi reserved to France may not be brought into the negotia-
tion. Should France propose such a stipulation, it will be expedient to avade it, if
possible, as more likely to be a source of disagreeable questions between the par-
ties concerning the actual casus foederis, than of real advantage to France. There
will be less reason in the demand of such an article, as the United States would
set little value on a guaranty of any part of their territory, and consequently there
would be no just reciprocity in it. Should France, notwithstanding these consi-
derations, make a guaranty an essential point, it will be better to accede to it, than
to abandon the object of the negotiation, mitigating the evil, as much as possible,
by requiring for the casus foederis a great and manifest danger, threatened to the
territory guarantied, and by substituting for an indefinite succour, or even a definite
succour, in military force a fixed sum of money payable at the Treasury of the
United States.”—“The instructions, thus far given, suppose that France may be
willing to cede to the United States the whole of the Island of New Orleans and
both the Floridas. As she may be inclined to dispose of a part or parts, and of
such only, it is proper for you to know, that the Floridas, together, are estimated
at one fourth the value of the whole Island of New Orleans, and East Florida at
half that of West Florida. In case of a partial cession, it is expected that the
regulations of every other kind, so far as they are onerous to the United States,
will be more favourably modified.”
97. Mr Livingston to the Secretary of State, on the Louisiana Purchase.
Disclosure of the Conversations. Extract.
Paris, April 11, 1803.−M. Talleyrand asked me this day, when pressing the
subject, whether we wished to have the whole of Louisiana. I told him no; that
our wishes extended only to New Orleans and the Floridas, that the policy of
France, however, should dictate.—He said, that if they gave New Orleans, the
rest would be of little value, and that he would wish to know, ‘what we would
give for the whole?' I told him it was a subject I had not thought upon, but I sup-
posed we should not object to twenty millions, provided our citizeus were paid. He
told me this was too low an offer—that he would be glad, I would reflect upon it
and tell him to-morrow. I told him that, as Mr Monroe would be in town in two
days, I would delay any further offer, until I had the pleasure of introducing him.
Paris, April 13, 1803. While we were taking coffee, the Minister [of the
Treasury, Marbois, came in, and after being some time in the room, we strolled
into the next room, when he told me, he heard that I had been at his house two
days before, when he was at St. Cloud; that he thought I might have some-
thing particular to say to him, and had taken the first opportunity to call on
534, DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Louisiana Purchase.
me. I saw that this was meant as an opening to one of those free conversations,
which I had frequently had with him. I accordingly began on the subject of the
debt, and related to him the extraordinary conduct of the minister, &c. He told
me, that this led to something important, that had been cursorily mentioned to him
at St. Cloud, but as my house was full of company, he thought I had better call
upon him any time before eleven that night. He went away, and a little after,
when Mr Monroe took leave, I followed him, he told me he wished me to repeat,
what I had said relative to M. Talleyrand’s requesting a proposition from me, as
to the purchase of Louisiana. I did so, and concluded with the extreme absurdity
of his evasions of that day, and stated the consequence of any delay on this subject,
as it would enable Britain to take possession, who would readily relinquish it to
us. He said that this proceeded upon a supposition of her making so successful a
war, as to be enabled to retain her conquests. I told him that it was probable, that
the same idea might suggest itself to the United States, in which case, it would be
their interest to contribute to render her successful, and I asked whether it was
prudent to throw us into her scale! This led to long discussions of no moment to
repeat; we returned to the point; he said that, what I had told him, led him to think,
that what the Consul had said to him on Sunday at St. Cloud (the day on which,
as I told you, the determination had been taken to sell) had more of earnest than
he thought at the time; that the Consul had asked him what news from England!
as he knew he read the papers attentively: he told him that he had seen in the Lon-
don papers the proposition for raising 50,000 men to take New Orleans; the Con-
sul said, he had seen it too, and had also seen, that something was said about
2,000,000 of dollars being to be disposed of among the people about him to bribe
them, &c. and then left him; that afterwards, when walking in the garden, the Con-
sul came again to him, and spoke to him about the troubles, that were excited in
America, and enquired how far I was satisfied with this last note.” “He (Marbois)
then took occasion to mention his sorrow that any cause of difference should exist
between our countries. The Consul told him in reply, ‘Well you have the charge
of the treasury, let them give you one hundred millions, and pay their own claims and
take the whole country.’ Seeing by my looks, that I was surprised at so extrava-
gant a demand, he added that he considered the demand as exorbitant, and had
told the first Consul that the thing was impossible; that we had not the means of
raising that. The Consul told him, we might borrow it. I now plainly saw the
whole business—first the Consul was disposed to sell; next he distrusted.Talleyrand
on account of the business of the supposed intention to bribe, and meant to put the
negociation into the hands of Marbois, whose character for integrity is established.
I told him that the United States were anxious to preserve peace with France, that
for that reason they wished to remove them to the west side of the Mississippi, that
we would be perfectly satisfied with New Orleans and the Floridas,and had no dispo-
sition to extend across the river, that of course we would not give any great sum for
the purchase, that he was right in his idea of the extreme exorbitancy of the de-
mand, which would not fall short of one hundred and twenty-five millions, that,
however, we would be ready to purchase, provided the sum was reduced to reason-
able limits; he then pressed me to name the sum. I told him that this was not
Worth while, because as he only treated the enquiry as a matter of curiosity, any
Paris, April 17, 1808.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 535
declarations of mine would have no effect. If a negociation was to be opened, we
should, Mr Monroe and myself, make the offer, after mature reflection. This com-
pelled him to declare, that though he was not authorized expressly to make the
inquiry from me, yet, that, if I would mention any sum, that came near the mark,
that could be accepted, he would communicate it to the First Consul. I told him
we had no sort of authority to go to a sum, that bore any proportion to what he
mentioned, but that as he, himself, considered the demand as too high, he would
oblige me by telling me, what he thought would be reasonable; he replied, that if
I would name sixty millions, and take upon us the American claims to the amount of
twenty more, he would try how far it would be accepted. I told him that it was in
vain to ask any thing, that was so greatly beyond our means; that true policy would
dictate to the First Consul not to press such a demand; that he must know, that it
would render the present government unpopular, and have a tendency, at the next
election, to throw the power into the hands of men, who were hostile to a
connexion with France, and that this would probably happen in the midst of a war.
I asked him, whether the few millions acquired at this expense would not be too
dearly bought? He frankly confessed, that he was of my sentiments, but that he
feared the Consul would not relax. I asked him to press this argument upon him,
together with the danger of seeing the country pass into the hands of Britain. I
told him that he had seen the ardour of the Americans to take it by force, and the
difficulty, with which they were restrained by the prudence of the President—that
he must easily see how much the hands of the war party would be strengthened,
when they learned that France was upon the eve of a rupture with England; he ad-
mitted the weight of all this, “but,” says he, “you know the temper of a youthful
conqueror; every thing he does is as rapid as lightning; we have only to speak to
him, as opportunity presents itself, perhaps in a crowd, when he bears no contradic-
tion. When I am alone with him, I can speak more freely, and he attends; but
this opportunity seldom happens, and is always accidental; try then, if you cannot
come up to my mark, consider the extent of the country, the exclusive navigation
of the river, and the importance of having no neighbour to dispute you—no war to
dread.’ I told him that I had considered all these as important considerations, but,
there was a point beyond which we could not go, and that fell far short of the
sum he mentioned.”
Paris, April 17, 1803. On waiting upon the minister, we found M. Marbois
there, who told me that he had come to communicate to the minister what had pass-
ed between us, and that he greatly regretted the not being able to bring us to such
an offer as he might mention to the first Consul. We were very graciously receiv-
ed by the minister, whom I pressed to obtain, as early a day as possible, for the
reception of Mr Monroe, as time pressed, and we were anxious to conclude our
business, for reasons arising out of the present disturbed state of America—he told
me, he would speak to the first Consul that night on the subject, and that he hoped
some person would be appointed to treat with us, even before Mr Monroe was
presented. After a little general conversation, we took leave in expectation, that
Mr Monroe would be presented this day,(Sunday) being a day of reception for the
civil officers of the government.
536 1) IPLOMATIC WRITING. [Livingston, 1803.
The next day, Mr Monroe and myself, after spending some time in consulta”
tion, determined to offer 50 millions, including our debts, but presumed it would
be best only to mention 40 in the first instance; this I accordingly did. In a con-
ference I had the 15th, with M. Marbois, he expressed great sorrow, that we could
not go beyond that sum, because he was sure that it would not be accepted, and
that, perhaps, the whole business would be defeated; which he the more feared,
as he had just received a note from the minister, indicative of the Consul’s not
being quite pleased, that he had so greatly lowered his original proposition. He
said that he saw our situation, and he knew there was a point beyond which we
could not go, with safety to ourselves or the President; but he wished us to ad-
vance to that point. He said that he would, if I wished, go that very day to St.
Cloud, and let me know the result. I reminded him of the Consul’s promise to
pay the debt. I placed in a stronger light his personal obligation on this subject,
and desired him to urge it as an additional reason to conclude an agreement, which
would facilitate the means of doing it. The next morning, which was yesterday,
I again called to see him, he told me that he had been to St. Cloud—that the
Consul received his proposition very coldly, and that I might consider the busi-
mess no longer in his hands, since he had given him no further powers—that he
had urged the Consul’s promise, relative to the debt, which he admitted, but said,
at the same time, he did not think it had exceeded three millions, though my let-
ter expressly mentioned twenty. He expressed great sorrow upon the occasion,
and advised me to press M. Talleyrand to present Mr Monroe the next day, (that
is this day) that he hoped, that if the Consul saw me, as he had a very particular
esteem for me, that he would renew the subject with me himself.
Paris, May 13, 1803. Extract. We found, as we advanced in the negotia-
tion, that M. Marbois was absolutely restricted to the disposition of the whole,
that he would treat for no less portion, and, of course, that it was useless to urge it.
On mature consideration, therefore, we finally concluded a treaty on the best terms
we could obtain for the whole.*
By this measure we have sought to carry into effect, to the utmost of our
power, the wise and benevolent policy of our government, on the principles laid
down in our instructions. The possession of the left bank of the river, had it
been attainable alone, would, it is true, have accomplished much in that respect;
but it is equally true, that it would have left much still to accomplish. By it our
people would have had an outlet to the ocean, in which no power would have a
right to disturb them; but while the other bank remained in possession of a foreign
power, circumstances might occur to make the neighbourhood of such power high-
ly injurious to us in many of our most important concerns. A divided jurisdic-
tion over the river might beget jealousies, discontents and dissentions, which the
wisest policy on our part could not prevent or control. With a train of colonial
governments established along the western bank, from the entrance of the river
far into the interior, under the command of the military men, it would be difficult
to preserve that state of things, which would be necessary to the peace and tran-
Tuillity of our country. A single act of a capricious, unfriendly or unprincipled
* See treaty, vol. 1. page 84.
£ouisiana Purchase.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 537
subaltern, might wound our best interests, violate our most unquestionable rights.
and involve us in war. But by this acquisition, which comprises within our limits,
this great river and all the streams, that empty into it from their sources to the
ocean, the apprehension of these disasters is banished, for ages, from the United
States. We adjust by it the only remaining known cause of variance with this
very powerful nation: we anticipate the discontent of the great rival of France,
who would probably have been wounded at any stipulation of a permanent nature,
which favored the latter, and which it would have been difficult to avoid, had she
retained the right bank. We cease to have a motive of urgency, at least, for in-
clining to one power to avert the unjust pressure of another. We separate our-
selves in a great measure from the European world and its concerns, especially
its wars, and intrigues; we make, in fine, a great stride to real and substantial in-
dependence, the good effect whereof will, we trust, be felt essentially aud exten-
sively in all our foreign and domestic relations. Without exciting the apprehen-
sions of any power, we take a more imposing attitude with respect to all. The
bond of our union will be strengthened, and its movements become more harmonious
by the increased parity of interest, which it will communicate to the several parts,
which compose it.
In deliberating on this subject in a financial view, wé were strongly impressed
with the idea, that while we had only a right of deposite, or, indeed while the
right bank remained in the possession of a foreign power, it was always to be expec-
ted that we should at some time or other, be involved in war on questions, resulting
from that cause. We were well satisfied, that any war would cost us more than here-
by is stipulated to be given for this territory; that none could produce a more favo-
rable result, while it might especially in the present disturbed state of the world,
prove the ruin of our affairs.
There were other considerations which, though of minor importance, had
nevertheless their due weight in our decision on this great question. If France or
any other power holding the right bank of the river, imposed lighter duties than
comport with the revenue system of the United States, supposing even that we had
acquired the left bank, all the supplies destined for our extensive and populous
settlements on the other side, would be smuggled in through that channel, and our
revenue, thereby, considerably diminished. Should such power open offices for
the sale of lands on the western bank, our population might be drained to the ad-
vantage of that power, the price of our lands be diminished, and their sale prevent-
ed. But by the possession of both banks, these evils are averted.
Louisiana was acquired of Spain by France in exchange for Tuscany, which
letter is settled by treaty on the son in law of the king of Spain, with the title of
king of Etruria, and was estimated in the exchange, in consideration of its reve
nue, at 100,000,000 francs. The First Consul thought he had made an advantageous
bargain in that exchange, as appears from the high idea, which he entertained of
its value, as shown on many occasions. Louisiana was the territory, which he
promised in his proclamation at the peace as an asylum to those, who had become
unfortunate by the revolution, and which he spoke of as vast and fertile. When he
made up his mind to offer the cession of it to the United States, it was contempla-
ted to ask for it 100,000,000 exclusive of the debts, they owed to our citizens, which
68
538 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Erskine's Arrangem't,
they proposed, we should also pay, with a perpetual exemption from foreign duties
on the manufactures, productions and vessels in France and Spain in the ports of
the ceded territory. From that demand, however, in respect to the sum he receded
under the deliberation of his own cabinet; for the first proposition, which M. Mar-
bois made to us was, that we should pay 80 millions. Sixty of which in cash,
the balance to our citizens, the whole in one year in Paris, with a perpetual ex-
emption from foreign duties as above. The modification in the mode of payment,
that is by stock, for from the quantum he never would depart, and the limitation of
the term of the duties to twelve years, with the proviso annexed to it, which was
introduced into the treaty, with every other change from this project, was the effect
of the negotiation and accommodation,in which we experienced on his part and that
of his government, a promptitude and candor, which were highly grateful to us.
* R. R. LIVINGSTON, JAMES MONROE.
98. Mr Erskine Arrangement.
From Mr Canning’s Instructions to Mr Erskine. Extract.
London, Jan. 23, 1809. From the reports of your conversations with
Mr Madison, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Gallatin, it appears, 1st, That the American gov-
ernment is prepared, in the event of his Majesty's consenting to withdraw the orders
in council, of January and November 1807, to withdraw, contemporaneously, on
its part, the interdiction of its harbours to ships of war, and all nomintercourse and
nonimportation acts, so far as respects Great Britain, leaving them in force with res-
pect to France, and the powers which adopt or act under her decrees. 2dly, What
is of the utmost importance, as precluding a new source of misunderstanding, which
might arise after the adjustment of the other questions, that America is willing to
renounce, during the present war, the pretension of carrying on, in time of war, all
trade with the enemies’ colonies, from which she was excluded during peace. 3dly,
Great Britain for the purpose of securing the operation of the embargo, and of the
bona fide intention of America to prevent her citizens from trading with France,
and the powers adopting and acting under the French decrees, is to be considered
as being at liberty to capture all such American vessels as my be found attempting
to trade with the ports of any of those powers; without which security for the ob-
servance of the embargo, the raising of it nominally, with respect to Great Britain
alone would in fact raise it with respect to all the world. On these conditions, his
majesty would consent to withdraw the orders in council, of January and Novem-
ber 1807, so far as respect America.” “Upon receiving through you, on the
part of the American government, a distinct an official recognition of the three above
mentioned conditions, his majesty will lose no time in sending to America a min-
ister, fully empowered to consign them to a formal and regular treaty.” “Upon
the receipt here of an official note, containing an engagement for the adoption, by
the American government, of the three conditions above specified, his majesty will
be prepared, on the faith of such engagement, either immediately, (if the repeal
shall have been immediate in America) on any day specified by the American gov-
ernment for that repeal, reciprocally to recall the orders in council, without waiting
for the conclusion of a treaty. And you are authorized, in the circumstances here-
in described, to take such reciprocal engagement on his majesty’s behalf.”
Jackson to Smith] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 539
Apology for deviating from Instructions.
Washington Aug. 10, 1809. Nothing could have induced me to have devi-
ated, in the slightest degree, from the orders I had received, but a thorough con-
viction upon my mind, that by so doing, to a certain extent, I should accomplish
the object which his majesty had in view, when, by too strictly adhering to the
letter of my instructions, I might lose the opportunity of promoting essentially his
majesty’s wishes and interest.”
99. Mr Jackson to Mr Smith.
On Mr Erskine’s Instructions. Extract.
Washington, October 11, 1809. “It was not known, when I left England,
whether Mr Erskine had, according to the liberty allowed him, communicated to
you, in extenso, his original instructions. It now appears that he did not. But in
reverting to his official correspondence and particularly to a despatch addressed on
the 20th of April to his Majesty’s secretary of state for foreign affairs, I find that
he there states, that he had submitted to your consideration the three conditions,
specified in those instructions as the ground work of an arrangement, which, ac-
cording to information received from this country, it was thought in England
might be made with a prospect of great mutual advantage. Mr Erskine there
reports verbatim et seriatim your observations upon each of the three conditions,
and the reasons, which induced you to think, that others might be substituted in
lieu of them. It may have been concluded between you, that these latter were an
equivalent for the original conditions, but the very act of substitution evidently
shows, that those original conditions were in fact very explicitly communicated
to you, and by you of course laid before the President for his consideration. I
need hardly add, that the difference between these conditions, and those contained
in the arrangement of the 18th and 19th of April, is sufficiently obvious to re-
quire no elucidation, nor need I draw the conclusion, which I consider as admitted
by all absence of complaint on the part of the American government; viz, that
under such circumstances his majesty had an undoubted and incontrovertible right
to disavow the act of his minister. I must here allude to a supposition, which
you have more than once mentioned to me, and by which, if it had any the sligh-
test foundation, this right might perhaps have been in some degree affected. You
have informed me that you understood that Mr Erskine had two sets of instructions
by which to regulate his conduct, and that upon one of them, which had not been
communicated either to you or to the public, was to be rested the justification of
the terms finally agreed upon between you and him. It is my duty, sir, solemnly
to declare to you, and through you to the President, that the despatch from Mr
Canning to Mr Erskine, which you have made the basis of an official correspon-
dence with the latter minister, and which was read by the former to the American
minister in London, is the only despatch by which the conditions were prescribed
to Mr Erskine for the conclusion of an arrangement with this country on the mat-
ter to which it relates.”
100. Mr. Jackson to Mr. Smith.
His Vindication. Extract.
Washington Nov. 4, 1809. I am concerned, Sir, to be obliged a sceond time
to appeal to those principles of public law, under the sanction and protection of
540 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [Smith to Jackson.
which I was sent to this country. Where there is not freedom of communication
in the form substituted for the more usual one of verbal discussion, there can be
little useful intercourse between ministers; and one, at least of the epithets, which
you have thought proper to apply to my last letter, is such as necessarily abridges
that freedom That any thing therein contained, may be irrelevant to the subject.
it is of course competent in you to endeavour to show, and, as far as you succeed in
so doing, in so far will my argument lose its validity; but as to the propriety of
my allusions, you must allow me to acknowledge only the decision of my own sov-
ereign, whose commands I obey, and to whom alone, I can consider myself res-
ponsible. Beyond this, it suffices that I do not deviate from the respect due to the
government, to which I am accredited.
You will find that in my correspondence with you, I have carefully avoided draw-
ing conclusions that did not necessarily follow from the premises advanced by me,
and, last of all, should I think of uttering an insinuation where I was unable to
substantiate a fact. To facts, such as I have become acquainted with them, I have
scrupulously adhered, and in so doing, I must continue, wherever the good faith
of his Majesty’s government is called in question, to vindicate its honor and dig-
nity, in the manner that appears to me the best calculated for that purpose.
101. Mr Smith to Mr Jackson.
Close of Negotiation. Extract.
Washington, Nov. 8, 1809. In my letter of the 19th ult. I stated to you,
that the declaration in your letter of the 11th, that the despatch from Mr. Canning
to Mr. Erskine of the 23d January, was the only despatch by which the conditions
were prescribed to Mr. Erskine for the conclusion of an arrangement on the mat-
ter to which it related, was then for the first time made to this government; and it
was added, that if that despatch had been communicated at the time of the arrange-
ment, or if it had been known that the propositions contained in it, were the only
ones on which he was authorized to make an arrangement, the arrangement would
not have been made.
In my letter of the 1st instant, adverting to the repetition in your letter of the
23d ultimo, of a language implying a knowledge of this government that the ins-
tructions of your predecessor did not authorize the arrangement formed by him, an
intimation was distinctly given to you, that after the explicit and peremptory as-
severation that this government had not any knowledge, and that with such a know-
ledge, such an arrangement would not have been made; no such insinuation could
be admitted by this government.
Finding that in your reply of the 4th instant, you have used a language, which
cannot be understood, but as reiterating and even aggravating the same gross in-
sinuation, it only remains, in order to preclude opportunities, which are thus abus-
ed, to inform you that no further communications will be received from you, and
that the necessity of this determination will, without delay, be made known to
your government. In the mean time, a ready attention will be given to any com-
munications affecting the interests of the two nations through any other channel
phat may be substituted.” I am, &c. &c. &c. R. SMITH.
French Decree, 1806] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 541
102. Berlin Decree of Nov. 21, 1806. (French.)
Imperial Camp, Berlin, JVov. 21, 1806. Napoleon, emperor of the French, and king of
Italy, considering:
1. That England does not admit the right of nations, as universally acknowledged by
all civilized people:
2. That she declares as an enemy every individual belonging to an enemy state, and, in
consequence, makes prisoners of war, not only of the crews of armed vessels, but also of
merchant vessels, and even the supercargoes of the same:
3. That she extends or applies to merchant vessels, to articles of commerce, and to
the property of individnals, the right of conquest, which can only be applied or extended to
what belongs to an enemy state:
4. That she extends to ports not fortified, to harbours, and mouths of rivers, the right
of blockade, which, aeeording to reason and the usage of civilized nations, is applicable only
to strong or fortified ports:
5. That she declares blockaded places before which she has not a single vessel of war,
although a place ought not to be considered blockaded, but when it is so invested as that no
approach to it can be made, without imminent hazard; that she declares even places blocka-
ded, which her united forces would be incapable of doing, such as entire coasts and a whole
empire:
6. That this unequalled abuse of right of blockade has no other object than to interrupt
the communications of different nations, and to extend the commerce and industry of England
upon the ruin of those of the continent—
7. That this being the evident design of England, whoever deals on the continent in
English merchandise favours that design, and becomes an accomplice—
8. That this conduct in England (worthy only of the first ages of barbarism) has bene-
fitted her to the detriment of other nations—
9. That it being right to oppose to an enemy the same arms she makes use of, to com-
bat as she does, when all ideas of justiee, and every liberal sentiment (the result of civilization
among men) are disregarded–
We have resolved to enforce against England the usages which she has consecrated in
her maritime code,
The present decree shall be considered as the fundamental law of the empire, until Eng-
land has acknowledged that the rights of war are the same on land as at sea; that it cannot be
extended to any private property whatever, nor to persons who are not military, and until
the right of blockade be restrained to fortified places, actually invested by competent forces.
103. Orders in Council of Nov. 11, 1807. (English.)
./lt the Court at the queen’s Palace, the 11th JYovember, 1807–present, the King’s JMost
Eaccellent JMajesty in Council.
Whereas certain orders, establishing an unprecedented system of warfare against this
kingdom, and aimed especially at the destruction of its commerce and resources, were, some
time since, issued by the government of France, by which “the British islands were declared
to be in a state of blockade,” thereby subjecting to capture and condemnation all vessels,
with their cargoes, which should continue to trade with his majesty’s dominions.
And whereas, by the same orders, “all trading in English merchandise belonging to Eng-
land or coming from her colonies, or of her manufacture, is declared lawful prize.”
And whereas the nations in alliance with France, and under her control, were required
to give, and have given, and do give, effect to such orders.
And whereas his majesty’s order of the 7th of January last, has not answered the desired
purpose, either of compelling the enemy to recall those orders, or of inducing neutral nations
to interpose, with effect to obtain their revocation; but on the contrary, the same have been
recently enforced with increased vigour.
542 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [British Order,1807.
And whereas,his majesty, under these circumstances, finds himself compelled to take further
measures for asserting and vindicating his just rights, and for supporting that maritime pow-
er, which the exertions and valour of this people have, under the blessing of Providence,
enabled him to establish and maintain; and the maintenance of which is not more essential to
the safety and prosperity of his majesty’s dominions, than it is to the protection of such states
as still retain their independence, and to the general intercourse and happiness of mankind.
His majesty is therefore pleased, by and with the advice of his privy council, to order,
and it is hereby ordered, that all the ports and places of France and her allies, or of any
other country at war with his majesty, and all other ports or places in Europe, from which,
although not at war with his majesty, the British flag is excluded, and all ports or places in
the colonies belonging to his majesty’s enemies, shall from henceforth be subject to the same
restrictions, in point of trade and navigation, with the exceptions herein after mentioned, as
if the same were actually blockaded by his majesty’s naval forces, in the most strict and
rigorous manner: And it is hereby further ordered and declared, that all trade in articles,
which are of the produce or manufacture of the said countries or colonies, shall be deemed
and considered to be nulawful; and that every vessel trading from or to the said countries or co-
lonies, together with all goods and merchandise on board, and all articles of the produce or
manufacture of the said countries or colonies, shall be captured, and condemned as prize to
the captors.
But although his majesty would be fully jusisfied, by the circumstances and considerations
above recited, in establishing such system of restrictions, with respect toall the countries and
colonies of his enemies, without exception or qualification, yet his majesty being nevertheless
desirous not to subject neutrals to any greater inconvenience than is absolutely inseparable
from thc carrying into effect his majesty’s just determination to counteract the designs of his
enemies, and to retort upon his enemies themselves the consequences of their own violence
and injustice, and being yet willing to hope that it may be possible (consistently with that
object) still to allow to neutrals the opportunity of furnishing themselves with colonial produce
for their own consumption and supply, and even to leave open, for the present, such trade
with his majesty’s enemies as shall be carried on directly with the ports of his majesty’s do-
minions, or of his allies, in themanner herein after mentioned.
His majesty is therefore pleased further to order, and it is hereby ordered, that nothing
herein contained shall extend to subject to capture or condemnation any vessel, or the cargo
of any vessel, belonging to any country, not declared by this order, to be subjected to the re-
strictions incident to a state of blockade, which shall have cleared out with such cargo from
some port or place of the country to which she belongs, either in Europe or America, or
from some free port in his majesty’s colonies, under circumstances in which such trade from
such free port is permitted direct to some port or place in the colonies of his majesty’s ene-
mies, or from those colonies direct to the country to which such vessel belongs, or to some
free port in his majesty's colonies, in such cases, and with such articles, as it may be lawful
to import into such free port; nor to any vessel, or the cargo of any vessel, belonging to any
country not at war with his majesty, which shall have cleared out from some port or place
in this kingdom, or from Gibraltar or Malta, under such regulations as his majesty may think
fit to prescribe, or from any port belonging to his majesty’s allies, and shall be proceeding
direct to the port specified in her clearance; nor to any vessel, or the cargo of any vessel, be-
longing to any conntry not at war with his majesty, which shall be coming from any port or
place in Europe, which is declared by this order to be subject to the restrictions incident to a
state of blockade, destined to some port or place in Europe, belonging to his majesty, and
which shall be on her voyage direct thereto; but these exceptions are not to be understood as
exempting from capture or confiscation any vessel or goods, which shall be liable thereto, in
respect of having entered or departed from any port or place actually blockaded by his maj-
esty’s squadrons or ships of war, or for being enemies’ property, or for any other cause than
the contravention of this present order.
British Orders, 1807] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 543
And the commanders of his majesty’s ships of war and privateers, and other vessels act-
ing under his majesty’s commission, shall be, and are hereby instructed to warn every vessel
which shall have commenced her voyage prior to any notice of this order, and shall be desti-
ned to any port of France, or of her allies, or of any other country at war with his majesty
or to any port or place from which the British flag as aforesaid is excluded, or to any colony
belonging to his majesty’s enemies, and which shall not have cleared out as herein before
allowed, to discontinue her voyage, and to proceed to some port or place in this kingdom, or
to Gibraltar or Malta; and any vessel which, after having been so warned, or after a reason-
able time shall have been afforded for the arrival of information of this his majesty’s order at
any port or place from which she sailed, or which, after having notice of this order, shall be
found in the prosecution of any voyage contrary to the restrictions contained in this order,
shall be captured, and, together with her cargo, condemned as lawful prize to the captors.
And whereas countries, not engaged in the war, have acquiesced in the orders of France
prohibiting all trade in any articles the produce or manufacture of his majesty’s dominions;
and the merchants of those countries have given countenance and effect to those prohibitions
by accepting from persons styling themselves commercial agents of the enemy, resident at
neutral ports, certain documents, termed “certificates of origin,” being certificates obtained
at the ports of shipment, declaring that the articles of the cargo are not of the produce or
manufacture of his majesty's dominions, or to that effect:
And whereas this expedient has been directed by France, and submitted to by such
merchants, as part of the new sytem of warfare directed against the trade of this kingdom,
and as the most effectual instrument of accomplishing the same, and it is therefore essentially
necessary to resist it:
His majesty is therefore pleased, by and with the advice of his privy council, to order,
and it is hereby ordered, that if any vessel, after reasonable time shall have been afforded
for receiving notice of this his majesty's order at the port or place from which such vessel shall
have cleared out, shall be found carrying any such certificate or document as aforesaid, or any
document referring to, or authenticating the same, such vessel shall be adjudged lawful prize
to the captor, together with the goods laden therein, belonging to the person or persons by
whom, or on whose behalf any such document was put on board.
And the right honorable the lords commissioners of his majesty’s treasury, his majesty's
principal secretaries of state, the lords commissioners of the admiralty, and the judges of the
high court of admiralty and courts of vice-admiralty, are to take the necessary measures
herein, as to them shall respective appertain. W. FAWKENER.
...At the Court at the Queen's Palace, the 11th of JVovember, 1807–present, the King's JMost
Excellent JMajesty in Council.
Whereas articles of the growth and manufacture of foreign countries, cannot by law be
imported into this country, except in British ships, or in ships belonging to the countries of
which such articles are the growth and manufacture, without an order in council, specially
authorising the same:
His majesty taking into consideration the order of this day’s date, respecting the trade to
be carried on to and from the ports of the enemy, and deeming it expedient that any vessel
belonging to any country in alliance or at amity with his majesty, may be permitted to import
into this country, articles of the produce or manufacture of countries at war with his majesty.
His majesty, by and with the advice of his privy council, is therefore pleased to order,
and it is hereby ordered, that all goods, wares, or merchandizes, specified and included in
the schedule of an act, passed in the forty-third year of his present majesty’s reign, intituled
“An act to repeal the duties of customs payable in Great Britain, and to grant other duties
in lieu thereof.” may be imported from any port or place, belonging to any state not at amity
with his majesty, in ships belonging to any state at amity with his majesty, subject to the pay-
ment of such duties, and liable to such drawbacks as are now established by law upon the
544 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. British orders,1807.
importation of the said goods, wares, or merchandise, in ships navigated according to law; and
with respect to such of the said goods, wares, or merchandise, as are authorised to be ware-
housed under the provisions of an act, passed in the forty-third year of his present majesty’s
reign, intituled “An act for permitting certain goods imported into Great Britain, to be se-
cured in ware-houses without payment of duty,” subject to all the regulations of the said last
mentioned act; and with respect to all articles which are prohibited by law from being import-
ed into this country, it is ordered, that the same shall be reported for exportation to any
country in amity or alliance with his majesty.
And his majesty is further pleased, by and with the advice of his privy council, to order,
and it is hereby ordered, that all vessels which shall arrive at any port of the United Kingdom,
at the port of Gibraltar or Malta, in consequence of having been warned pursuant to the afore-
said order, or in consequence of receiving information, in any other manner, of the said order,
subsequent to their having taken on board any part of their cargoes, whether previous or sub-
sequent to their sailing, shall be permitted to report their cargoes for exportation, and shall
be allowed to proceed upon their voyages to their original ports of destination, (if not unlaw-
ful before the issuing of the said order,) or to any port at amity with his majesty, upon receiving
a certificate from the collector or comptroller of the customs at the port at which they shall
so enter, (which certificate the said collectors and comptrollers of the customs are hereby
authorised and required to give,) setting forth that such vessels came into such port in conse-
quence of being so warned, or of receiving such information as aforesaid and that they were
permitted to sail from such port, under the regulations which his majesty has been pleased to
establish in respect to such vessels. But in case any vessel so arriving shall prefer to import
her cargo, then such vessel shall be allowed to enter and import the same, upon such terms
and conditions as the said cargo might have been imported upon; aecording to law, in case the
said vessel had sailed after having received notice of the said order, and in conformity thereto.
And it is further ordered, that all vessels which shall arrive at any port of the United
Kingdom, or at Gibraltar or Malta, in conformity and obedience to the said order, shall be
allowed, in respect to all articles which may be on board the same, except sugar, coffee, wine,
brandy, snuff and tobacco, to clear out to any port whatever, to be specified in such clearance;
and with respect to the last mentioned articles, to export the same to such ports, and under
such conditions and regulations only, as his majesty, by any license to be granted for that pur-
pose, may direct.
And the right honorable the lords commissioners of his majesty’s treasury, his majesty’s
principal secretaries of state, the lords commissioners of the admiralty, and the judges of the
high court of admiralty and courts of vice-admiralty, are to take the necessary measures here-
in, as to them shall respectively appertain, W. FAWKENER.
.At the Court at the Queen’s Palace, the 11th of JVovember, 1807–present, the King's JMost
Eaccellent JMajesty in Council.
Whereas the sale of ships by a belligerent to a neutral is considered by France to be
illegal : -
And whereas a great part of the shipping of France and her allies has been protected
from capture during the present hostilities by transfers, or pretended transfers, to neutrals.
And whereas it is fully justifiable to adopt the same rules, in this respect, towards the
enemy, which is applied by the enemy to this country.
His majesty is pleased, by and with the advice of his privy country, to order, and it is
hereby ordered, that in future the sale to a neutral of any vessel belonging to his majesty’s
enemies, shall not be deemed to be legal, nor in any manner to transfer the property, nor to
alter the character of such vessel; and all vessels now belonging, or which shall hereafter be-
long to any enemy of his majesty, notwithstanding any sale, or pretended sale to a neutral,
after a reasonable time shall have elapsed for receiving information of this his majesty’s order
at the place wbere such sale, or pretended sale was effected, shall be captured and brought
in, and shall be adjudged as lawful prize to the captors.
JMilan Decree.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 545
And the right honourable the lords commissioners of his majesty's treasury, his majesty’s
principal secretaries of state, the lords commissioners of the admiralty, and the judges of the
high court of admiralty and courts of vice admiralty, are to take the necessary measures here-
in, as to them shall respectively appertain. W. FAWKENER.
104. Milan Decree of Nov. 11, 1807. (French.)
Rejoinder to his Britannic JMajesty's order in Council of November 11th, 1807. At our Royal
Palace, at JMilan, December 17, 1807.
Napoleon, emperor of the French, King of Italy, and protector of the Rhenish confederacy.
Observing the measures adopted by the British Government, on the 11th of November
last, by which vessels belonging to neutral, friendly, or even powers the allies of England,
are made liable, not only to be searched by English cruisers, but to be compulsorily detained
in England, and to have a tax laid on them of so much per cent, on the cargo, to be regulated
by the British legislature;
Observing that by these acts the British government denationalizes ships of every nation
in Europe, that it is not competent for any government to detract from its own independence
and rights, all the sovereigns of Europe having in trust the sovereignties and independence of
the flag; that if by an unpardonable weakness, and which, in the eyes of posterity, would be
an indelible stain, such a tyrrany was allowed to be established into principles and consecra-
ted by usage, the English would avail themselves of the tolerance of governments to establish
the infamous principles, that the flag of a nation does not cover goods, and to give to their
right of blockade an arbitrary extension, and which infringes on the sovereignty of every state;
we have decreed, and do decree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. Fvery ship, to whatever nation it may belong, that shall have submitted to
be searched by an English ship, or to a voyage to England, or that shall have paid any tax
whatsoever to the English government, is thereby, and for that alone, delared to be denation-
alized, to have forfeited the protection of its king, and to have become English property.
ARTICLE II. Whether the ships thus denationalized by the arbitrary measures of the
English government, enter into our ports or those of our allies, or whether they fall into the
hands of our ships of war, or of our privateers, they are declared to be good and lawful prizes.
ARTICLE III. The British islands are to be declared in a state of blockade, both by sea
and land. Every ship, of whatever nation, or whatsoever the nature of its cargo may be,
that sails from the ports of England, or those of the English colonies, and of the countries
occupied by English troops, and proceeding to England, or to English Colonies, or to countri-
es occupied by English troops, is good and lawful prize, as contrary to the present decree; and
may be captured by our ships of war or our privateers, and adjudged to the captor.
ARTICLE IV. These measures, which are resorted to only in just retaliation of the bar-
barous system adopted by England, which assimilates its legislation to that of Algiers, shall
cease to have any effect with respect to all nations who shall have the firmness to compel the
English government to respect their flag. They shall continue to be rigorously in force as
long as that government does not return to the principle of the law of nations, which regulates
the relations of civilized states in a state of war. The provisions of the present decree shall
be abrogated and null, in fact, as soon as the English abide again by the principles of the law
of nations, which are also the principles of justice and honor.
. All our ministers are charged with the execution of the presen decree, which shall; be
inserted in the bulletin of the laws. NAPOLEON.
By order of the Emperor. The Secretary of State: H. B. MARET.
*
105. Spanish Decree of Jiranjuez, Feb. 19, 1807.
By the greatest outrage against humanity, and against policy, Spain was forced by Great
Britain to take part in the present war. This power has exercised over the sea and over the
commerce of the world, an exclusive dominion. Her numerous factories disseminated through
all countries are like sponges which imbibe the riches of those (countries) without leaving
them more than the appearances of mercantile liberty. From this maritime and commercial
* England derives immense resources for carrying on a war, whose object is to de-
546 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Span. & Ramb.
stroy the commerce which belongs to each state from its industry and situation. Experience
has proved that the morality of the British cabinet has no hesitation as to the means, so long
as they lead to the accomplishment of its designs; and whilst this power can continue to en-
joy the fruits of its immense traffic, humanity will groan under the weight of a desolating war.
To put an end to this, and to attain a solid peace, the emperer of the French and King of
Italy issued a decree on the 21st of November last, in which, adopting the principles of re-
prisals, the blockade of the British isles is determined on; and his ambassador, his excellency
Francis de Beauharnois, grand dignitary of the order of the iron crown, of the legion of honor,
&c. &c. having communicated this decree to the king pur master, and his majesty being de-
sirous to co-operate by means sanctioned by the rights of reciprocity, has been pleased to
authorize his most serene highness the prince generalissimo of the marine, to issue a circular
of the following tenor.
As soon as England committed the horrible outrage of intercepting the vessels of the royal
marine, insidiously violating the good faith with which peace assures individual property and
the rights of nations; his majesty considered himself in a state of war with that power, although
his royal soul suspended the promulgation of the manifesto until he saw the atrocity commit-
ted by its seamen, sanctioned by the government of London. From that time, and without
the necessity of warning the inhabitants of these kingdoms of the circumspection with which
they ought to conduct themselves towards those of a country which disregards the sacred laws
of property and the rights of nations; his majesty made known to his subjects the state of war
in which he found himself with that nation. All trade, all commerce is prohibited in such a
situation; and no sentiments ought to be entertained toward such an enemy which are not
dictated by honor, avoiding all intercourse which might be considered as the vile effect of av-
arice operating on the subjects of a nation which degrades itself by them.
His majesty is well persuaded that such sentiments of honor are rooted in the hearts of
his beloved subjects; but he does not choose on that account to allow the smallest indulgence
to the violators of the law, nor permit that, through ignorance, they should be taken by sur-
prise-authorizing me by these presents, to declare that all English property will be confisca-
ted whenever it is found on board a vessel, although a neutral if the consignment belongs to
Spanish individuals. So likewise will be confiscated all merchandise which may be met with
although it may be in neutral vessels, whenever it is destined for the ports of England or her
isles.
And finally his majesty, conforming himself to the ideas of his ally the emperor of the
French, declares in his states the same law, which, from principles of reciprocity and suitable
respect, his imperial majesty promulgated under date of the 21st November, 1806.
The execution of this determination of his majesty belongs to the chiefs of provinces, of
departments, and of vessels, (baxeles) and communicating it to them, in the name of his ma-
jesty, I hope they will leave no room for the royal displeasure.
God preserve you many years. The Prince Generalissimo of the Marine.
Aranjuez, 19th February, i807.
106. Rambouillet, (French) Decree, March 23, 1810.
Napoleon, &c. &c. &c. Considering that the governmentof the United States; by an act
dated the 1st of March 1809, which ſorbids the entrance of the ports, harbours, and rivers of
the said states, to all French vessels, orders, 1st. that after the 20th of May following, vessels
under the French flag,which shall arrive in the United States, shall be seized and confiscated
as well as their cargoes: 2d. That after the same epoch, no merchandise or produce, the
growth or manufacture of France or her colonies, can be imported into the said United States
from any foreign port or place whatsoever, under the penalty of seizure, confiscation, and a
fine of three times the value offhe merchandise; 3d. That American vessels cannot go to any
port of France, of her colonies or dependencies: We have decreed and do decree what follows:
ARTICLE I. All vessels navigating under the flag of the United States, or possessed, in
whole or in part, by any citizen or subject of that power, which, counting from the 20th of
May, 1809, have entered or shall enter into the ports of our empire, of our colonies, or of
the countries occupied by our arms, shall be seized, and the product of the sales shall be de-
posited in the suplus fund (caisse d’amortissement.)
There shall be excepted from this regulation, the vessels which shall be charged with
despatches, or with commissions of the government of the said states, and who shall not have
either cargoes or merchandise on board.
Our grand judge, minister of justice, and our minister of finance, are charged with the
execution of our present decree. NAPOLEON.
*
trar Manifesto 1812) DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 5%.7
107. Congressional Eaposition of the Motives and Causes of the War.
Manifesto of the causes and reasons of War with Great Britain, presented to the House of
Representatives, by the Committee of Foreign Relations. June, 1812. Extr.
House of Representatives, June 3, 1812. The period has nôw arrived, when
the United States must support their character and station among the nations of
the earth, or submit to the most shameful degradation. Forbearance has ceased
to be a virtue. War on the one side, and peace on the other, is a situation as ruin-
ous as it is disgraceful. The mad ambition, the lust of power and commercial
avarice of Great Britain, arrogating to herself the complete dominion of the ocean,
and exercising over it an unbounded and lawless tyranny, have left to neutral na-
tions an alternative only between the base surrender of their rights, and a manly
vindication of them. Happily for the United States their destiny, under the aid
of Heaven, is in their own hands. The crisis is formidable only by their love of
peace. As soon as it becomes a duty to relinquish that situation, danger disap-
pears. They have suffered no wrongs, they have received no insults, however
great, for which they cannot obtain redress.
More than seven years have elapsed, since the commencement of this system
of hostile aggression by the British government, on the rights and interest of the
United States. The manner of its commencement was not less hostile than the
spirit with which it has been prosecuted. The United States have invariably
done every thing in their power to preserve the relations of friendship with Great
Britain. Of this disposition they gave a distinguished proof at the moment when
they were made the victims of an opposite policy. The wrongs of the last war
had not been forgotten at the commencement of the present one. They warmed us
of dangers, against which it was sought to provide. As early as the year 1804,
the minister of the United States at London, was instructed to invite the British
government to enter into a negotiation on all the points on which a collision might
arise between the two countries, in the course of the war, and to propose to it an
arrangement of their claims, on fair and reasonable conditions. The invitation
was accepted. A negotiation had commenced and was depending, and nothing
had occured to excite a doubt that it would not terminate to the satisfaction of both
the parties. It was at this time, and under these circumstances, that an attack
was made, by surprise, on an important branch of the American commerce, which
aſſected every part of the United States, and involved many of their citizens in ruin.
The commerce on which this attack was so unexpectedly made, was that be-
tween the United States and the colonies of France, Spain, and other enemies of
Great Britain. A commerce just in itself, sanctioned by the example of Great
Britain in regard to the trade with her own colonies; sanctioned by a solemn act
between the two government in the last war; and sanctioned by the practice of the
British government in the present war; more than two years having then elapsed,
without any interference with it.
The injustice of this attack could only be equalled by the absurdity of the
pretext alleged for it. It was pretended by the British government, that in case
of war, her enemy had no right to modify its colonial regulations, so as to mitigate
the calamities of war to the inhabitants of its colonies. This pretension, peculiar
to Great Britain, is utterly incompatible with the rights of sovereignty in every
548 - DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [War Manifesto, 1812
independent state. If we recur to the well established, and universally admitted
law of nations, we shall find no sanction to it in that venerable code. The sove-
reignty of every state is co-extensive with its dominions, and cannot be abrogated,
or curtailed in its rights, as to any part, except by conquest. Neutral nations
have a right to trade to every port of either belligerent, which is not legally block-
aded; and in all articles which are not contraband of war. Such is the absurdity
of this pretension, that your committee are aware, especially after the able manner
in which it has been heretofore refuted and exposed, that they would offer an in-
sult to the understanding of the house, if they enlarged on it; and if any thing
could add to the high sense of the injustice of the British government in this trans-
action, it would be the contrast which her conduct exhibits in regard to this trade,
and in regard to a similar trade by neutrals, with her own colonies. It is known
to the world that Great Britain regulates her own trade, in war and in peace, at
home and in her colonies, as she finds for her interest: that in war she relaxes the
restraints of her colonial system in favor of the colonies, and that it never was
suggested that she had not a right to do it; or that a neutral in taking advantage of
the relaxation violated a belligerent right of her enemy. But with Great Britain
every thing is lawful. It is only in a trade with her enemies, that the United
States can do wrong: with them all trade is unlawful.
In the year 1793 an attack was made by the British government on the same
branch of our neutral trade, which had nearly involved the two countries in war.
That difference however, was amicably accommodated. The pretension was with-
drawn, and reparation made to the United States for the losses which they had
suffered by it. It was fair to infer from that arrangement, that the commerce was
deemed by the British government lawful, and that it would not be again disturbed.
Had the British government been resolved to contest this trade with neutrals,
it was due to the character of the British nation that the decision should be made
lºnown to the government of the United States. The existence of a negotiation
which had been invited by our government, for the purpose of preventing differ-
ences, by an amicable arrangement of their respective pretensions, gave a strong
claim to the notification, while it afforded the fairest opportunity for it. But a
very different policy animated the then cabinet of England. Generous sentiments.
were unknown to it. The liberal confidence and friendly overtures of the United
States were taken advantage of to ensnare them. Steady to its purpose, and in-
flexibly hostile to this country, the British government calmly looked forward to
the moment when it might give the most deadly wound to our interests. A trade,
just in itself, which was secured by so many strong and sacred pledges, was con-
sidered safe. Our citizens, with their usual industry and enterprize, had embark-
ed in it a vast proportion of their shipping and of their capital, which were at sea
under no other protection than the law of nations, and the confidence which they
reposed in the justice and friendship of the British nation. At this period the
unexpected blow was given. Many of our vessels were seized, carried into port
and condemned by a tribunal, which, while it professes to respect the law of na-
tions, obeys the mandate of its own goverment in opposition to all law. Hundreds
of other vessels were driven from the ocean, and the trade itself in a great med-
sure suppressed. -
War.Manifesto, 1812] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. - 549
The effect produced by this attack on the lawful commerce of the United
States, was such as might have been expected from a virtuous, independent, and
highly injured people. But one sentiment prevaded the whole American nation.
No local interests were regarded, no sordid motives felt. Without looking to the
parts which suffered most, the invasion of our rights was considered a common
cause, and from one extremity of our Union to the other was heard the voice of an
united people, calling on their government to avenge their wrongs, and vindicate
the rights and honour of the country.
From this period the British government has gone on in a continued encroach-
ment on the rights and interests of the United States, disregarding in its course,
in many instances, obligations which have heretofore been held sacred by civilized
nations. -
In May, 1806, the whole coast of the continent, from the Elbe to Brest inclu-
sive, was declared to be in a state of blockade. By this act, the well established
principles of the law of nations, principles which have served for ages as guides,
and fixed the boundary between the rights of belligerents and neutrals, were viola-
ted. By the law of nations, as recognised by Great Britain herself, no blockade
ts lawful unless it be sustained by the application of an adequate force; and that
an adequate force was applied to this blockade, in its full extent, ought not to be
pretended. Whether Great Britain was able to maintain legally, so extensive a
blockade, considering the war in which she is engaged, requiring such extensive
naval operations, is a question which it is not necessary at this time to examine.
It is sufficient to be known that such force was not applied, and this is evident
from the terms of the blockade itself, by which, comparatively, an inconsiderable
portion of the coast only, was declared to be in a state of strict and rigorous bloc-
kade. The objection to the measure is not diminished by that circumstance. If
the force was not applied, the blockade was unlawful, from whatever cause the
failure might proceed. The belligerent who institutes the blockade cannot
absolve itself from the obligation to apply the force, under any pretext whate-
ver. For a belligerent to relax a blockade which it could not maintain, with a
view to absolve itself from the obligation to maintain it, would be a refinement in
injustice, not less insulting to the understanding than repugnant to the law of na-
tions. To claim merit for the mitigation of an evil which the party either had
not the power, or found it inconvenient to inflict, would be a new mode of encroach-
ing on neutral rights. Your committee think it just to remark, that this act of
the British government does not appear to have been adopted in the sense in which
it has been since construed. On consideration of all the circumstances attending
the measure, and particularly the character of the distinguished statesman, [C. J.
Fox,] who announced it, we are persuaded that it was conceived in a spirit of
conciliation, and intended to lead to an accommodation of all differences between
between the United States and Great Britain. His death disappointed that hope,
and the act has since become subservient to other purposes. It has been made by
his successors a pretext for that vast system of usurpation, which has so long op-
pressed and harrassed our commerce.
The next act of the British government which claims our attention, is the
order of council of January 7, 1807, by which neutral powers are prohibited trad-
550 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [War Manifesto, 1812
ing from one port to another of France, or her allies, or any other country with
which Great Britain might not freely trade. By this order, the pretension of
England, heretofore disclaimed by every other power, to prohibit neutrals disposing
of parts of their cargoes at different ports of the same enemy, is revived, and with vast
accumulation of injury. Every enemy, however great the number, or distance
from each other; is considered one, and the like trade even with powers at peace
with England, who, from motives of policy, had excluded or restrained her com-
merce, was also prohibited. In this act, the British government evidently dis-
claimed all regard for neutral rights. Aware that the measures authorized by it
could find no pretext in any belligerent right, none was urged. To prohibit the
sale of our produce, consisting of innocent articles, at any port of a belligerent,
not blockaded; to consider every belligerent as one, and subject neutrals to the
same restraints with all, as if there was but one, were bold encroachments. But
to restrain, or in any manner interfere with our commerce with neutral nations,
with whom Great Britain was at peace, and against whom she had no justifiable
cause of war, for the sole reason that they restrained or excluded from their ports
her commerce, was utterly incompatible with the pacific relations subsisting be-
tween the two countries.
We proceed to bring into view the British order in council of N ovember 11,
1807, which superseded every other order, and consummated that system of hostili-
ty on the commerce of the United States, which has been since so steadily pur-
sued. By this order, all France and her allies, and every other country at war
with Great Britain, or with which she was not at war, from which the British flag
was excluded, and all the colonies of her enemies, were subjected to the same re-
strictions, as if they were actually blockaded in the most strict and rigorous man-
ner; and all trade in articles the produce and manufacture of the said countries and
colonies, and the vessels engaged in it, were subjected to capture and condemna-
tion as lawful prize. To this order certain exceptions were made, which we for-
bear to notice, because they were not adopted from a regard to neutral rights, but
were dictated by policy to promote the commerce of England and so far as they
related to neutral powers, were said to emanate from the clemency of the British
government. *
It would be superfluous in your committee to state, that by this order the Bri-
tish government declared direct and positive war against the United States. The
dominion of the ocean was completely usurped by it, all commerce forbidden, and
every flag driven from it, or subjected to capture and condemnation, which did not
subserve the policy of the British government by paying it a tribute, and sailing
under its sanction. From this period the United States have incurred the heaviest
losses, and most mortifying humiliations. They have borne the calamities of war,
without retorting them on its authors.
So far your committee has presented to the view of the house, the aggressions
which have been committed under the authority of the British government on the
commerce of the United States. We will now proceed to other wrongs which
have been still more severely felt. Among those is tº impressment of our seamen,
a ractice which has been unceasingly maintained by Great Britain in the wars to
which she has been a party since our revolution. Your committee cannot convey
Declar. War, 1812] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 551
in adequate terms the deep sense which they entertain of the injustice and oppres-
sion of this proceeding. Under the pretext of impressing British seamen, our
fellow citizens are seized in British ports, on the high seas, and in every other
quarter to which the [British power extends; are taken on board British men of
war, and compelled to serve there as British subjects. In this mode our citizens
are wantonly snatched from their country and their families; deprived of their
liberty, and doomed to an ignominous and slavish bondage; compelled to fight
the battles of a foreign country, and often to perish in them. Our flag has given
them no protection; it has been unceasingly violated, and our vessels, exposed to
danger by the loss of the men taken from them:
Your committee, believing that the free born sons of America are worthy to
enjoy the liberty which their fathers purchased at the price of so much blood and
treasure, and seeing in the measures adopted by Great Britain, a course commenced
and persisted in, which must lead to a loss of national character and independence
feel no hesitation in advising resistance by force; 'in which the Americans of the
present day will prove to the enemy and to the world, that we have not only inhe-
rited that liberty which our fathers gave us, but also the will and power to main-
tain it. Relying on the patriotism of the nation, and confidently trusting that the
Lord of Hosts will go with us to battle in a righteous cause, and crown our efforts
with success, your committee recommend an immediate appeal to arms.
108. Declaration of War, June 19, 1812.
By the President of the United States of America: a Proclamation.
Whereas the Congress of the United States, by virtue of the constituted
authority vested in them, have declared by their act bearing date of the eighteenth
day of the present month, that WAR exists between the united kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, and the dependencies thereof, and the United States of America
and their territories; now therefore I, James Madison, President of the United
States of America, do hereby proclaim the same to all whom it may concern: that
I do especially enjoin all persons holding offices, civil or military, uuder the author-
ity of the Unite States, that they be vigilant and zealous, in discharging the
duties respectively incident thereto: And I do moreover exhort all the good people
of the United States, as they love their country; as they value the precious heri-
tage derived from the virtue and valour of their fathers; as they feel the wrongs
which have forced on them the last resort of injured nations; and as they consult
the best means under the blessing of Divine Providence, of abridging its calamities
that they exert themselves in preserving order, in promoting concord, in maintain-
ing the authority and efficacy of the laws, and in supporting and invigorating all
the measures which may be adopted by the constituted authorities, for obtaining
a speedy, a just, and an honorable peace.
* In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed to these presents. [SEAL.]
Done at the city of Washington, the nineteenth day of June, one thousand
eight hundred and twelve, and of the Independence of the United States the thirty-
sixth. JAMES MADISON,
By the President: JAMES MONROE, Sec, State,
j
55? DIPLO):ATIC WRITING. [Florida Pur, 1815
109. Instructions to JMr Forsyth on the Spanish Treaty of Indemnity of 1819.
Extract.
Washington, 1819. The treaty of amity, settlement and limits, be-
tween the United States and Spain, concluded on the 22d ultimo, and ratified on
the part of the United States, having provided for the adjustment of all important
subjects of difference between the two nations, the first object of your mission will
be to obtain the ratification of the Spanish government, and receive it in exchange
for ours, the authentic instrument of which is committed to your charge.
On exchanging the ratifications, certificates of the fact will be mutually exe-
cuted and delivered by you and the Spanish minister, with whom you will make
the exchange. Copies of that, which passed in both languages on the exchange of
the ratifications of the convention of the 11th August 1802, are now furnished you,
and will serve as forms to be used in the performance of this ceremony. On this
occasion, as upon all others, upon which you may have occasion to execute any
document, joint, or reciprocal, with a foreign minister of state, you will be careful
to preserve the right of the United States to the alternative of being first named,
and your own right, as their representative, to sign first in the papers executed;
while, in the counterparts, the other contracting party will be named first, and the
foreign minister will first sign and scal. A rigid adherence to this practice has
become necessary, because it is strictly adhered to by all the European sovereigns
in their compacts with one another; and because the United States having, hereto-
fore, forborne to claim this conventional indication of equal dignity, some appear-
ance of a disposition to allege the precedent against them, as affecting their
right to it, was manifested by the British plenipotentiaries on executing the con-
vention of 3d July 1815, and M. de Onis at the drawing up and signing of this
treaty.—The scruple was, however, in both cases abandoned, and the right of
the United States to the alternative was conceded. It is not expected that it will,
hereafter, be questioned, and you will consider it as a standing instruction to abide
by it in the execution of any instrument of compact, which, as a public minister of
of the United States, you may be called to sign.
After the exchange of the ratifications, your attention will be directed to the
object of carrying the provisions of the treaty into effect. The orders for the eva-
cuation by the Spanish officers and troops of the places, occupied by them in the
Floridas, will, no doubt, be immediately issued, and as the transports and escort
for conveying to the Havana are to be furnished by the United States, it is
hoped you will obtain copies of the orders and transmit them here with the ratifi-
cation of the treaty. You will think it advisable to keep the Spanish government
reminded of the necessity to include the orders for the delivery of possession, that
of all the archives and documents, relating to the dominion and sovereignty. The
appointment of a commissioner and surveyor for running the line of the western
boundary must, also, be kept in rememberance, and notice given to us, as soon as
possible, after their appointment. You will collect from the archives of the lega-
tion at Madrid all the documents, relating to the claims of citizens of the United
States upon the Spanish government, which have been deposited there, and which
come within the description of claims to be exhibited to the commissioners under
the 11th article of the treaty. You will send all these documents, together with
Florida Pur. 1819] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 553
the ratified treaty, to this department, retaining descriptive lists of them, and, if
necessary, copies of such papers, for which no equivalent substitute could be pro-
duced in case of their being lost. Should you have reason to believe that any doc-
uments, which you should be able to specify, were in possession of the Spanish
government, tending to elucidate any of these claims, you will endeavour to obtain
them. The treaty provides, that they shall be furnished at the demand of the com-
missioners. But as much time may be saved, if they can be sent here to be ready
when the commission will be organized and commence the exercise of its functions,
you will, should the occasion present itself, use your endeavours to that effect.”
110. Nesselrode to Jºr Poletica, Russian Minister in the U. States, 1819.
Extract.
You doubtless have been able to obtain information, how far the president's
last instructions to Mr. Forsyth were positive. The emperor will not now take it
upon him to justify Spain, but he charges you to plead with the government at
Washington the cause of peace and concord.That government is too enlightened to
take hasty steps, and its rights appear to be too solid, not to be weakened by a vio-
lent course of proceeding: and on the other hand, such is the character of the con-
siderations, which command the ratification by Spain of the arrangement, relative
to the Floridas, that, it is hoped, she will, at length, yield to the force of evidence.
The United States will then have added to the reputation of an able, that of a mod-
erate policy, and will gather with security, the fruits of wisdom.
His Imperial Majesty, therefore, wishes that if there be yet time, you would
engage the government at Washington to give to the Spanish ministry a proof of
patience, which its circumstances might indeed seem to suggest. Nevertheless,
the emperor does not interpose in this discussion. He makes, above all, no preten-
sion to exercise an influence in the councils of a foreign power. He merely ex-
presses a wish, dictated by his concern for the general welfare, and worthy of the
generous, good faith, which characterises the government of the United States.”
11 1. The treaty of Feb. 22, 1819, was signed, after a succession of negociations
of nearly twenty year’s duration, in which all the causes of difference between the
two nations had been thoroughly discussed, and with a final admission on the part
of Spain, that there were existing just claims on her government, at least, to the
amount of five millions of dollars, due to citizens of the United States, and for the
payment of which provision was made by the treaty. It was signed by a minis-
ter, who had been several years residing in the United States, in constant and un-
remitted exertions to maintain the interests and pretensions of Spain, involved in
the negociation—signed, after producing a full power, by which in terms, as so-
lemn and as sacred as the hand of a sovereign can subscribe, his Catholic Majes-
ty had promised to approve, ratify and fulfil whatever should be stipulated and
signed by him.” “The express authority of two of the most eminent writers
upon national law to this point were cited in Mr Forsyth's letter of 2d October
1819, to the duke of San Fernando. The words of Vattel are, “But to refuse with
honour to ratify that, which has been concluded in virtue of a full power, the sov-
ereign must have strong and solid reasons for it, and particularly he must show, that
that his minister transcended his instructions.” The words of Martens are, “Every
70
554, DIPLOMATIC WRITING. LSwed. Claims, 1818
thing, that has been stipulated by an agent, in conformity to his full powers, ought
to become obligatory for the state from the moment of his signing, without ever
waiting for the ratification.’
“However, not to expose the state to errors of a single person it is now become
a general maxim, that public conventions do not become obligatory, until ra-
tified. The motive of this custom clearly proves, that the ratification can
never be refused with justice, except when he, who is charged with the negotia-
tion, keeping within the extent of his full public powers, has gone beyond his secret
instructions, and, consequently, rendered himself liable to punishment, or when
the other party refuses to ratify.” “After a lapse of more than a month from
the time of Mr Forsyth's first note, and of more than two months from the time,
when the Spanish government had received the treaty, with knowledge that it had
been ratified by the United States, the ratification of a treaty, which his Catholic
Majesty had solemnly promised, (so that it might be exchanged within six
months from the date of its signature, or sooner if possible) was withheld merely to
give time to his Catholic Majesty to examine it; and this treaty was the result of
a twenty years’ negotiation, in which every article and subject, contained in it, had
been debated and sifted to the utmost satiety between the parties, both at Wash-
ington and Madrid—a treaty in which the stipulations by the Spanish minister
had been sanctioned by successive references of every point to his own govern-
ment, and were, by the formal admission of your own note, fully within the com-
pass of his instructions.
“If, under the feeling of such a procedure on the part of the Spanish govern-
ment, the minister of the United States appealed to the just rights of his country
in expressions, suited more to his sense of its wrongs, than to the courtesies of
European diplomacy, nothing had till then occurred, which could have restrained
the Spanish government from asking of him any explanation, which could be ne-
cessary for fixing its determination upon the ratification.”
112. Mr Russell to the Count d’Engerstroem on the Swedish Claims.
Extract.
June, 1818. None of the nations, whose dominions border on the Baltic, ever
committed, in relation to the United States, nor it is believed in relation to other
friendly nations, any act similar to that, for which the undersigned has been ins-
tructed to ask indemnity from Sweden. Of the conduct of Russia and Prussia dur-
ing the continental system the United States has no cause to complain, and if Den-
mark imposed a sequestration towards the close of the year 1809, on American ves-
sels and their cargoes in her ports, that sequestration continued for a few months
only, and the American property, subjected to it, was restored, without exception,
to the lawful owners. If the United States have now claims on Denmark, it is for
the lawless depredations of her privateers and the unjust decision of her tribunals,
and not for the confiscation without the form of a trial of property, acknowledged
to be American, and fairly and regularly entered at her custom houses. Of all the
nations, bordering on the Baltic, it was left for Sweden, alone, to receive the du-
ties, and summarily and peremptorily to confiscate the merchandise without sug-
gesting a doubt of its origin or ownership.”—“The Swedish government, for-
getting its previous assurances and disregarding the incontrovertible rights of the
Swed. Claims 1818] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 555
United States and the friendly relations, which had not ceased to subsist between
the two countries, advertised that property for sale at Stralsund on the 2d day of
August 1811, actually sold it on the 14th day of the same month, and caused the
proceeds thereof to be paid into the Swedish royal treasury in Pomerania. These
facts, it is believed, will not be contested, for they are supported by documents of
acknowledged authenticity. Between the 12th July 1811, the day en which this
property was placed at the disposal of the Swedish government, and the second
day of the following month, on which it was advertised for sale there elapsed twenty
one days only, a period barely sufficient for deciding on the royal order at Stock-
holm and for its transmission to Stralsund, and for the preparation and publication
of the advertisment. The undersigned is ignorant of the date of that order, but from
the considerations, just suggested, it could not well have been issued at a latter
day than the twentieth of the same month of July, and consequently not more than
eight days after the note of the Baron Alquier had announced the complete libera-
tion, on the part of France, of the sequestered property. Whatever might have
been the extravagance and versatility of the predominant despotism of the time
it will not be presumed, that the government of the United States will volunteer
a belief of a total change of policy in so brief a period, and if instead of consenting
to raise the sequester as so formally and recently announced, it had been caprici-
ously resolved to proceed to immediate confication. His Excellency must be a-
ware, that the precise orders, received from the French government during that
period, should be produced, and communicated to the American government to ob-
tain its faith in the existence of an inconsistency in its nature so incredible. But
neither his Excellency or any other Swedish functionary has attempted to show
that any such orders were so received, and the undersigned will now dare to trouble
his Excellency with proof, not mere presumptively that they are not. A declara-
tion of the Swedish authorities in Pomerania renders it certain that they, at least,
acted in complete igorance of such orders, as well as all French interference on
the occasion, and in the full conviction, that the Swedish government at Stock-
holm had the exclusive control of the transaction. This declaration is contained
in reply of those authorities, on the 9th of August 1811, to a memorial, presented
to them on the 6th of that month by certain merchants of Stralsund, on behalf of
themselves and of their American constituents. This reply clearly manifest the
opinion, which the Swedish Regency in Pomerania entertained of the justice of the
object of the memorial, and of the competency of their Sovereign to decide defin-
itively in relation to it. It is, likewise, evident from their engagement to place
provisionally the proceeds of the merchandise, claimed in the royal chamber, that
they acted independently of all French interference, and that there was no agent
of France in their vincinity, whom they felt themselves obliged to consult, or to
obey in this proceeding.”
[These acts were never denied by Sweden, but an attempt was made to throw
a different hue over them.] -
“It is an undisp uted fact that the American vessels in question entered the ports
of Pomerania, whilst that province was still under the dominion of Sweden, but
scarcely was the French government informed of it, when it gave orders to its a-
gents in Pomerania to demand the seizure and confiscation of these vessels to the
556 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Dan. Claims, 1811
benefit of France, alleging, in justification of this violent pretension, the system,
called continental, under which France then cloaked her projects of progressive
encroachment, menacing all Europe, but which had notwithstanding been acced-
ed to by all European powers at peace with the French empire. The imposing
force, at that time kept up by France in these countries, left no alternative to the
Swedish government, which was reluctantly compelled to acquiesce in her de-
mands. The steps then taken by Sweden with the French government, to obtain
a transfer to her of the property, thus confiscated, were prompted by a desire to re-
store it to the lawful owners, but they proved ineffectual, France, having agreed
to transfer on certain conditions only, expressly stipulating, that the proceeds of
these cargoes should be immediately employed in placing Pomerania in a state of
defence against the English naval force, which then threatened all the shores of
the Baltic.”
113. Mr Russell to the Secretary of State.
Extract.
Agreeably to the invitation, above mentioned, I dined yesterday, with the King
at his country palace of Rosendale. Immediately after dinner, he desired me and
Count d’Engerstroem to accompany him into his private apartments. He there,
at once, introduced the subject of the claims, and expressed a regret that all the
circumstances, connected with that transaction, had not hitherto been communica-
ted to the American government. He observed that these circumstances, he be-
lieved, would palliate, if not justify the conduct of Sweden in that transaction, and
that they should be immediately addressed to me. He then gave directions to
Count d’Engerstroem in conformity with this declaration, and, in doing so, he al-
luded to an order of the French government, designating the objects to which the
proceeds of the American property were to be applied. He added, that he was
still disposed to do all he could for the relief of the American sufferers, but that,
as he had nothing excepting military stores at his disposal for this object, he could
furnish this relief in articles of that description only. I simply replied, that we
could not have expected, that new facts would have been brought forward at this
late day, after the earnest manner in which we had so long urged these claims, and
that I could hardly believe, I might say hope, that these facts were of a nature to
justify the Swedish government and exempt it from all responsibility. I was, how-
ever, entirely disposed to give to these facts, whatever they might be, a candid
consideration.”
[The Claims on Sweden were closed by a private agreement.]
114. Mr G. W. Erving to M. de Rosenkrantz—Danish Claims.
Convoy Cases. Copenhagen, June 7, 1811.
[Extract.] With my note of yesterday, I transmitted to your excellency alist of
the ‘convoy cases,” twelve in number; the two last in that list are now depending
on appeal before the high court, as is mentioned in a memorandum opposite to
their names; the first eight vessels of the remaining ten were bound immediately
from Petersburg and Cronstadt to the United States; they had all paid their sound
dues, and several of them had been examined before the Danish marine tribunals,
on entering the Baltic; and they were all arrested, in going out, by a British force.
and compelled to join convoy. When that convoy was attacked by his Majesty’s
gun brigs, the Americans, not conscious of any illegality in the nature of their
Ban. Claims, 1811] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 557
voyages, or of any irregularity in their own conduct, made no efforts to escape,
and were captured and brought into port. These vessels have been condemned
under the authority of the article ‘D’ in the 11th clause of his Majesty’s instruc-
tions for privateers, issued on the 10th of March 1810, which declares to be good
prize “All vessels which have made use of British convoy, either in the Atlantic
or the Baltic. At the time of this declaration, these vessels were in Russia, on
the point of sailing, and wholly ignorant of it.” “That the belligerent has a
right to ascertain the character of neutrals met with at sea, I am not disposed to
deny; but to say that the neutral shall be condemned on the mere fact that he was
found under enemy’s convoy, is to impose upon him the necessity of Sailing with-
out protection, even against his own separate enemies; for the case might well
happen, indeed has happened, that though neutral with regard to the belligerent
powers, he has had an enemy, against whom either of the belligerents might be
disposed to protect him. Of such protection, the American commerce has often
availed itself, during the war between the United States and the Barbary powers;
nor was it ever supposed, by either of the great belligerent powers, that such com-
merce, so protected by its enemy, had thus become liable to capture and confisca-
tion. The case might also occur, that of two allied belligerent powers, a third
power should be enemy as to one, and neutral as to the other. I state these argu-
ments against the broad ground taken in the royal Instructions above quoted. But
it will be said, that the belligerent, having also an unquestionable right to ascer-
tain the neutrality of vessels, and belligerent right being paramount to neutral
rights, where the two happen to be in collision; hence the attempt of the neutral
to deprive the belligerent of his right, by putting himself under convoy, forms of
itself a ground of capture and confiscation. To this I answer, first, that the bel-
ligerent rights, where they come in collision with those of neutrals, are not to be
deemed in all cases paramount; and that nothing can establish such a general rule
but force, which is not law or justice. Secondly, that no presumption necessarily
arises against the neutral, from the mere circumstance of his being found under
enemy’s convoy; but that this point will depend upon the peculiar circumstance
of each case. Thirdly, that where the belligerent and neutral rights conflict, all
other circumstances being equal, the plea of necessity ought to decide the question
in favour of the neutral. In the case supposed, the belligerent is seeking the mere
exercise of a right, but the neutral is occupied in his self preservation. These
vessels did not seek convoy for any purpose, but they were forced into it; they had
no motive to seek convoy as a protection against Cruisers. They had,
indeed, other inducements to put themselves under convoy; the decrees of his
Majesty the emperor of France being then in force, that system, working against
the English orders in council, produced such a state of things, with regard to the
commerce of America, that scarely one of its ships could move on the face of the
ocean, without being exposed, under this unfortunate co-operation of hostile sys-
tems, to capture and confiscation. But had this happened in the cases before us,
yet it would not have formed a just ground of capture and confiscation; for, the
merits or demerits of the Berlin and Milan decrees out of the question, those decrees
have not been adopted by Denmark; indeed, at the time the vessels were taken,
his majesty had not assumed any course, with respect to the American commerce,
from which evil was to be apprehended; hence, I beg leave to repeat, that the ves-
558 DIPLOMATIC WRATING. [Impressment.
sels in question cannot be presumed to have sought protection under British con-
voy, for the purpose of avoiding his cruisers. But if the contrary had been proved,
if it stood confessed, that they had sought convoy against Danish cruisers; in that
case, they would have been liable to capture, certainly—but it is equally certain,
that they would have been liable to condemnation. I must again totally deny, that
the rule laid down in the article of the royal instructions yet above cited, is support-
ed by any principle to be found in the law—and I can confidently ask your excel-
Hency to show me any authorities in its favour. If the writers be silent on the sub-
jec, then their silence is to be construed favourably for the neutral. But the law
says, that neutral goods found under the enemy’s forts, within his territory, or even
on board his vessels at sea, which is to be as immediately and totally under his
protection as is possible,_that these are not liable to confiscation, but shall be re-
stored to the neutral owners. The doctrine laid down by Grotius, in the “De Jure
Belli ac Pacis,” on this point, he has never been refuted, but has, on the contrary,
been adopted by subsequent writers. England herself has never gone to the ex-
tent of condemning vessels upon the mere ground of their having been taken un-
der enemies’ convoy; but she has captured them in that situation, and then acquit-
ted them.”
115. JHr Rush’s Outline of the Question of Impressment.
[From his “Residence at the Court of London.”]
Great Britain, as a measure of state policy, impresses her seamen to serve on
board her ships of war; in other words, takes them by force. The practice is one
with which other nations have nothing to do, as long as it is confined to British
seamen, the British dominions, or the decks of British vessels upon the seas. It
may seem at variance with the high standard of personal rights upon which her
laws are founded in other respects; but that consideration is wholly for herself.
But, she claims the right of searching the vessels of other nations upon the
high seas, for her seamen; and here begins the cause of complaint. For, how can
the claim ever be enforced consistently with what is due to other nations!
Let the steps by which the enforcement proceeds be attended: A British
frigate in time of war meets an American vessel at sea, boards her, and, under
terror of her guns, takes out one of the crew. The boarding lieutenant as-
serts, and let it be admitted, believes, the man to be a Briton. By this proceeding,
the rules observed in deciding upon any other fact where individual or national
rights are at stake, are overlooked. The lieutenant is accuser and judge. He de-
cides upon his own view, instantly. The impressed man is forced into the frigate’s
boat, and the case ends. There is no appeal, no trial of any kind. More impor-
tant still, there is no remedy, should it appear that a wrong has been committed.
Different is the mode of proceeding if an American merchant vessel be stop-
ped and examined at sea under circumstances subjecting her to suspicion as prize
of war. In the latter case, the boarding officer sends the vessels into port under
accusation. Facts are inquired into judicially, and both parties heard. Both
have ample opportunity of bringing forward proofs; should the tribunal decide
that lawful cause of seizure existed, the vessel is restored, the captors are answer-
able fin damages, and there are adequate modes of making them pay. If, on the
3ther hand, the man seized, be in fact no Briton, the most that he can ever hope
Impressment.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 559
for is, merely to be released. This can only take place after he has been kept an
indefinite length of time on board the frigate, put to duty, and perhaps made to
fight. He may be slain in battle. If this fate does not await him, his subsequent
liberation, from the nature of the case, can only be effected at a distant day, and is
not certain at last. He may not be able whilst on board the frigate, to obtain docu-
ments to show that he is not a Briton. He may be transferred to some other ves-
sel of war. Even to trace him, through a navy scattered over all Seas, must be-
come to his country or friends a difficult, often a hopeless task. Should the chances,
multiplied as they are against him, all turn out in his favour, and the order for his
discharge be finally obtained, where is his action for damages; where his remedy
for loss of liberty! for this outrage, so terrible, upon all his feelings and rights?
He has none.
A claim so ex parte in the whole enforcement, so intrinsically open to error,
and the error if committed so fatal, cannot, it should seem, rest upon public law.
The United States say, that it does not. They have never denied to Great Britain
the right of search. They allege however that this means search for enemy’s prop-
erty, or articles contraband of war, not search for men. They say that no public
code or other adequate authority, has ever established the latter as an internation-
al right. If its exercise by any other state than Great Britain can be shown, the
instances are averred to be too few, and too devoid of the evidences of general con-
sent, to have made it part of the law of nations. Troops indeed, or men in the mili-
tary service of the enemy, may be taken out of a neutral vessel at sea; but this is
wholly different from impressing seamen.
Great Britain places her claim on the ground of natural allegiance. She alleges,
that, by a principle of universal law, a man owes this kind of allegiance to the coun-
try of his birth. That he never can shake it off. That as his country protects
him, so it may demand his services in return; especially in time of war.
The United States reply, that the principle of natural alliance, however cher-
ished by some states, is not universal. Sir William Blackstone in his commentaries
so able and masterly for the most part, lays it down as universal; but he refers for
support, only to the writers of England. Puffendorf holds that allegiance may be
put off; so do Grotius and Bynkershoek. If we choose to go as far back as the
Justinian code, we shall there find the same doctrine. The principle of perpetual
allegiance may be held sacred by Britain; it may be of the highest practical impor-
tance under her own system; but the United States say, that its operation should
be confined to her own territorial dominions, and decks of her own merchant ves-
sels. There is scarcely an important principle of public law that has not, at one.
time or other, had place in treaties among European states, the better to define or
regulate it. This is especially the case with principles that belong to maritime
affairs. Would a right of such concern to all nations using the sea, as a sovereign's
to enforce the allegiance of his own subjects in neutral vessels on its broad high-
way, have altogether escaped notice in these solemn instruments between states?
Yet it is believed that no treaty contains any thing in relation to it.
The United States have been exposed to grievances from the exercise of this
claim by Britain, heavier perhaps than ever fell to the lot of an independent nation.
It springs from a cause rooted in nature, and irreversible; the resemblance of their
560 DiPLOMATIC WR THNG. [Impressment.
seamen to those of England. Their language, dress, sea phrases, everything, are
alike. To discriminate, is, in most cases, impossible. Of this, the proof is incon-
testible, and here follows.
Britain disavows, unequivocally, all claim to impress from American ships,
any other seamen than her own. Her sense of justice would not allow her to set
up any pretence of claim to take Americans; yet these she unavoidably does take,
and in numbers sufficient to surprise those not informed upon the subject.
From a report made to congress by the secretary of state in April 1816, it ap-
peared, that the impressed American seamen on board of the British armed ships
at the commencement of the war of 1812, a war occasioned chiefly by this cause,
amounted to one thousand four hundred and twenty-two. Here is no exaggeration.
The fact comes from the archives of Britain. It is taken from official lists, furnish-
ed by functionaries of the British government to the American agent for prisoners
of war in London. These men had been transferred from English ships to English
prisons, on the breaking out of the war, or during its progress.
Furthermore. Britain, at a former period, liberated one thousand one hundred
and thirty-two Americans who had been impressed prior to the month of Septem-
ber, 1801. This fact also rests upon the authority of British archives, and was
included in the same report to Congress. On the impressment of all these Ameri-
cans, the British boarding officers must have believed they were taking their own
subjects; else they took them knowing them to be Americans: Hence the difficulty
not to be surmounted, of distinguishing American from British seamen.
What then do we learn? more than two thousand six hundred American citi-
zens, confessedly, the sufferers under this practice! and this by no means the whole
list. All were clearly Americans. No British seamen, naturalized in the United
States, was ever, if impressed, given back again. Can Britain, whose pride and
spirit have raised her to greatness, and who must know how to respect such quali-
ties in other nations, can she for a moment, wonder, that a practice leading to such
consequences, should excite the deepest scnsation in the United States?
She complains, that she is aggrieved by the number of her seamen who get
into the merchant service of the United States, through our naturalization laws and
other causes. This takes from her, she alleges, the right arm of her defence.—
Without her navy, her existence, no less than her glory, might be endangered.
It is therefore vital to both, that, when war comes, she should reclaim her seamen
from the vessels of a nation where they are so frequently ſound. * :}; ::
The foregoing is an outline of the question, in its main features. It may serve
to give some idea of the manner in which it operates upon the United States. As
between the two nations, it is a question sui generis. To both, it is of the last im-
portance.—The diplomatic history of the United States will show how repeated
and earnest have been their endeavours to settle it. The joint mission to London
in 1806, when Mr Monroe and Mr Pinkney were our negotiators, could effect no-
thing on this point; and Mr King's effort in 1803, successful in all other respects,
was at last frustrated by Great Britain insisting on reserving her right to impress
within the narrow seas.—To this doctrine of the mare clausum of her Selden, in
opposition to the mare liberum of Grotius, the United States were not prepared to .
assent. They never can assent to it.
Impressment.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 561
I return to my interview with Lord Castlereagh. He remarked, that intrinsic
as were the difficulties respecting impressment, his desire was sincere to see them
removed; and his efforts to remove them, would be given with earnestness.-I
assured him, that, under all my instructions, my efforts would be equally sincere
and earnest. The conversation proceeded. We adverted to the principles main-
tained by our respective countries. He said, that the abuse of the practice, for he
freely admitted its abuse, had been the result of the peculiar state of the world,
all Europe having been at war, and America neutral. He did not believe that the
desire to enforce their right to the same extent, would exist in future; or that it
would be drawn into exercise at all, if means could be devised to keep their men
out of our vessels. I said, that the question never could be put to rest as long as
a British naval officer was allowed to muster an American crew upon an American
deck, to look for British seamen. Besides the indignity of this, so felt by all
America, the inevitable consequences to which it must lead of subjecting Americans
to seizure instead of Britons, would preclude forever all hope of adjustment. The
best mode we could devise of keeping British officers from our vessels on such
errands, was that which he had hinted at; namely, to keep British seamen away
altogether. This we were desirous to do, as far as in our power. I promised to
furnish him with a proposal to this effect; and he, that it should have a liberal
consideration.
116. American Proposal for abolishing Impressment,
Submitted by Mr Rush to Lord Castlereagh, on the 18th of April, 1818.
“Great Britain alleging a right to impress her seamen out of American ves-
sels upon the high seas, it follows, that whenever a mode can be devised for their
previous exclusion from American vessels, the motive for the practice must be at
an end. It is believed that this may be effected by each nation imposing restraints
upon the naturalization of the seamen of the other, and reciprocally excluding from
their service all seamen not naturalized. If Great Britain be allowed to naturalize
American seamen, the United States must be allowed to naturalize British sea-
men. Each should be at liberty to afford the same facilities, or bound to interpose
the same restraints. The greater the difficulty in acquiring the right of citizenship,
the easier will it be to avoid imposition, and the more complete the desired exclu-
sion. The law of Congress of the third of March one thousand eight hundred
and thirteen, of all the provisions of which, Great Britain may command the bene-
fit, will prove how sincerely the United States desire to settle this controversy on
conditions satisfactory to Great Britain. By that law it is made indispensable
for every British subject who may hereafter become a citizen, to reside five years
in the United States without intermission, and so many guards are interposed to
prevent frauds, that it seems scarcely possible they should be eluded. No British
subject can be employed in a public or private ship of the United States unless he
produce to the commander in the one case, and to the collector of the port in the
other, a certified copy of the act by which he became naturalized. A list of the
crew in the case of a private ship, must be taken, certified, and recorded by the
collector; and the consuls or commercial agents of Great Britain may object to the
employment of a seaman, and have the privilege of attending the investigation rela-
tive to his citizenship. The commander of a public ship receiving a person not
71
562 - DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Impressment.
duly qualified, is to forfeit a thousand dollars, and the commander or owner of a
private ship, five hundred. It is also made a felony punishable by fine and im-
prisonment, for any person to forge or counterfeit, or to pass, or use, any forged
or counterfeited certificate of citizenship, or to sell or dispose of one.
“The United States will also be willing to provide that every British subject
desiring to become a citizen, shall be bound to appear in person before the proper
tribunal, once a year, for the term of five years, until his right shall be completed,
or adopt any other more practical and satisfactory evidence that his residence with-
in their territory was bona fide and uninterrupted, it being their sincere desire to
employ their own seamen only, and exclude British. By requiring five years
uninterrupted residence as the condition of citizenship, it is confidently believed
that, from considerations readily suggesting themselves, few if any British seamen
would be found to take advantage of it. The nature of a seaman’s life stands op-
posed to any other conclusion. If in some instances, a residence should be com-
menced with a real intention, at the time, of submitting to this condition, the pre-
sumption is strong that, at the expiration of the term, such a change of habits and
prospects would be superinduced, as to lead to the abandonment forever of the sea
as an occupation. If the proposal be accepted, the United States would farther
agree, that none of the British seamen who might be within their territory when
the stipulation to give it effect was entered into, without having already become
citizens, should be admitted into either their public or private ships, until they
had acquired the right, according to all the above regulations. In return for them,
a clear and distinct provision to be made by Great Britain against impressment
out of American vessels. * :}; :}; :};
Although in our conference of the eleventh [of June, 1818,) I had made
known the willingness of the United States to exclude from their naval and mer-
chant service all British seamen, native as well as naturalized, I did not think
proper to let the proposition rest on the footing of a verbal offer, but reduced it to
writing, [June 20) in terms as follow:
“The proposal submitted by the Undersigned to Lord Castlereagh, upon the
subject of impressment, on the eighteenth of April, not being found acceptable, he
has the honour to offer on behalf of his government, the following:
“Each nation rigidly to exclude from service on board of their ships of war and
merchant vessels, all native born subjects, or citizens of the other. The checks and
precautions stated in the former paper, to guard against fraudulent naturalization,
to be resorted to (with the proper modifications) to prevent imposition relative to
the birth place of seamen, or others adopted. Seamen already naturalized in the
United States, to be excluded from the operation of the agreement, as these, by
their laws, cannot be included. The number of this class is believed to be small,
and in a short time would cease altogether. Although the stipulation for exclu-
sion must be reciprocal, a provision to be inserted authorising the United States,
if so disposed, to dispense with the obligations it would impose on their own sea-
men, whenever the latter may choose of their own accord to enter the British ser-
vice; this power of dispensation to be reciprocal, if desired.
“Should the above proposal be accepted it will follow that all British seamen
or subjects now in the United States, and not heretofore naturalized, will be ex-
Fmpressment.] DIPLGMATIC WRITING. 563
cluded from their sea service, and that all who arrive in future will be excluded.
Great Britain, on her part, to come into a distinct stipulation, not to impress men
out of American vessels.” R. R.
I handed this paper to his lordship. The proposal had, as I knew, been re-
jected; but I knew the president’s desire to settle this great question, and believed
that I should be more truly the organ of his will, by putting the proposal in a shape
in which it might go upon the archives of his majesty's government.
117. British Projet for regulating Impressment,
Submitted by the Right Honorable F. J. Robinson and H. Goulbourn, Esq. to Messrs Gallatin
and Rush. Extract.
1. “The high contracting parties engage and bind themselves to adopt with-
out delay, and in the manner that may best correspond with their respective laws,
such measures as may be most effectual for excluding the natural born subjects
and citizens of either party from serving in the public or private marine of the other:
Provided always, that nothing contained in this article shall be understood to ap-
ply to such natural born subjects or citizens of either power as may have been
maturalized by their respective laws, previous to the signature of the present treaty.
And such measures, when adopted, shall be immediately communicated to each
party respectively. -
2. “For the better ascertaining the number of persons on either side that may
fall within the exception contained in the preceding article, the high contracting
parties engage to deliver, each to the other, within twelve months from the ratifica-
tion of the present treaty, a list of all persons falling within the said exception,
specifying the places of their birth, with the date of their becoming naturalized.
And it is further agreed, that none other than the persons whose names shall be
included in the lists, shall be deemed to fall within the said exception.
3. “The high contracting parties however reserve to themselves the power
to authorize and permit by proclamation, their respective subjects or citizens, to
serve in the public or private marine of the other country. And it is hereby ex-
pressly understood, that, as long as such permission shall remain in force, it shall
be competent for the government of the other power, notwithstanding the engage-
ment set forth in the first article of this treaty, to admit the performance of the said
service. Provided always, That whenever the power so granting permission to the
said subjects or citizens to serve in the marine of the other, shall withdraw the
same, notification thereof shall forthwith be made to the other contracting party,
and, on receipt of such notification, the power receiving the same shall, forthwith,
notify it in the most public and official manner, and shall use its utmost endeavours
to restrain the said subjects or citizens of the other party from further serving in its
public or private marine, and shall enforce the exclusion of such of the said sub-
jects or citizens of the other power as may then be in its service, as if no such per-
mission had been promulgated.
4. “In consideration of the stipulations contained in the preceding articles, it
is agreed by the high contracting parties that, during the continuance of the present
treaty, neither power shall impress or forcibly withdraw, or cause to be impressed,
or forcibly withdrawn, any person or persons from the vessels of the other power
when met upon the high seas, on any plea or pretext whatsoever. Provided always.
That nothing contained in this article shall be construed to apply to the vessels of
56.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Impressment.
either power which may be within the ports, or within the maritime jurisdiction of
the other, and also provided, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to
impair or affect the established right of search as authorized in time of war by
the law of nations.
5. “The high contracting parties have agreed to extend the duration of the
present treaty to ten years, and they reserve to themselves to concert, as to its re-
newal, at such convenient period, previous to its expiration, as may ensure to
their respective subjects and citizens, the uninterrupted benefit which they expect
from its provisions: Provided always, that either power may, if it deem it expedient,
upon giving six months previous notice to the other, wholly abrogate and annul the
present treaty.
6. “It is agreed that nothing contained in the preceding article shall be under-
stood to affect the rights and principles on which the high contracting parties have
heretofore acted, in respect to any of the matters to which these stipulations refer,
except so far as the same shall have been modified, restrained, or suspended, by
the said articles. And, whenever the present treaty shall cease to be in opera-
tion, either by the expiration of the term for which it is, enacted, without any re-
newal of the same, or by the abrogation thereof by either of the high contracting
parties, as hereinbefore provided, or, (which God forbid) by any war between them,
each of the said high contracting parties shall stand, with respect to the other, as
to its said rights and principles, as if no such treaty had ever been made.”
In submitting these articles, the British plenipotentiares expressed upon the
protocol their conviction that under all the difficulties that surrounded the question
they would be sufficient to satisfy us of the earnest disposition of Great Britain to
go every practicable length in a joint effort for their removal, so as to connect the
two countries in the firmest ties of harmony. It was with this solemnity that the
subject was presented to our consideration.
It received from us a deliberate and anxious attention. We brought to the
task an unaffected desire to smooth down every obstacle. It was not to be sup-
posed that a subject that had divided the two nations for five and twenty years, and
been the principal cause of a war, could be definitively arranged by the first projet
of a treaty drawn up by one of the parties. But we hailed the entire plan as the
harbinger of adjustment, believing that we saw in its spirit and outline the sure
hope of success. Taking an interval for advisement we said, that the proposals
heretofore made by the United States could leave no doubt of their constant desire
to settle this question, and declared our readiness to agree, with some amendments,
to the plan submitted. We added our full expectation that, founded as it was in
mutual confidence, it could not fail to have a happy effect towards rendering dura-
ble the relations of amity so happily subsisting between the two countries. These
sentiments we, too, recorded with like solemnity on the protocol.
Several of our amendments were only verbal. We did not think that the re-
cital in the preamble met the whole case on both sides, and offered alterations,
some of which were approved. So the clause under which there might have been
a claim to continue impressment in the narrow seas, we objected, and it was, in ef-
fect, withdrawn. Nor did we like the particular mode, or place, in which Britain
reserved the right of search at the close of the fourth article. We suggested, in
lieu of it, that the words should go to a different article, and provide that neither
1 Impressment. 1) IPLOMATIC WRITING. 565
party should be affected by the treaty “ in any of their belligerent or neutral rights
as acknowledged by the law of nations, so far as modified, restricted, or suspended by
the treaty.” It becomes unnecessary however to dwell on these and other points
as to which the parties did not agree at first, since they might have agreed ultimate-
ly, had it not been for two that proved fatal to the plan. To the explanation of
these I therefore confine myself.
The second article, with a view to ascertain the persons who were to be ex-
cepted from those intended to be excluded from the sea service of either nation,
provides, that each shall furnish the other with a list of their names. This list was
to specify the place of their birth, and dates of their naturalization; and none but
persons whose names were upon it, were to full within the exception. To this provision
we were obliged to object, our laws not enabling us to meet all that it required.
As a substitute we proposed that “no natural born subject or citizen of either power
whose name should not be included in the list, should be deemed to fall within the eaccep-
tion, UNLESS HE PRODUCED PROOF of His HAVING BEEN DULY NATURALIZED PRIoR
TO THE EXCHANGE OF RATIFICATIONS OF THE TREATY.”
Reasons must be given why the United States could not comply with the
British article as it stood. Anterior to 1789, aliens were naturalized according to
the laws of the several states composing the Union. Under this system, the forms
varied and were often very loose. The latter was especially the case when they
were drawn up by justices of the peace, as sometimes happened. Since that epoch,
the forms have been uniform, and are only permitted before such courts of record
as are designated by the laws of the United States. But the designation includes
not only courts of the United States, properly so called, but courts of the several
states. Minor children also of naturalized persons, if the former be within the
limits of the Union, become ipso facto, naturalized. It must be added, that, for
several years no discrimination as to the birth place of aliens was recorded. If
attempts were made to procure the lists required, a first objection might have been
that the courts of the several states were not bound to obey, in this respect, a call
from the general government. But granting that all obeyed, the lists would have
exhibited nothing more than the names of British natural born subjects, natural-
ized during a period of nearly thirty years, They would not designate seamen, the
law not having required a record of the occupation; nor would they embrace minor
children, their names never having been directed to be registered. There was but
one other source from which lists could have been derived, and here only partially.
By a law of 1796, collectors of customs were required to keep books in which the
names of seamen, citizens of the United States, were, on their own application, to
be entered. Under this law, as may be inferred from its terms, the entry of names
was not full; nor did the law draw a distinction between native citizens and citi-
zens by naturalization.
From this summary it is manifest, that a compliance with the British article
would have been impracticable. The unavoidable consequence of consenting to
it would have been, that aliens naturalized before the treaty, and entitled by our
laws to all the rights of citizens, would, by an ex post facto and therefore uncon-
stitutional measure, have found themselves excluded from following the seas as
an occupation.
566 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Impressment.
All these obstacles we presented to the British plenipotentiaries; and they
were plainly such as we could not remove, whatever our desire. But we urged,
that the condition required, appeared unnecessary. . By the substitute we proposd,
every native born subject of Britain claiming the right of serving in our vessels,
and not being able to show his name upon the lists, would have to adduce other
proof of his naturalization. This other proof must have been, either the original
certificate of naturalization, or an authentic copy. It could have been on no better
proof, that any names would have returned in the lists. If minors claimed the
benefit of the exception, legal proof must have been given of their identity; to
which must have been subjoined, proof of the naturalization of their fathers. We
urged also the right reserved to either party of annulling the treaty at will, as af-
fording a sufficient security. It was a reservation, not of our choice, but acquiesced
in, to avoid objection, and supersede the necessity of details too complicated. It
gave Britain a remedy in her own hands against deviations from the true spirit of
the compact, whenever she believed any were committed.
But we could not prevail upon the British plenipotentiaries to recede from
their ground. They appeared to have taken up an impression which we were un-
able to expel, that great numbers of their seamen intended by the treaty to be ex-
cluded, would, but for the condition annexed, find their way into our service.
The other part of the projet that produced fatal diversity, was in the first
article. It ran thus: “provided always, that nothing contained in this article shall be
understood to apply to such natural born subjects or citizens of either power, as may
have been naturalized by their respective laws previous to the SIGNATURE of the present
treaty.” In place of SIGNATURE, we proposed “ExCHANGE OF RATIFICATIONs.”
To the former, we could not consent It would have brought with it the same
consequence—that of violating our Constitution. The obligations of a treaty are
not complete, until exchange of ratifications. To exclude from our service, sub-
jects naturalized prior to that date, would have involved the objection of ex post facto
The British plenipotentiaries would not agree to drop their word. Here too was
manifested what, to us, seemed needless apprehension. As by the laws of the
United States a residence of five years is one of the pre-requisites to naturalization,
the number of British seamen who could have come in between the two dates,
must have been extremely small; not worth consideration, as we supposed, in a
national point of view. But we could not succeed in making the British plenipo-
tentiaries think so. The subject was debated until the closing hours of the nego-
tiation, and then fell to the ground. It put the seal to the failure of our efforts.-
We had offered all that was possible under our Constitution and laws. We could
go no farther. -
The failure to accommodate this formidable source of strife between the two
nations, is only postponed, not defeated. If removed in no other way, it will cease,
ultimately, through the cessation of the practice as a home measure in England.
It cannot endure Inuch longer; it is impossible. Englishmen will get their minds
open to its true nature. It is the remark of a sagacious historian of their own, that
nations long after their ideas begin to enlarge and their manners to refine, adhere
to systems of superstition founded on the crude conceptions of early years. It is
the same with public abuses. The English part, reluctantly, with those sanction-
The Fisheries. J DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 567
ed by time; but at length, public scrutiny and the moral sense of the nation, fasten
upon them; as in the case, for example, of the slave trade. Reason emerges, as
from a cloud; the abuses fall, and loud reprobation succeeds to the long tolerance
that kept them up. Indications are not wanting of this coming change as to im-
pressment.
Finally, I superadd my testimony to that of every other American, that the
United States cannot again permit the exercise, by any Foreign power, of impress-
ment on board their vessels at sea. After the incontestible facts set forth in
[page 558 of this volume, they would be untrue to themselves, and the race they
spring from, if they did.
118. The Fisheries.
From the Same.
By the third article of the Treaty of September 1783, between the United States and Great
Britain, the people of the former had the “RIGHT to take fish on the Grand Bank,
“ and all other banks of Newfoundland; in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and all other places
“ in the sea, where the inhabitants of both countries had been used to fish before; and
the LIBERTY to fish on such part of the coast of Newfoundland as British fishermen
used, (but not to dry or cure fish there,) and on the coasts, bays and creeks of all other
British dominions in America. American fishermen had also the liberty to dry and
cure fish in any unsettled bays, harbours, and creeks of Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands,
and Labrador; but as soon as any of them were settled, this LIBERTY was to cease,
unless continued by agreement with the inhabitants.”
&
&
&
&
&
&
g
&C
6 &
These were RIGHTs and LIBERTIES of great magnitude to the United States.—
Besides affording profitable fields of commerce, they fostered a race of seamen con-
ducive to the national riches in peace, as to defence and glory in war. After the
peace of Ghent, the fishing vessels of the Union proceeded as formerly to fish off
the British coasts, and use the unsettled shores for curing and drying, according to
the stipulations of the above treaty. They were immediately ordered off by the
British naval forces. Some were captured. The ground alleged was, that the
treaty was no longer in existence. The government of the United States obtained
a suspension of these apparently hostile orders and proceedings until the two gov-
erments could make efforts for adjusting a question of so much moment.
The British doctrine was that the treaty of 1783 not being re-enacted or confirm-
ed by the treaty of Ghent, was annulled by the war of 1812.
The United States wholly dissented from this doctrine. They did not deny
the general rule of public law on which Britain relied; that a war puts an end to
previous treaties; but they insisted that the rule was not applicable to the treaty of
I783. That treaty, was peculiar in its nature and objects. It had no analogy to
common treaties and was not to be judged by their rules. It was a treaty by
which Great Britain had acknowledged the independence of the United States, af.
ter a seven years contest in arms. It made two empires out of one. It was a treaty
of separation. The rights of each party were laid down as primary and funda-
mental, in the act of dismemberment which the treaty established. So much of
territory and incidental rights in America, were allotted to one, so much the other
The entire instrument implied permanence. Hence all the fishing rights secured
under it to the United States, were placed by Great Britain upon the same founda-
tion with their independence itself. Was her acknowledgment of the latter revoked
568 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [The Fisheries.
by the war of 1812; or were the boundaries of the United States as affixed by the
treaty of 1783, annulled by that war! So far was this from being the case, that
the treaty of Ghent, in making provision for ascertaining with further accuracy some
parts of the boundary line, constantly referred to the treaty of 1783: thus manifest-
ing a tacit conviction on each side, that this treaty was regarded as the fundamen-
tal law of the relations between the two countries. By what rule then was the
war to destroy the treaty in some part and leave it whole in others? The use of
the word right in one place and liberty in another, could make no difference. A
liberty of unlimited duration, secured by so elementary and solemn a deed, was as
much a right as if stipulated by any other term. In speaking of rights and liberties
in a national sense, both terms were alike efficacious. Liberty might have seem-
ed the more appropriate term where an enjoyment was guaranteed to one party, of
a thing adjoining territory allotted to the other; but it took nothing from the perma-
mence of the allotment. In point of principle the United States were pre-eminent-
ly entitled to all these fisheries; and in point of fact they had enjoyed more of them
than any other portion of the British empire before the separation. The people
of New England, from their proximity, had been earlier led to the discovery and
improvement of the best fishing grounds, and had also, with other parts of the
Union, contributed amply in blood and treasure towards winning from France,
provinces on the coast of which some of the fisheries were situated. Apart from
the question of right, the claim of the United States had high sanctions. These
fisheries afforded subsistence to a numerous class of their inhabitants. By the
usages of nations, fishermen were a portion of human society, whose occupa-
tions, contributing to the general welfare of the species, were always regarded with
favour. Sometimes they were even exempt from the effects of war whilst it raged;
as when England herself allowed the Dutch to fish upon her coasts at such seasons.
The foregoing is a synopsis of the material arguments by which the claim of the
United States was defended. Whatever could shed light upon it, had been urged
by Mr Adams when in the English mission, with an ability and fullness that left
little to be said after him.
The claim was resisted by Great Britain in a manner to give proof of her equal
sincerity in the opposite doctrine. She denied that the treaty of 1783 had any
thing in its nature to exempt it from abrogation by a war. She knew of no ex-
ception to this rule of international law, and could not consent to give to her diplo-
matic relations with one state, a different degree of permanence from that on which
her connexion with all other states depended. She did not admit that this treaty
was to be regarded as in force, because the treaty of Ghent had referred
to it on the subject of boundaries. One object of the latter treaty was, the mutual
restoration of territory taken by either party from the other during the war. As a
necessary consequence of such a stipulation, each party reverted to their bounda-
ries as before the war; and the treaty of 1783 having fixed these, the treaty of Ghent
had referred to them as facts, nothing more. She contended that it was not unu-
sual for treaties containing recognitions and acknowledgments of perpetual obliga-
tion to contain likewise grants of privileges liable to be revoked.The treaty of '83
contained provisions of different characters; some in perpetuity, others from their
nature, temporary. If it were inferred, because some of the advantages specified
The Fisheries.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 569
would not be lost by a war; that therefore all were designed to be permanent, it
ought first to be shown that the advantages themselves were the same; or at least
of similar character. But what necessary connexion was there between a right to
national independence, and a liberty to fish within British jurisdiction, or use Brit-
ish territory! Liberties within British limits, were as capable of being exercised
by a dependent, as an independent state; they could not therefore be the necessary
consequence of independence. The independence of a nation was that which could
not be correctly said to be granted by a treaty, but to be acknowledged by one.
In the treaty of 1783 the independence of the United States was acknowledged by
Great Britain, as it had already been by the powers of Europe; and by Britain
herself, in her previous consent in November 1782, to enter into provisional articles.
Their independence might have been acknowledged without either the treaty or
provisional articles; but by whatever mode acknowledged, the acknowledgment
was, in its nature, irrevocable. A power of revoking or even modifying it, would
be destructive of the thing itself, and was therefore necessarily renounced when
the acknowledgment was made. She urged as corroborative of her reasoning,
notwithstanding the explanations suggested by the American plenipotentiaries,
the use of the word right when the United States were to take fish on the banks,
and other places from which Great Britain could not pretend to exclude any inde-
pendent nation, and liberty when they were to cure and dry within British territo-
ry. The latter was also made to depend on agreements with proprietors of the
soil, whenever the territory might become settled. As to the origin of the fishing
privileges in point of fact, she admitted that whilst the United States made part
of the British dominions, their inhabitants had the enjoyment of them in common
with other British subjects; but they had at the same time, like British subjects
every where, duties to perform. When therefore the United States, by their sepa-
ration from Great Britain, became released from the duties, they became excluded
also from the privileges of British subjects.—The above is a summary of the rea-
soning in its chief parts, against our claim. It was embodied in a paper by Lord
Bathurst, in October 1815, prepared with the force and zeal that the subject de-
manded. The views of each party on the question, had not been left out of sight
in negotiating the treaty of Ghent. [See page 571, art. 119, post.]
To the distinction so much insisted on by Great Britain between liberty and
right it was replied for the United States, that the former, if construed to imply
limitation of time, or precariousness of tenure, would defeat the whole meaning of the
article, as gathered from the context. The restriction itself, at the close of the ar-
ticle, stamped pormanence upon it. The intention was, the people of the United
States should continue to enjoy all the benefit they had formerly enjoyed from the
fisheries, with the exception of drying and curing on the shores of Newfoundland;
but when other shores on which they were to have this liberty, became settled,
then its exercise was to be conciliated with the proprietary rights of the owners of
the freehold. This was precisely the restriction to which British fishermen would
be liable. Whence it followed, that the argument against permanence on account
of the word liberty being used, if applicable to the inhabitants of the United States,
would also be applicable to the subjects of Britain. The argument therefore by
proving too much, proved nothing. The principles of municipal law in England,
which were the same in the United States, corroborated the interpretation for
72
576# DIPLOMATIc writing. [The Fisheries.
which the latter contended. By these, the property of a fishery was not necessa-
rily in the owner of the soil. The right to the soil might be exclusive; the fishery,
free or in common. Thus, whilst in this partition of the national possessions in
America, the jurisdiction over the shores where the fisheries were situated was re-
served to Great Britain, the fisheries themselves and accommodations essential to
their prosecution and enjoyment, were, by the mutual compact, agreed to be in
common. How different the course adopted in the treaty of Utrecht on a similar
point. By the twelfth article of that treaty, Nova Scotia was ceded to Britain; yet
the subjects of France were expressly excluded from fishing within thirty leagues
of the coast. This prohibition was renewed in the fifth article of the treaty of
Paris of 1763. By the eighteenth article of the same treaty, the subjects of Spain
were excluded from all fishing rights in the neighbourhood of Newfoundland.—
The treaty of 1783 was, therefore, it was again insisted, altogether unlike common
treaties. It contemplated a permanent division of coequal rights, not a transient
grant of mere privileges. The acknowledgment of independence, the establish-
ment of boundaries, and the guarantee of the fisheries, each rested upon the same
immutable basis.
Neither side yielded its convictions to the reasoning of the other. This being
exhausted, there was no resource left with nations disposed to peace, but a compro-
mise. Great Britain grew willing to give up something. The United States con-
sented to take less than the whole. After various proposals by the former, which
the latter rejected, as inadequate, we at length, as their plenipotentiaries, acceded
to the following: viz.—
“That the United States should have, FoREvKR, in common with the British subjects, the
“liberty to fish on the southern coast of Newfoundland, from Cape Ray to the Rameau Islands;
“ and from that cape to the Quirpon Islands on the western and northern coasts; and on the
“shores of the Magdalen-Hslands; and on the coasts, bays, harbours and creeks from Mount
“Joli, on the southern coast of Labrador, through the Straits of Belleisle, and thence indefi-
“nitely along the coast, northwardly; but without prejudice to any exclusive rights of the
“Hudson Bay Company: Also, the liberty, FoREven, to dry and cure fish in any of the un-
“settled bays, harbours and creeks of the southern coast of Newfoundland, as above described;
** and of the coast of Labrador; subject, after settlement, to agreement with the proprietors
“of the soil. In consequence of the above stipulations, the United States renounced forever
“the liberty of fishing within three miles of any other part of the British coasts in America, or
“of curing or drying on them. But American fishermen were to be permitted to enter bays
“or harbours on the prohibited coasts for shelter, repairing damages, and obtaining wood
“ and water, subject to restrictions necessary to prevent abuses.”
Such was the article, finally, agreed upon. The most difficult part of our task,
was on the question of permanence. Britain would not consent to an express clause
that a future war was not to abrogate the rights secured to us. We inserted the
word forever, and drew up a paper to be of record in the negotiation, purporting that
if the convention should from any cause be vacated all anterior rights were to re-
vive. The insertion of any words of perpetuity, was strenuously resisted by the
British plenipotentiaries. They said that in case of war, the only effect of their
omission would be, the necessity of providing in the treaty of peace, for the renew-
al of the right. We replied that we could agree to no article on the subject, un-
less the word forever was retained; or if any counter record was made on the pro-
tocol impairing its effect.
The Fisheries] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 57]
It was by our act that the United States renounced the right to the fisheries
not guaranteed to them by the convention. That clause did not find a place in the
British counter-projet. We deemed it proper under a threefold view; 1, to exclude
the implication of the fisheries secured to us being a new grant; 2, to place the
rights secured and renounced, on the same footing of permanence; 3, that it might
expressly appear, that our renunciation was limited to three miles from the coast.
This last point we deemed of the more consequence from our fishermen having in-
formed us, that the whole fishing ground on the coast of Nova Scotia, extended
to a greater distance than three miles from land; whereas, along the coasts of La-
brador it was almost universally close in with the shore. To the saving of the ex-
clusive rights of the Hudson's Bay Company, we did not object. The charter of
that company had been granted in 1670, and the people of the United States had
never enjoyed rights in that bay that could trench upon those of the company.
Finally, it is to be remarked, that the liberty of drying and curing on certain parts
of the coast of Newfoundland, as secured in the article, had not been allotted to
the United States, even under the old treaty of 1783.
119. The .imerican Plenipotentiaries to the Secretary of State,
On concluding the Treaty of Ghent with the British Plenipotentiaries. From “The
Fisheries and the Mississippi,” By John Q. Adams. Extract.
Ghent, 25th December, 1814. Sir: We have the honour of transmitting, here-
with, one of the three copies of the treaty of peace between Great Britain and the
{Jnited States, signed last evening by the plenipotentiaries of his Britannic majes-
ty and by us.
At the first conference on the 8th of August, the British plenipotentiaries had
notified to us, that the British government did not intend, henceforth, to allow to
the people of the United States, without an equivalent, the liberties to fish, and to
dry and cure fish, within the exclusive British jurisdiction, stipulated in their fa-
vour, by the latter part of the third article of the treaty of peace of 1783. And,
in their note of the 19th of August, the British plenipotentiaries had demanded a
new stipulation, to secure to British subjects the right of navigating the Missis-
sippi: a demand, which, unless warranted by another article of that same treaty of
1783, we could not perceive that Great Britain had any colourable pretence for
making. Our instructions had forbidden us to suffer our right to the fisheries to
be brought into discussion, and had not authorized us to make any distinction in
the several provisions of the third article of the treaty of 1783, or between that
article and any other of the same treaty. We had no equivalent to offer for a new
recognition of our right to any part of the fisheries, and we had no power to grant
any equivalent which might be asked for it by the British government. We con-
tended that that the whole treaty of 1783, must be considered as one entire and
permanent compact, not liable, like ordinary treaties, to be abrogated, by a subse-
quent war between the parties to it; as an instrument recognising the rights and
liberties enjoyed by the people of the United States as an independent nation, and
containing the terms and conditions on which the two parts of one empire had mu-
tually agreed thenceforth to constitute two distinct and separate nations. In con-
senting, by that treaty, that a part of the North American continent should remain
subject to the British jurisdiction, the people of the United States had reserved to
572 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Fisheries—Ind. Host.
themselves the liberty, which they had ever before enjoyed, of fishing upon that
part of the coasts, and of drying and curing fish upon the shores; and this reserva-
tion had been agreed to by the other contracting party. We saw not why this
liberty, then no new grant, but a mere recognition of a prior right, always enjoy-
ed, should be forfeited by a war, any more than any other of the rights of our na-
tional independence, or why we should need a new stipulation for its enjoyment
more than we needed a new article to declare that the king of Great Britain treated
with us as free, sovereign, and independent states. We stated this principle, in
general terms, to the British plenipotentiaries, in the note which we sent to them
with our project of the treaty; and we alleged it as the ground upon which no
new stipulation was deemed by our government necesssry to secure to the people
of the United States all the rights and liberties, stipulated in their favour, by the
treaty of 1783. No reply to that part of our note was given by the British pleni-
potentiaries; but, in returning our project of a treaty, they added a clause to one
of the articles, stipulating a right for British subjects to navigate the Mississippi.
Without adverting to the ground of prior and immemorial usage, if the principle
were just that the treaty of 1783, from its peculiar character remained in force in
all its parts, notwithstanding the war, no new stipulation was necessary to secure
to the subjects of Great Britain the right of navigating the Mississippi, as far as
that right was secured by the treaty of 1783; as, on the other hand, no stipulation
was necessary to secure to the people of the United States the liberty to fish, and
to dry and cure fish, within the exclusive jurisdiction of Great Britain. If they
asked the navigation of the Mississippi as a new claim, they could not expect we
should grant it without an equivalent; if they asked it because it had been granted
in 1783, they must recognise the claim of the people of the United States to the
liberty to fish and to dry and cure fish, in question. To place both points beyond
all future controversy,a majority of us determined to offer to admit an article confirm-
ing both rights: or, we offered at the same time, to be silent in the treaty upon both,
and to leave out altogether the article defining the boundary from the Lake of the
Woods westward. They finally agreed to this last proposal, but not until they had
proposed an article stipulating for a future negotiation for an equivalent to be giv-
en by Great Britain for the navigation of the Mississippi, and by the United States
for the liberty as to the fisheries within the British jurisdiction. This article was
unnecessary, with respect to its professed object, since both governments had it in
their power, without it, to negociate upon these subjects if they pleased. We re-
jected it, although its adoption would have secured the boundary of the 49th degree
of latitude west of the Lake of the woods, because it would have been a formal
abandonment, on our part, of our claim to the liberty as to the fisheries, recognised
by the treaty of 1783.
You will perceive by the correspondence, that the 9th article [relative to put-
ting an end to Indian hostilities] was offered us as a sine qua non and an ultimatum.
We accepted it, not without much hesitation, as the only alternative to a rupture of
the negotiation, and with a perfect understanding that our government was free to
reject it, as we were not authorized to subscribe to it. We have the honour to be &c.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS,
J. A. BAYARD, HENRY CLAY,
JONATHAN RUSSELL, ALBERT GALLATIN.
The Boundary] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 573
121. The Boundary.
From Mr Rush’s Residence at the Court of London.
The boundary line, from the lake of the Woods. This line had been originally
laid down in the treaty of 1783. It proved defective, and further provision was
made for running it, in the treaty of 1794.—Several attempts, for effecting this
provision, came to nothing. The cession of Louisiana by France in 1803 gave to
the United States new and extensive territory west of the Mississippi.—This
altered the relative position of Great Britain and the United States in this quarter,
and the hitherto unsettled boundary was now arranged.—It was provided, that
a line drawn from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods along the forty
ninth degree of latitude due west, should be the line of demarkation, forming the south-
ern boundary of the British territories and the northern bonndary United States, from
the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains. In case such a line would not run along
the forty ninth degree, but full above or below it, then the line was to be traced by first
drawing one from the same point, north or south as the case might be, writil it struck
forty mine; from which point of intersection the western line was to begin.—Thus it
was definitively settled.
An attempt was made by the British pleuipotentiaries io connect with this
article, [on the boundary line from the Lake in the Wocds] a clause securing to
Great Britain access to the Mississippi, and the right to its navigation. They
made a similar claim at Ghent, but withdrew it; and we declared that we could
consent to no clause of that nature. Its omission having, in the end, been agreed
to, that subject was also put at rest. Britain under the treaty of 1783, had the
right of navigating the Mississippi; but it was then the western boundary of the
United States. Their northern boundary, by the same treaty, was to have been
a line running due west from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods
to the Mississippi. It was afterwards ascertained that a line so drawn, would not
strike the Mississippi; its head waters not being within British limits, as first sup-
posed. Hence, all reason for Britain to claim the right of navigating a river which
touched no part of her dominions, ceased. The United States have claimed, in a
subsequent negotiation, the right of navigating the St. Lawrence, from its sources to
its mouth. The essential difference in the two cases, is, that the upper waters of
the St. Lawrence flow through territory belonging to both countries, and form a natu-
ral outlet to the ocean for the inhabitants of several states of the American Union.*
The third article effected a temporary arrangement of claims beyond the Rocky
Mountains and to Columbia river.
That settlement,called Astoria,made by Americans,was broken up by the British
during the war, but fell back to the United States by the treaty of Ghent, on the
principle of status ante bellum. The British plenipotentiaries manifested a strong
desire to connect this subject with that of the boundary line; and appeared unwil-
Jing, except under such a connexion, to agree to the line in any shape. We pro-
* See Definitive treaty between France and "Great Britain of 30th May, 1814, art. 5, page
147 of this volume. In the Congress of Vienna Treaties,the same stipulation is contained, on
the Navigation of Rivers, extending it to the Scheldt, Moselle, Meuse, Mayne, and Necker.
See general arrangements for the Navigation of Rivers, at large, as agreed on, by Eight
European Powers, page 181, also in this volume.
57% DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [Boundary–Com. Con.
posed its extension to the Pacific ocean. The treaty of Utrecht had fixed the
forty-ninth degree of latitude as the line between the possessions of Britain and
France, including Louisiana, since ceded to the United States. If therefore the
United States and Britain arranged their claims westward, the same line carried
on to the Pacific, seemed the natural one. We contended that, as far as prior
discovery could give the right to territory, ours was complete to the whole, on the
waters of the Columbia. It derived its name from the American ship that first
entered its mouth. It was first explored from its inland sources under the express
authority of the government of the United States. The British traveller, M*Kensie,
had mistaken another river for a branch of the Columbia; the American travellers,
Lewis and Clarke, as was now fully ascertained, having been the first to trace the
Columbia from the interior to the ocean. Astoria had, as incontestibly, been the
first permanent settlement at its month.
The British plenipotentiaries asserted, that earlier voyages of English naviga-
tors, amongst them Cook’s, gave to Britain the rights of prior discovery on this
coast. They alleged also that purchases of territory had been made by Britain,
or her subjects, from the natives south of this river, before the American revolu-
tion. They made no formal proposal of a boundary in these regions, but intima-
ted that the river itself was the most convenient, and said they could agree to none
that did not give them the harbour at its mouth, in common with the United States.
To this we could not assent, but were willing to leave things west of the moun-
tains, at large, for future settlement. To this they objected, and made in turn
propositions objectionable in our eyes. Finally it was agreed, that the country on
the north-west coast of America, westward of the Rocky Mountains, claimed by
either nation should be open to the inhabitants of both, for ten years, for purposes
of trade; with the equal right of navigating all its rivers.
I cannot leave this part of the negotiation without remarking, that the impor-
tant question of territorial rights which it involves between the two nations, is still
an open one; and I do not fear to record the prediction that it will be found a ques-
tion full of difficulty, under whatever administration either of Great Britain or of
the United States, it may hereafter be approached. It is not in the genius of either
nation readily to yield what it believes itself entitled to; and however strong our
own convictions of the just foundation of the whole of our claim on that coast and
its interior, the convictions of Great Britain in the stable nature of her right, that
interferes so materially with ours, is not less decided and unequivocal. Nor will
she push it with less zeal; not more on the general ground of her maritime and
commercial enterprise, which are only stopped by the limits of the globe, than on
her special desire to foster the growing interests of her colonial settlements all
over this continent, and those of the trading companies that issue from them.
The fourth article prolonged for ten years the existing commercial convention.
By its provisions, a reciprocal liberty of commerce is established between the
United States and the British dominions in Europe. Importations and exportations
into or from either nation, are to be the same as permitted to other nations, and
chargeable with no higher duties. The vessels of each nation, pay equal tonnage
duties in each other's ports; and duties upon merchandise imported into or expor-
ted from either, are the same whether conveyed in vessels of the one nation, or the
West India Trade.] DIPF,{}MATIC WRITING. 575
other. Other clauses give to vessels of the United States the right of trading
with the principal British settlements in the East Indies; viz. Calcutta, Madras,
Bombay and Prince of Wales’ Island; but it is only the direct trade between these
settlements and the United States, that is opened. The vessels of the United
States pursuing this trade, or going to China, may also touch for refreshments at
the Cape of Good Hope, St. Helena, or other possessions of Great Britain in the
African or Indian seas. These are the principal enactments of this commercial
convention. It was originally negotiated in the summer of 1815, by three public
men of the United States, long signalized in the home and foreign service, Mr.
Adams, Mr. Clay, and Mr. Gallatin.
121. Statement on the side of the U. States on opening the West India Trade.
From the same.
The U.States contend for a free intercourse in their vessels,with the British West
India Islands, and British colonies cn the continent of North America, whenever
the trade, to either, is opened at all by Great Britain to their flag; else they say,
that, by navigation acts of their own, they will be obliged to prohibit the trade al-
together. The steady policy of England has been, to secure as large an employ-
ment as possible of her own tonnage, in carrying on her commerce with the rest of
the world. Her celebrated navigation acts, commenced in Cromweli’s time and
adhered to in principle ever since, whatever occasional departures there may have
been from them in practice, have all had this end in view. They provided, that
the whole trade between England, and the continents of Asia, Africa and America,
should be carried on in English ships, manned by English sailors. They also
embraced regulations that placed the trade between England and the European
nations, upon nearly the same footing. It was against the previous monopoly of
Dutch tonnage that these navigation acts were levelled. What more matural, than
that other nations should be unwilling to witness the same monopoly in the ton-
nage of England, that she objected to in that of the Dutch; more especially since
the foreign and colonial dominions of the former have swelled to an extent that
could scarcely have been conceived in the time of Cromwell? The West India
Islands being part of the British empire, her right to interdict all trade between
them and any foreign country, could not be denied; and was not. As a general
rule, she did interdict it. But there were junctures when, to advance objects of
her own, she would throw the trade open to the United States. When she did
this, she confined it to her own ships, manned, as by law they must be, by their
own sailors. What the United States claimed was, that, whenever the trade exist-
ed at all, it should be carried on in their vessels, manned by their sailors, as well
as with the vessels and sailors of England. The trade once opened, the United
States were parties to it; and thence urged their right to a voice in its regulation.
This was their doctrine. It had been maintained since the days of President
Washington. It contemplated no interference with the colonial rights, or mono-
poly, of Great Britain. It left her at full liberty to prohibit the importation into
her colonies of whatever articles she thought fit, from the United States; and in
like manner to prohibit exportations. It only asked, that the commercial inter-
course, of whatever nature it might be, that was once opened for her benefit, or
that of both countries, should be placed upon a footing of equality as to the vessels,
576 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [West India Trade.
and sailors of both. This had lately been done in the trade between the United
States and the European dominions of Britain, by the convention of July 1815.-
That convention itself, unless the reciprocity were extended to the West Indies,
would give undue advantage to British vessels. The latter could sail, under its
enactments, from Liverpool to New York, for example, paying, in New York,
none other than American duties. Thence, under the English colonial System,
they could sail to the English West Indies, and back again to England; making
profit from this threefold operation. American vessels, on the other hand, were
confined to the direct track between New York and Liverpool. The British ship,
as was well expressed by a distinguished American senator, could sail on the
three sides of the triangle: the American, only on One.
Britain, on her part, alleged, that she had the right to regulate the trade be-
tween her colonies and the rest of the world in all respects as she saw fit. This
she declared it was proper she should do, not only as regarded the commodities
entering into the trade, but the vessels carrying them. She said, that to assent to
the basis of reciprocity in her trade between these islands and the United States,
would give to the latter inherent advantages owing to their proximity to the islands.
That she maintained the islands at great expense for their civil governments and
military establishments, and that on these grounds, as well as that of her general
sovereignty over them, not only had the right, but held it necessary to her just
interests to employ, chiefly, if not exclusively, her own vessels and seamen in the
trade, whenever opened, no matter to what extent, or or what inducements. Such
briefly, was the British doctrine. It will come into view again.
I will subjoin a brief commentary upon the original navigation act of England,
as passed by the Commonwealth parliament, in 1652. It is by Jenkinson, fiom
his work on treaties.
“Critics in commerce reason variously,” says he, “on the benefits or disad-
vantages of this act. Those who argue in its disfavour, reason on the general
principle of its being an error in politics to interrupt the free course of commerce
by any kind of prohibitions whatsoever; which is generally true, and would be al-
ways so, could one be assured of constant universal amity. But as that is very far
from being the case, the exception to the general rule in this case holds good,
since nothing is more clear, than that those who employ most ships will have most
seamen, and consequently be best enabled to command the sea. It was but too
evident by this short war [Cromwell’s with Holland] how near a match for us the
Dutch were, and continued so for some years after; and had not this act been made,
would very probably before this time have been too potent for us, as they would
have had the gross of the European seamen in their service; so that the act, not-
withstanding some inconveniences it might produce in point of commerce, was a
very happy thought in the making, and shows our judgment in its being continued.”
This celebrated act may be said to have changed the maritime condition of
the world. It continues to this day to affect the legislation of the United States.
The four articles of which Lord Castlereagh spoke, [formerly submitted by
the British government to Mr J. Q. Adams] reduced to their essence may be des-
cribed thus:–The first extended to the United States, the provisions of certain
Free Port acts, as they were called, authorizing a trade in the articles which they
enumerated, between certain specified ports of the British West Indies and the
West India Trade..] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 577
colonies of European nations, in vessels having only one deck. The second made
a special provision for the trade between the United States and the island of Ber-
muda, in a larger list of articles, and without limiting the size of the vessel. The
third allowed cotton and tobacco to be imported from the United States in their
own vessels to Turk’s Island, and salt to be taken away from that island, also in
their vessels. The fourth aimed at regulating the intercourse, though under many
Testrictions, between the United States and the British continental colonies in
America, adjoining the dominions of the former.
To his lordship’s inquiry as to the probability of my government agreeing to
these articles, I replied, that the President, when I left Washington, had them
under consideration, but I owed it to candour to say, that there was little likelihood
of their being accepted, so far did they fall short of the reciprocity desired He
afterwards inquired of what nature would be our counter-projet, in the event of their
rejection? I said, one that would open this trade fully, and, above all, give to
British vessels no privileges of any kind whatever, direct or incidental, over the
vessels of the U. S. The latter were ready to grant, in their ports, to British vessels
coming from the islands, all the privileges which their own vessels enjoyed; and
could not be content with less to their vessels, in the ports of the Islands. His
lordship here spoke generally of the colonial system of Britain. He said it was
interwoven with her whole commercial code, and code of navigation; and that she
owed it to interests which she believed to be important in both connexions, to ad-
here to the system in the main, however willing to submit to occasional or partial
relaxations. I rejoined, that, with whatever reluctance the United States would
adopt the policy of closing the trade altogether, in the continued absence of the re-
ciprocity for which they contended, they would, at last, be compelled to adopt it,
in necessary justice to their own commercial and navigating interests. I referred
him to some acts of Congress already passed with that intent. He wound up by
remarking, that Britain, considering the nature of her colonial system, had no right
to complain of measures of that character on the part of the United States, however
she might regret them; nor would she complain. She had maintained it so long,
that she would find it difficult on that, as well as other accounts, to change it.
It was a cardinal purpose, under our instructions that entire reciprocity should
be the basis of any regulations by treaty for opening this trade; and accordingly
we offered the following proposals as essential to the groundwork of our plan:—
That the vessels of the United States be permitted to import into the principal
ports of the British West Indies, which we enumerated, and into British colonial
ports on the continent of South America, naval stores, live stock, provisions of all
kinds, tobacco, lumber, and other productions of the United States, the importation
of which was allowed from other places. And also that they be permitted to
bring back cargoes of sugar, coffee, molasses, rum, salt, and other productions of
the foregoing ports or islands, the exportation of which was allowed at other places.
The vessels of Great Britain to be confined to the same articles of trade, so that
they might have no advantage over those of the United States; the tonnage duties
on the vessels of each nation to be the same; and each to be allowed to touch during
the voyage, at one or more ports of the other, to dispose of inward or ship outward
cargoes. Duties of import and export to be the same on all cargoes, whether car-
an
73
578 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [West India Trade,
ried in American or British vessels, and neither party to charge higher duties
upon the productions of the other, than were charged on similar productions in their
trade with other places. Regarding the colonies of Britain in North America, we
proposed, that both American and British vessels be allowed to import into them,
from the United States, the same productions as allowed above, and bring back
any productions of those colonies, admitted into the United States from other places;
tonnage duties upon the vessels of each nation, to be equal here also, and the duties
on all cargoes to be the same, whether carried in the vessel of the one nation or
the other.
The British Plenipotentiaries on receiving these proposals, declared them to
be inadmissible. They amounted, they said, to a much greater departure from
the colonial system of Britain, than she was prepared to sanction. They alleged
the impossibility of breaking down the system, favoured as it still was by public
opinion, and leagued in with various interests, national and individual. The trade
of their North American colonies in salted fish and lumber, the export trade in
beef, pork, and flour, from Ireland, the British shipping interest, and the interest
of non-resident West India planters, were among those to which they referred.—
They were willing to admit reciprocity in the trade, (tonnage it will be borne in
mind is not included under this term) between the United States and West Indies,
to a certain extent; but our plan opened it too far. They were willing to open,
for example, all the ports we had enumerated, (Bermuda being of the number)
except St. Christophers, St. Lucia, Demarara, Essequibo, and Berbice; the ex-
ception of the three last, growing out of their engagements with Holland. But if
they admitted a specified number of articles in the direct trade with the islands,
they thought that we ought to consent to a larger list in the trade with Halifax
and St. Johns on the North American continent; and also with Bermuda; we ought
not to ask that the trade be confined to the same articles with all their possessions,
insular and continental. They claimed also a right for their vessels coming from
Great Britain, to touch at any port of the United States and take cargoes for the
West Indies; alleging that without this right, the proximity of the United States
to the Islands, would give our vessels an undue advantage, and they were willing
to agree to a provision, that our vessels should have the same right; a provision,
however, the reciprocity of which would have been only nominal. In the end they
TCrmarked, that one of our proposals went the length, in effect, of restraining Great
Britain from laying higher duties upon articles imported into her islands from the
United States, than on similar articles coming from her own possessions in North
America; to which they very pointedly objected, urging the natural right of Great
Britain to resort to duties of this kind for the purpose of favoring the productions,
agricultural or otherwise, of any part of her own dominions.
We did not pretend to deny this last principle; but remarked, that truth in
abstract propositions, did not always bear enforcement internationally. We con-
tended that the application of this principle to the trade in question, would prove
altogether unjust to the United States. Britain made a distinction, which of course
she had the right to do, in her commercial intercourse between her home domin-
ions and colonies. She even drew a distinction in the regulations of trade between
her North American colonies, and her West India Islands. The United States
West India Trade.j DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 579
were therefore, in a commercial view, obliged to consider each of these portions of
her empire, as many distinct countries. To the United States, they were distinct,
as well by geographical situation, and nature of their productions, as by this poli-
cy of the parent country. Nor was this mere theory. In the business of trade, it
worked tangible results. The United States made an offer to lay no higher duties
on productions imported into their ports from British Islands, than on similar pro-
ductions from other foreign countries. Britain met this by apparent, but owing to
the division of her dependencies into separate countries for commercial purposes,
certainly not by real justice; she offered to lay no higher duties on productions im-
ported from the United States into her Islands, than were charged on similar ones
from other foreign countries. Now, this offer would be reciprocal in words only,
unless it went farther; it ought to add, than up on similar productions from any
other place, according to our proposals. The reason was obvious; the British Islands
were supplied with similar productions from no other foreign country than the United
States. The only similar ones, in amount deserving to be mentioned, would go from
the North American colonies of Britain herself. The only competition in the sup-
ply would therefore be, between these latter colonies and the United States; where-
as, there would be a real foreign competition on the productions imported into the
United States from the British Islands; similar ones being constantly imported,
and in large amount, from the Islands or colonies of other foreign powers. Hence
the clause would be operative for Great Britain, and only nominal for the United
States. It was plain that the former could turn it to her own account; her vessels
might come to the Uuited States from her Islands, with the productions of the
Islands; whilst the vessels of the United States would find little encouragement in
going to the Islands with the productions of the United States, because British
productions of the same kind would get there in British vessels from Halifax, St.
John’s, or other British possessions, under duties sufficiently low to vanquish
American competition. Such was our answer to this objection. At first sight, the
objection wore a fair appearance. It seemed unreasonable to say that Britain
must not be left at liberty to foster, by high duties, as she saw fit, the productions
of any part of her own dominions. Iłut unless the United States took this ground,
they could secure no substantial reciprocity to their own vessels in carrying on the
trade to be arranged; and this, plainly because Britain stamps upon her colonies,
as regards the interests of navigation and trade, the double aspect described—one
making them separate communities—the other part and parcel of the same empire
with the mother country—as it may serve to benefit the latter, or bear hard on
foreign nations; particularly, from the causes stated, on the United States.
We alleged also the inexpediency of consenting to a limited number of arti-
cles as the objects of a direct trade between our ports and the Islands, and allowing
an indefinite or even larger list to go circuitously. The effect of this would in
like manner be, what the United States aimed at preventing—a disproportionate
employment of British tonnage. The articles not allowed to go to the Islands direc-
tly, would be sent through Halifax, St. John’s or Bermuda. To these ports, it
is true, they might go in American vessels; but, arrived there, they would be trans-
ferred to British vessels, and carried to the Islands exclusively in the latter. It
was a main point with the United States to guard their own shipping from this
source of danger.
580 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [west India Trade.
It was so that we reasoned. Nevertheless, it was our duty to pay a just re-
gard to the considerations which Great Britain had presented; and we expressed
a desire to listen to any specific proposals she would make. We asked for a scale
of duties that would exhibit the maximum of those intended for the protection
of the agricultural or other produce of her own dominions; but no such document
was prepared for our consideration. In further reply to the British doctrine about
duties, we naturally remarked, that, if enforced against the United States, the lat-
ter ought undoubtedly to retain the option of laying higher duties on the produc-
tions of the British Islands, than on those of countries where the productions of
the United States were, or might be, received on better terms than in the British
Islands. We also declared that we could agree to no proposals for regulating the
intercourse with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, unconnected with the Islands.
After these and other particulars had been fully canvassed, it became evident
that the parties were too wide asunder to give hope of meeting on ground that
would satisfy both. The British plenipotentiaries candidly expressed themselves
to that effect; but as we invited proposals, they gave them. Their proposals ad-
hered to the principles of protecting the productions of their North American col-
onies, by levying higher duties on similar productions from the United States. They
also claimed the right for British vessels sailing from the European dominions
of Britain, to touch at ports of the United States for the purpose of taking in car-
goes for the West Indies. In other respects, as these nominally, they admitted
the principles of reciprocity, as far as the trade was to be open. But the restric-
ted it in a way to be little acceptable to the United States. Neither sugar, nor
coffee, was allowed to be among the direct exports to the United States from the
Islands, although we would have consented to a limited amount of each; nor were
salted provisions of any kind, including fish, nor lumber, generally, for under the
last head there were slight Cxceptions, to be allowed among the imports into the
Islands, from the United States. Yet it was proposed that not only sugar and cof-
fee, but all articles of the produce or manufacture of any of the British dominions, and
even East India articles, should be admitted into the United States through the cir-
cuitous channels of Bermuda, Halifax and St. John’s. It was also asked, that, in
the whole trade, Britain, by all the regulations of all the United States, should sland
upon as good a fooling in their ports, as any other foreign nation. Such were the
main features of their proposals.
Britain would agree to no arrangement of the intercourse by land, or inland
navigation, with her American continental possessions bordering on the United
States, different from the one rejected with the four articles submitted by Lord
Castlereagh. Nor would she let us take our produce down the St. Lawrence as
far as Montreal, or down the Chambly as far as the St. Lawrence.
On referring her proposals to our government, with all the views elicited
from her plenipotentiaries, they were unequivocally rejected. In progress of time,
renewed negotiations were held between the two governments, some whilst I re-
mained at the British court, some afterwards. Each government gave up some
of the ground taken in this negotiation; but no arrangement, by treaty, has ever
yet been made upon this subject. The trade stands upon regulations adopted by
the statutes of each nation, which each is at liberty to modify or recall. Until
West India Trade. DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 581
opened by these regulations, the prohibitory laws of the Union would not allow
supplies from the British Islands to come directly to the United States, or to go
directly from the United States to the Islands, in the vessels of either power. The
reason was, that as Britain would not allow them to come and go in this manner,
on terms that the United States deemed of equal advantage to their vessels, they
preferred that the direct intercourse should cease altogether. It is obvious, that
the dispute was about tonnage, rather than the productions or merchandize of either
party. These were still permitted to be consumed in the territories of each; but
it was necessary to import them in round-about ways.
On a Spanish ambassador once representing to Cromwell that the Inquisition
and colonial trade, were his master’s two eyes, Cromwell replied, “Then I must
trouble your master to put out his two eyes.” We cannot address England in such
language, although England did Spain; but we may at least remark, that as far
as she enforces her colonial system in her intercourse with other nations, the latter
will, so far, lose the benefit of equal competition. The United States cannot, it is
true, complain that she violates any of their rights in allowing the vessels of her
own subjects in her North American colonies, to trade with her Islands on better
terms, than the vessels of the United States; but, to whatever extent she does so,
it is manifest that, to the same extent, American tonnage must labour under intrin-
sic disadvantages, and the British be likely to shoot ahead of it; which is the basis
of the competition at present—[1818].
122. Arrangement for opening the West India Trade. Mr McLane
to the Earl of Aberdeen.
9, Chandos-street, Portland Place, July 12th, 1830.
The right Hon. the Earl of Aberdeen, &c. &c. &c.
The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from
the United States, has had the honor already, in a personal conference, to explain
to the Earl of Aberdeen, his Majesty's principal secretary of State of Foreign Aſ-
fairs, certain measures adopted by the Congress of the United States, during their
late session, which have an immediate and important bearing on the relations of
the two countries, and upon the proposition heretofore submitted by the under-
signed, respecting the West India trade. Having received from the Earl of Aberdeen
an intimation of the propriety of communicating those measures in a more formal
manner, the undersigned has the honor herewith to transmit such information on
the subject as he is now in possession of.
The first of the measures alluded to is an act of the Congress of the United
States, authorizing the President, in the recess of Congress, to annul all the restric-
tive and discriminating measures of the United States, and to open the ports to British
vessels trading with the British West Indies in the manner particularly pointed
out in the act; a copy of which, for the better explanation of the case, the under.
signed begs leave to subjoin.
The undersigned has the honor also to inform lord Aberdeen, that, during the
late session of the Congress of the United States, several other laws were passed,
by which, in lieu of the duties imposed upon certain articles of the produce of the
West India islands, and of the possessions of Great Britain, by previous regula-
tions, the following duties only are to be collected; that is to say:
582 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. | West India Trade.
Upon molasses, a duty of five cents, instead of ten cents, per gallon, allowing at the
at the same time a drawback of the duty upon all rum which may be manufactured from that
article, and exported from the United States;
On salt, a duty of ten instead of twenty cents per bushel;
On cocoa, a duty of one cent per pound on all imported after the 31st of December, 1830,
or remaining at that time in the custom-house stores under the bond of the importer;
And on coffee, a duty of two, instead of five cents per pound, from and after the 31st of
HDecember, 1830; and of one cent per pound from and after the thirty-first day of December,
1831, and the same duties to be taken on coffee remaining at the respective times under bond
in the custom-house stores.
The undersigned will not permit himself to doubt, that, in the first of these
acts,"emanating from the frank and friendly spirit which the President has uni-
formly professed, and passed with an avowed reference to the pending negotia-
tion, the Earl of Aberdeen will see new and irresistible motives for concurring
in the promotion of the end to which this measure directly leads.
Such a measure could not have been recommended by the President, without
incurling a deep responsibility towards his own country, and feeling a confident
reliance upon the justice and magnanimity of this.
It is a voluntary and leading step in the conciliating policy of the two na-
tions, taken in disdain of the restraints of form, and which, if met in a corres-
ponding spirit, cannot ſail to produce that friendly intercourse and real harmony
so ardently desired by those who consult the true interests and glory of both
countries. It concedes in its terms all the power in the regulation of the colonial
trade, and authorizes the President to confer on British vessels all those privi-
leges, as well in the circuitous as the direct voyage, which Great Britain has at
any time demanded or desired. It has done this in the only manner in which it
was possible for Congress, at the present moment, and under existing circum-
stances, to act, without a total abandonment of even those advantages conceded
by the present regulations of Great Britain, and without raising up new interests
to obstruct the favorable disposition expressed by this Government. Nor will
the undersigned conceal his hope and belief that this act will stamp the negotia-
tion with a new and more favorable character; and that the United States having
thus taken the first step, and particularly defined the terms of their legislation,
the mode of adjustment may be disencumbered of even those objections with
which it was supposed to be embarrassed when submitted to Lord Dudley, and
by the answer which on that occasion was given to Mr. Gallatin. The objec-
tions suggested at that period on the part of Great Britain had no special or ex-
clusive reference to the measure in question, but to the giving of any prospective
pledge by which she might commit herself to the adoption of any specific line
of conduct contingent on events which could not be foreseen, and to the entering
into any informal agreement as to mutual acts of legislation, while it was im-
possible to anticipate the details with which those acts might be accompanied, or
the position and circumstances in which the two countries, and the commercial
commonwealth generally, might be placed at the time when the laws enacted
should come into effect. If these objections could at any time have been essen-
tial to the subject, which the undersigned by no means admits, they certainly are
not so at present.
West India Trade] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 583
The act of Congress has been passed without any pledge, prospective or
otherwise; it therefore relieves the adjustment of this subject from that part of
the difficulty. The details of the colonial legislation on the part of the United
States are precisely defined and fully explained by the law. Frankly announcing
all this, it leaves to Great Britain herself the selection of the mode and time in
which, according to her conception of her own interests, she may restore the di-
rect trade between the United States and the West Indies. She is enabled de-
liberately to do this, with a full knowledge of the beforementioned details, and of
the precise position and circumstances, as well of the two nations, as of the
commercial commonwealth in general, at the time when the measures are to come
into effect. This she may do without any risk as to the future, and with the cor-
tainty that, while doing an act of justice to a friendly power, and relieving it
from an invidious exclusion from advantages allowed to all other nations, she is
contributing materially to the prosperity of her possessions in the West Indies.
The undersigned will not dismiss this subject without oxpressing the hope
and persuasion thaf, in the other measures of Congress alluded to, the Earl of
Aberdeen will find not merely all the considerations heretofore urged for giving
now facilities to the trade between the United States and the British West Indios
materially strengthened, if not absolutely confirmed, but that a further and more
favorable alteration is thereby made in the object and charactor of the negotiation.
These measures manifest at least a laudable desire to loose the shackles of
trade and commerce, which, if England is so disposed, she cannot better encou-
rage than by a relaxation of her own restraints upon the particular branch of trade
under discussion.
The Earl of Aberdeen has been already informed that the consumption of for-
eign molasses in the United States is not less than thirteen millions of gallons,
even under the discouragement of the high rate of duty, and a denial of the draw-
back, which nearly proved fatal to the chief source of consumption—the distillo-
ries of New England. It is obvious, however, that the reduction of the duty to
its present low rate, and the allowance of the drawback, must swell the demand
for this article even beyond the ordinary amount, which, in the regular course of
a direct trade, would seek its principal supply in the British West Indies.
Of coffee, not less than thirty-seven millions of pounds were annually im-
ported into the United States; and of those in a regular trade, not less than eight
millions from the British West Indies.
Of four hundred thousand pounds of cocoa annually imported into the United
Srates, little less than one-fourth was brought from the British West Indies.
The Earl of Aberdeen will readily perceive, that the reduction of duty on
these articles, and especially on coffee, to a rate which will soon be little more
than nominal, cannot ſail to at least double the importation.
Those remarks apply with even additional force to the article of salt, the
consumption of which is more dependent on the rate of duty than that of any
other necessary of life.
The enormous quantity of this article requisite to supply the wants of twelve
millions of people, is too obvious to need any conjectural assertion; but it is wor-
thy of observation that, notwithstanding the extent of the home Supply encou-
raged by the high duty of twenty cents per bushel, the annual importation of that
584 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Prest India Trade.
article from abroad seldom amounted to less than five millions of bushels. Of
this amount more than three millions came from Great Britain and her posses-
sions, her West India islands furnishing at least one million.
To what extent this amount may be enlarged by the increased consumption
arising from the low rate of duty and the advantages of an easy trade, the Earl
of Aberdeen may readily conjecture.
It should be remarked, also, that, while the consumption of this article is
thus augmented, the diminution of the duty must proportionably diminish the
price of Salted provisions. So far as these, therefore, form part of the supplies to
the West Indies, the subsistence of the islands will be cheapened, while the de-
mand for their produce is increased.
It should not escape the attention of the Earl of Aberdeen that the provisions
of these acts of the Congress, so far as they relate to cocoa, coffee, and salt, con-
fer encouragement on the trade of the West Indies, with the United States, which
did not exist, and could not have been contemplated at the period of passing the
act of Parliament of 1825. They therefore superadd new and important motives
for restoring the trade then offered, and for restoring it upon terms not less fa-
vourable.
While the participation of the British islands is invited in the advantages to
be derived from this enlarged and increasing demand of the United States for the
produce of the West Indies, the undersigned takes leave to suggest the expedien-
cy of securing that participation before the trade may be exclusively diverted into
other channels by the superior advantages of a direct intercourse with other islands.
In closing this communication to the Earl of Aberdeen, the undersigned will
take the occasion to repeat his deep interest in the subject, and a renewed hope of
an early and favorable issue. The Earl of Aberdeen will not fail to appreciate
the spirit and motive by which the President was actuated in recommending, and
the Congress in passing, the act to which allusion was first made. The effects
of delay upon the commercial enterprise of the United States, and the disappoint-
ment of interests desirous of a different measure of legislation, though they offer-
ed great embarrassments, were not the greatest difficulties attendant upon that
act. To give to Great Britain the fullest time to consult her own interest and
convenience; to make a further and a signal effort to place the commercial relations
of the two countries upon a footing of sure and lasting harmony; and to guard, in
a manner consistently with duty, against delay during the recess of Congress;
could only be done by a measure calculated also to awaken at once the spirit of
commercial speculation, and to create new expectations of favorable dispositions
on the part of this Government.
If, as the undersigned will continue to hope, the British Government should
find it their interest to realise these expectations, their measures will derive addi-
tional grace from the frankness and promptitude with which they may be adopted;
and if, unfortunately, these hopes are destined to experience a disappointment, it
is not less the duty of his Majesty's Government to quiet the public expectations
thus excited, and to mitigate, as far as may be in its power, the injurious effects
thereof, by giving an early reply to the application which, in behalf of his Go-
Vernment, the undersigned has had the honor to submit.
The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to Lord Aberdeen
the assurances of his highest consideration: LOUIS McLANE.
ſpest India Trade] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 585
123. Mr McLane to JMr Van Buren.
Successful Issue of the Negotiation on the Colonial Trade.
London, August 20th, 1830. Sir: I have the satisfaction to forward herewith
a letter from the Earl of Aberdeen, dated the 17th instant, by which it will be per-
ceived that my negotiation for the colonial trade is successfully closed; and that
this Government consents to restore to us the direct intercourse with her American
colonies, upon the terms of the proposition submitted by me on the 12th of De-
cember last.
It will be perceived, also, that, from an apprehension that the late act of Con-
gress might admit of an interpretation incompatible with the terms of my proposition,
and the act of Parliament of the 5th July, 1825, the British government have ac-
companied their consent with an explanation of the construction which, in their
opinion, the law ought to receive, and to which their proceedings will be conformed.
This is precautionary, however, and intended to guard against misapprehension in
future. The proclamation of the President, which is authorized upon evidence,
satisfactory to himself, will be immediately followed, upon the part of Great Britain
by the revocation of the order in council of July, 1827, the abolition of the dis-
criminating duties on American vessels in British colonial ports, and by extending
to the vessels of the United States the advantages of the act of Parliament of the
5th July, 1825.
If it had been admitted that the late act of Congress varied intentionally from
the terms of our proposition, and the British act of the 5th July, 1825, and demand-
ed advantages not contemplated by the latter, it would have been considered as
reviving pretensions already given up, and must have had the effect of entirely
defeating any hope of recovering the colonial trade. Recurring to your letter of
18th June last, communicating the President’s message to Congress and a copy of
the law, I did not doubt that the act was, in fact, intended to authorize the Presi-
dent to give effect, in the recess of Congress, to the known and uniform object of
the negotiation and to accept a renewal of the trade upon the terms of the proposition
which I had been authorized to make. I felt it my duty, therefore, to concur in
the suggestion that the supposed deviations in the law from the act of the 5th of
July, 1825, were apparent merely, and neither intentional, nor for the purpose of
advancing any new claim upon the part of our Government.
My instructions authorized me to propose that the United States should now
comply with the conditions of the act of 5th July, 1825, by repealing our restric-
tive laws, “if such a measure would lead to the revocation of the order in council
of July, 1827, to the abolition or suspension of all discriminating duties on Ameri-
can vessels in the British colonial ports, and to the enjoyment by us of the advan-
tages of the last mentioned act of Parliament.”
These instructions were literally pursued in the proposition which I submitted
in December last, and, together with it, were communicated to Congress. But it
will be apparent to you that, if the law necessarily authorize a different construc-
tion than that adopted by this government, it will not be a compliance with the
conditions of the act of Parliament, but demand advantages which, by that act,
are expressly denied, and by this Government allowed to no other country.
74
586 DIPLOMATIG WRITING. | West India Trade
The navigation act of Great Britain, by which all her previous acts upon that
subject are repealed, and her system permanently established, passed simultaneous-
ly with the act of the 5th July, 1825, regulating the trade of the British possessions
abroad; and by that act the importation, both into her European and colonial ports
is restricted to the vessels of the country of which the articles imported shall be
the produce. Nor has this restriction been considered inconsistent with our com-
mercial convention with Great Britain, which we have anxiously sought to extend
to the colonial intercourse. The beforementioned act of the 5th of July, 1825,
regulating the trade with the British possessions abroad, refers, in express terms,
to the act concerning navigation, and limits the right of importation into the British
colonial ports to American produce, and to vessels coming directly from the ports
of the United States. By acceding to the terms of our proposition, therefore,
Great Britain extends to our vessels all the advantages of the act of the 5th July,
1825. She moreover places the United States, in the intercourse with the colonies,
on the same footing with all other nations; and by assenting to regulations, though
by legislative enactment, in the colonial trade, similar to those provided by our
commercial convention for the intercourse between the United States and the
British possessions in Europe, she now concedes to us, in this respect, substan-
tially that which we have been ineffectually seeking since the year 1815.
I am not aware that the restriction of the right of importation into the colonies
to articles of American produce, was at any period seriously objected to by our
Government. Nor can the difference, in this respect, between American and British
vessels, if we allow it to continue, be an object of much importance in any point
of view. It will generally be our interest, as it is that of every other nation, to al-
low the exportation of its surplus foreign produce in the vessels of any other coun-
try. It must be observed, also, that this is a privilege resulting from the general
spirit of our laws, and therefore resting in our discretion. There is nothing in the
arrangement now proposed to prevent the United States from hereafter denying to
British vessels this advantage, if it prove injurious to their commerce, and in plac-
ing by that means the vessels of both countries, in this respect, upon an equal foot-
ing. I ought to observe, however, that sound policy would not warrant such a
measure at any time.
Independently of these considerations, it is certain that both the restrictions
now reserved by the construction adopted by this Government were absolutely
conceded by ours before the present negotiation commenced, and could not have
been renewed at present with any hope of success. More than has been secured
by the present labors, the concessions of the last administration precluded us from
demanding. But if this had not been so, more could not have been obtained.
In the letter of Mr Gallatin to Mr Clay of the 27th October, 1826, the mean-
ing of the British act of Parliament of 5th July, 1825, which does not appear to
have been previously understood by our Government, is fully and intelligibly ex-
plained. To ascertain the precise state of the regulations at that period, and the
extent of the conditions and restrictions prescribed by the famous act of July, 1825,
Mr Gallatin reviewed all the British statutes upon this subject and superadded the
following observations:
“From what precedes, it follows, first, that the restrictions which limits the impor-
*ations in foreign vessels of goods into the British West Indies and American colonies, to vee-
West India Trade] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. b87
sels of the country of which the goods are the produce, and coming direct from such country,
having been revived by the navigation act of the 5th July, 1825, is still in force; secondly, that
the restriction which limited the exportations in foreign vessels, of goods exported from the
British West Indies and American colonies, to a direct exportation to the country to which
such vessel did belong, is so far repealed as that such exportations in such vessels may be
made to any country whatever, Great Britain and its dependencies excepted.”
“Although there is no prospect that any arrangement will shortly take place on that
subject, yet it is desirable to be prepared for any contingency. And I wish that the Presi-
dent would take into consideration whether, supposing an arrangement, either by convention
or by mutual modification on both sides of existing laws or regulations, to be practicable, it
would be proper, so far as relates to navigation, to agree to the terms contained in the acts of
AParliament.” -
“The most important of the restrictions on the direct or circuitous trade, that which lim-
ited the exportation from the British West Indies in American vessels to the United States,
has been repealed; and there remain but two—such exportations cannot be made in American
vessels to Great Britain or her dependencies, a point on which we cannot insist, and which is
already given up by the instructions; and the importations into those colonies of Americnn pro-
duce, must, if made in Jimerican vessels, be direct from the United States. Is it necessary, on
that account, to insist on the right of preventing British vessels, other than those coming di-
rect from the colonies, from clearing from the United States for those colonies? Or, in other
words, (for it is clear that with such restriction no arrangement is practicable,) is it worth
while, on that account, to continue to cut off altogether, the intercourse between the United
States and the British colonies? On that question I beg leave to submit two observations.
First, the right of importing produce of the United States into British West Indies from other
places than the United States; is in itself of no great value. It might occasionally be conve-
nient, when the market of Cuba, or of other ports in the Gulf of Mexico, was glutted with
American produce, to have a right to take it in American vessels to the British West India
ports; but it is but rarely that these will not, from the same causes, be also glutted at the
same time, and that the expense of a double voyage and freight could be incurred. Secondly,
whilst contending for nominal reciprocity, we must acknowledge that the other party must
consider how far this reciprocity will be real. It is now ascertained that four-fifths of the ton-
nage employed in our intercourse with Great Britain herself are American, and only one-fifth
British. Considering the species of population, the climate, and commercial capital of the
West Indies, and the distance of Great Britain, it is utterly impossible that the direct inter-
course between the United States and the British West Indies should not, with equal duties
and charges, be carried on in a still greater proportion in vessels of the United States. The
only compensation, in that respect, to Great Britain, is to be found in the circuitous voyages
which British vessels may make from that country through the United States and her West
Indin colonies; and I feel quite confident—I think any man acquainted with the subject will
be of the same opinion—that even granting them that privilege, will leave more than three
fourths of the intercourse to our vessels. *
“It will not escape you that the intercourse by sea between the United States and the Brit-
ish West Indies and North American eolonies, has already been considered as necessarily
connected together by the British Government, and that this connexion has been kept up in
the acts of Parliament, in the articles proposed by Mr. Itush, and indeed in all former propo-
sals on their part.”
In consequence, as it may be supposed, of this explanation and advice from
Mr Gallatin, our Government thenceforward abondoned whatever pretensions they
may have previously set up beyond the acts of Parliament In a letter from Mr.
Clay, dated April 11th, 1827, containing further instructions to Mr Gallatin, he
was informed— *
588 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [West India Trade.
* That the President is willing to recommend to Congress, at its next session, first, to
suspend the alien duties on British vessels and cargoes, and allow their entry into our ports
with the same kind of British or British colonial produce as may be imported in American
vessels, the vessels of both countries paying the same charges; and, secondly, to abolish the
restriction in the act of 1823 to the direct intercourse between the United States and the Brit-
ish colonies, leaving Great Britain in the exclusive possession of the circuitous trade between
Great Britain proper, through her colonies, and the United States. Mr. Gallatin will inquire
whether the passage of an act of Congress to that effect would lead to the revocation of the
British order in council of July, 1827, to the abolition of the discriminating duties on American
vessels in the British colonial ports, and to the enjoyment by our vessels of the advantages of
ſered by the act of the 5th July, 1825.”
These propositions were communicated by Mr. Gallatin to the British Go-
vernment, in a note to Lord Dudley, of the 17th of August, 1827; in which he re-
marks that “this mode would repeal all former acts of the American Government
which had been objected to by Great Britain, fulfil the condition in the act of
Parliament as now understood, and remove every obstacle in the way to an ar-
rangement; but that it would be useless for the President to make such recom-
mendation, without first ascertaining the intentions of the British Government;”
and he therefore inquired “whether, upon the passage of such an act as the Presi-
dent proposes to recommend, the British Government would allow to American
vessels the privileges of trade and intercourse, according to the act of the 5th
July, 1825?” With these communications, it will be seen that my instructions,
and the overture by me submitted on the 12th December last, and now assented
to by Great Britain, are entirely coincident.”
I have been thus minute that the precise and uniform object of our negotiation
with this Government should not be mistaken; and that the President, clearly and
explicitly understanding these, may feel no hesitation, when executing the law,
to interpret each particular clause in conformity with the obvious scope and de-
sign of the act.
Less difficulty, if possible, than on these points, can exist in regard to the
entry of British vessels and their cargoes in the ports of the United States, from
the islands, provinces, or colonies, designated in the second section of the act.
According to Mr. Gallatin’s despatch, “the intercourse by sea between the United
States and the British West Indies and North American colonies, has already
been considered as necessarily connected together by the British Government, and
and that this connexion has been kept up in all the acts of Parliament.” It will
not, therefore, be now separated. The general terms employed in this section
are sufficiently comprehensive to embrace any description of entry; and in his
instructions to the several collectors, the President may properly direct an entry
similar to that specified in the first section of the bill, and in the spirit of our
proposition.
Such, I presume, was the purpose of the law. I have, however, suggested
to this Gcvernment, in answer to the difficulty felt upon this point, the possibility
that these general terms may have proceeded from an apprehension of the existing
discriminating duty of one dollar per ton on American vessels in these northern
colonial ports. Should such be the case, it will not escape you that this duty is
prescribed by the order of the King in Council in 1823, in retaliation of our law
of that year; and that, by the terms of my proposition, it will be now abolished.
West India Trade.T 1){PLOMATIC WRITING. 589
If the remaining words of apparent difficulty constitute a provision inconsis-
tent with our proposition, and the act of the 5th July, 1825, I am obliged to con-
fess myself incapable of comprehending either their object or meaning. I refer,
of course, to the following clause: “leaving the commercial intercourse of the United
States with all other parts of the British dominions or possessions on a footing not less
favorable to the United States than it now is.”
Such a provision, or any thing resembling it, is now introduced, for the first
time, into our legislation upon this subject. With all other parts of the British
dominions, our commercial intercourse is regulated either by the convention with
Great Britain, or, with the exception of the ports in the northern provinces, abso-
lutely prohibited by acts of Parliament. No legislation on either side can affect
the stipulations of the convention, and any relaxation of existing prohibitions must
be beneficial.
This clause, as it stands, if it be not altogether nugatory and out of place,
would seem rather to apprehend some evil, not understood or explained, from ad-
vantages to be conferred on our trade by G. Britain. In any view of the subject,
however, it can properly relate only to the footing on which our commercial inter-
course with other ports will be left at the time of conceding such advantages,
Happily, therefore, with whatever object the clause may have been introduced,
the President may issue his proclamation with every assurance that the corres-
pondent acts on the part of this Government will leave “the commercial inter-
course of the United States with all other parts of the British dominions on a
footing not less favorable to the United States than it now is.”
That you may have all the British acts of Parliament relative to this subject
before you, and compare without difficulty the various provisions of the act of the
5th July, 1825, for the encouragement of British shipping and navigation, and of
that of the same date regulating the trade with the British possessions abroad,
I have the honor herewith to forward you “Hume's Custom Laws,” containing all
that may be useful in your researches.
The observations of the Earl of Aberdeen relative to the scale of duties in
favor of those interests incidentally fostered by the suspension of the intercourse
between the United States and the West Indies, are less unfavorable than, at the
date of my despatch of the 6th April, I had reason to apprehend. It was on the
ground of this apprehension, principally, that, in my note to Lord Aberdeen of the
12th July last, I alluded so particularly to the acts of Congress reducing the duty
on several articles of West India produce.
Though it may be probable that the schedule of duties adopted contempora-
neously with the act of Parliament of the 5th July, 1825, will be hereafter modi-
fied, the effect must be more severely felt by the West India planter, already over-
burthened, than by our merchants; and in this there is a safe guarantee against
any excessive alteration. There is good reason to believe, moreover, that such
modification, whenever it shall be made, will consist in reducing the duty on some
important articles, while it may increase it on others; and that our trade, in the
aggregate, will not be materially affected. This modification, however, is not a
part or condition of the present arrangement, and will therefore depend upon fu-
ture contingencies, of which each nation will be free to take advantage; and ours,
particularly, to resort to countervailing duties, if that course be deemed expedient.
590 DiPLOMATIC WRITING. [West India Trade.
On this question, we will always have the West Indian interest on our side; and
that, after the concessions heretofore made, is all we can expect. The arrange-
ment now proposed will restore to our vessels the direct trade with the British
colonial ports, and place the navigation of both countries in that trade upon an
equal footing. We may safely rely upon the skill and enterprise of the American
merchants to accomplish the rest.
I need scarcely refer to the period for which this question has embarrassed
the trade of our citizens, and the relations of the two countries, nor to the numerous
failures which have attended the efforts of our Government to adjust it. But it
ought not to be forgotten that, in producing these failures, technical interpretations
and misapprehension of legal provisions have had their full share. Sensible of
this, I felt it my duty to guard, if possible, against their recurrence; and after the
solicitude and perseverance with which I have conducted the negotiation, I could
not shun the responsibility of attempting to reconcile the apparent obscurities of
the law with the clear and frank object of our Government. I am happy to be-
lieve, moreover, that, in the attempt, I am fully sustained by the soundest princi-
ples of construction. In any event, I shall feel conscious that, with the sincerest
desire to conform to the instructions and sustain the character of the Executive, I
have faithfully contributed to succor the enterprise of my fellow-citizens, and to
place the foreign relations of the country upon a foundation of lasting harmony.
I have the honor to be, Sir, &c. LOUIS McLANE.
To the Hon. Martin Van Buren, Secretary of State, Washington.
124. The Earl of Jīberdeen to Mr. McLane.
Explanation of the Construction relative to the Consent of the British Government to restore,
to the Vessels of the United States, a Lºirect Intercourse with Her American Colonies.
Foreign Office [London] Aug. 17, 1830. The undersigned, His M.'s principal
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, has the honor to acknowledge the receipt
of the note of Mr. McLane, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from
the United States of America to this Court, dated the 12th of July; communica-
ting certain measures which have been adopted by Congress with a view to re-
move the obstacles which have hitherto impeded the re-establishment of the com-
mercial intercourse between the United States and the British West India colonies
Previously to the receipt of this communication, his Majesty’s Government
had already had under their consideration Mr. McLane’s note of the 16th March
last, explanatory of the proposition contained in his letter of the 12th of Decem-
ber, 1829, with reference to the same subject; and the undersigned assures Mr.
McLane that his Majesty's Government, in the earnest and dispassionate attention
which they bestowed upon this proposition, were actuated by the most friendly
feelings towards the Government of the United States, and by a sincere disposi-
tion to meet the proposals which he was authorized to make in the spirit with
which they where offered.
But the undersigned considers it unnecessary now to enter into any detailed dis-
cussion of the points embraced in those previous communications of Mr. McLane,
because they are in a great measure superseded by the more specific, and therefore
more satisfactory propositions contained in his note of the 12th July; to the
•ontents of which note, therefore, the undersigned will principally confine his pres-
ent observations:
West India Trade.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 59}
Of the character and effect of the recent measure of the American Congress,
Mr McLane observes that “it concedes in its terms all the power in the regulation
of the colonial trade, and authorizes the President to confer on British subjects
all those privileges, as well in the circuitous as the direct voyage, which Great
Britain has at any time demanded or desired.”
In this declaration the undersigned is happy to observe the same spirit and
disposition which dictated Mr. McLane's former communications, wherein he an-
nounced the readiness and desire of the American Government “to comply with
the conditions of the act of Parliament of 1825,” and also that the claims advanced
in justification of the omission of the United States to embrace the offers of this
country, have been abandoned by those who urged them, and have received no
sanction from the people of the United States:” and the undersigned readily ad-
mits, that if the bill passed by the American Legislature be well calculated prac-
tically to ſulfil the expressed intentions of its framers, it must have the effect of
removing all those grounds of difference between the two Governments, with re-
lation to the trade between the United States and the British colonies, which have
been the subject of so much discussion, and which have constituted the main
cause of the suspension of the intercourse by those restrictive acts of the United
States which the American Government is now prepared to repeal.
The proposition now made by Mr. McLane for the revocation of the order
in Council of 1826 stands upon a ground materially different from that on which
the same question was brought forward in the notes of Mr. Gallatin in 1827, and
and even in the more explanatory overtures of Mr. McLane contained in his com-
munications of December 1829, and March, 1830.
Those several proposals were, all of them, invitations to the British Govern-
ment to pledge itself, hypothetically, to the revocation of the order in Council,
in the event of a repeal of those acts of the American Congress which gave occasion
to it. His Majesty’s Government declined to give that prospective pledge or as-
surance, on the grounds stated in Lord Dudley’s note of the 1st October, 1827.
But the objections then urged are not applicable to the present overture. Provision
has now been made by an act of the American Legislature for the re-establishment
of the suspended intercourse upon certain terms and conditions; and that act being
now before his Majesty's Government, it is for them to decide whether they are
prepared to adopt a corresponding measure on the part of Great Britain for that
object.
The undersigned is ready to admit that, in spirit and substance, the bill trans-
mitted by Mr. McLane is conformable to the view which he takes of it in the ex-
pression before quoted from his note of the 12th July; and that it is calculated,
therefore, to afford to Great Britain complete satisfaction on the several points
which have been heretofore in dispute between the two countries. He has also
received, with much satisfaction, the explanation which Mr. McLane has afforded
him verbally, in the last conference which the undersigned had the honor of hold-
ing with him, upon those passages in which the wording of the bill appears ob-
scure, and in which it seems at least doubtful whether the practical construction
of it would fully correspond with the intentions of the American Government, as
expressed by Mr. McLane. But it is nevertheless necessary, in order to remove
all possibility of future misapprehension upon so important a subject, that he
592 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [ſpest India Trade.
should recapitulate the points upon which those doubts have arisen, and distinctly
state the sense in which the undersigned considers Mr McLane as concurring with
him in the interpretation of them:
The first point in which a question might arise is in that passage of the bill
wherein it is declared, as one of the conditions on which the restrictions now im.
posed by the United States may be removed, “that the vessels of the United States,
and their cargoes, on entering the ports of the British possessions, as aforesaid,
(viz: in the West Indies, on the continent of America, the Bahama islands, the
Caicos, and the Bermuda or Somer islands,) shall not be subject to other or higher
duties of tonnage or impost, or charges of any other description, than would be
imposed on British vessels, or their cargoes, arriving in the said colonial posses-
sion from the United States of .4merica.” It is not quite clear whether the conclu-
ding words “from the United Ståtes of America,” are meant to apply to the ves-
sels of the United States, and their cargoes, in the first part of the paragraph, as
well as to those of Great Britain or her colonies in the latter part.
It can scarcely, indeed, have been intended that this stipulation should extend
to American vsssels coming with cargoes from any other places than the United
States, because it is well known that, under the navigation laws of Great Britain,
no foreign vessel could bring a cargo to any British colonial port from any other
country than its own.
The next condition expressed in the act is, “that the vessels of the United
States may import into the said colonial possessions from the United States, any
article or articles which could be imported in a British vessel into the said posses-
sions from the United States.
In this passage, it is not made sufficiently clear that the articles to be impor-
ted on equal terms by British or American vessels from the United States, must
be the produce of the United States. The undersigned, however, cannot but suppose
that such a limitation must have been contemplated, because the clause of the
navigation act already adverted to, whereby an American vessel would be preclu-
ded from bringing any article not the produce of America to a British colonial
port, is not only a subject of universal notoriety, but the same provision is distinctly
made in the act of Parliament of 1825, which has been so often referred to in the
discussions on this subject.
It was also necessary that the undersigned should ask for some explanation
of that section of the bill which has reference to the entry of vessels into the ports
of the United States from the continental colonies of Great Britain in North America.
These are not placed, in the terms of the act, on the same footing as the ships
coming from the colonies of the West Indies.
With respect to the latter, the express provision made for the direct inter-
course with those colonies, together with the simultaneous repeal of the several
American acts which interdict, at present, the carriage of goods from the United
States to West Indian ports, in ships having arrived from other ports in the British
dominions, appear fully to warrant the expression, before quoted, of Mr McLane,
“ that the act would confer on British vessels all those privileges, as well in the
eircuitous as in the direct voyage, which Great Britain has at any time demanded.”
But, with regard to the continental colonies, there is merely a provision for “ad-
mitting to entry, in the ports of the United States, British vessels or their car-
nest India Trade.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 593
goes from the islands, provinces, or colonies of Great Britain, on or near the
North American continent, and north or east of the United States.” It must indeed
be presumed that vessels from these colonies are intended to be admitted upon the
same terms, in all respects, and to be entitled to the same privileges, as British
ships from any other British colony.
The act of Congress requires, as a further condition, that, when the inter-
course with the West India colonies shall be opened by Great Britain, “the com-
mercial intercourse of the United States with all other parts of the British domin-
ions or possessions shall be left on a footing not less favorable to the United States
than it now is.”
Although it may be most truly stated that there exists, at this time, no inten-
tion to make any alteration in the commercial policy of Great Britain, and equally
that there is no disposition on the part of His Majesty's Government to restrict,
in any measure, the commercial relations between this country and the United
States, yet the positive condition to maintain unchanged, or upon any particular
footing of favor, every part of our system of trade affecting our intercourse with
America, could not, with propriety, be made the subject of any specific engage-
ment, connected with the renewal of the colonial intercourse. Whether that inter-
course be renewed or not, it ought to remain at all times as free as it now is, both
to the government of Great Britain and to that of the United States, to adopt, from
time to time, such commercial regulations as either State may deem to be expedi-
ent for its own interests, consistently with the obligations of existing treaties.
It is due to the candor with which the communications of Mr McLane have
been made on this subject, that the undersigned should be thus explicit in noticing
the passage in the bill to which he has now adverted. -
Mr McLane, in his note of the 12th ultimo, has described and explained the
material diminution which has been made in the duties payable in the U. States
on the importation of certain articles of colonial produce. This measure has been
viewed by his Majesty's Government with sincere satisfaction, as indicating a
disposition to cultivate a commercial intercourse with his Majesty's colonies
upon a footing of greater freedom and reciprocal advantage than has hitherto exist-
ed. But the undersigned must frankly state, that, in the general consideration of
the question now to be determined, no weight ought to be assigned to the reduc.
tion of those duties, as forming any part of the grounds on which the re-establish-
ment of the intercourse may be acceded to. Those changes are part of the general
scheme of taxation which the government of America may, at all times, impose or
modify, with the same freedom as that which Great Britain may exercise in the
regulation of any part of its system of duties; and it is the more essential that his
Majesty’s Government should not contract, by implication, any engagement to-
wards that of the United States with respect to such alterations, because his Ma-
jesty’s Government have already had under their consideraticn the expediency of
introducing some modifications into the schedule of duties attached to the act of
Parliament of 1825, with a view more effectually to support the interests of the
British North American colonies.* To those interests, fostered, as they have inci-
dentally been, by the suspension of the intercourse between the United States and
* See page 159, of this volume.
75
59., DIPLOMATIC writing. [Irest India Trade.
the West Indies, his Majesty's government will continue to look with an earnest
desire to afford them such protection by discriminating duties as may appear to be
consistent with the interests of other parts of His Majesty’s dominions, and with a
sound policy in the commercial relations of this country with all other States.
The undersigned has thought it desirable that this point should be distinctly
understood on both sides, in order that no doubt should exist of the right of Great
Britain to vary those duties from time to time, according to her own views of ex-
pediency, unfettered by any obligation, expressed or implied, towards the United
States or any other country.
The undersigned adverts again with satisfaction to the verbal explanations
which he has received from Mr McLane of those passages in the act of Congress
which have not appeared to the undersigned to be literally adapted to the provisions
of the act of Parliament of 1825. He concurs with Mr McLane in thinking that
these will be found to have been merely apparent deviations from the conditions
of that statute, because the whole of the recent proceedings of the American Go-
vernment and Legislature in this matter have been manifestly and expressly foun-
ded upon a determination to conform to it. Any other view of the subject would
be entirely at variance with the tenor of the several communications from Mr
McLane before adverted to, which have all been conformable to the explicit pro-
position contained in his note of the 12th December, 1829, “that the Government
of the United States should now comply with the conditions of the act of Parliament
of July 5, 1825; by an express law, opening their ports for the admission of British
vessels, and by allowing their entry with the same kind of British colonial pro-
duce as may be imported in American vessels, the vessels of both countries pay-
ing the same charges; suspending the alien duties on British vessels and cargoes,
and abolishing therestrictions in the act of Congress of 1823 to the direct intercourse
between the United States and the British colonies, and that such a law should be
immediately followed by a revocation of the British order in Council of the 27th
July 1326, the abolition or suspension of all discriminating duties on American ves-
sels in the British colonial ports, and the enjoyment, by the United States, of the
advantages of the act of Parliament of the 5th July, 1825.” It only remains, there-
fore, for the undersigned to assure Mr McLane that, if the President of the United
States shall determine to give effect to the act of Congress, in conformity with the
construction put upon its provisions both by Mr McLane and by the undersigned,
all difficulty on the part of Great Britain, in the way of a renewal of the intercourse
between the United States and the West Indies, according to the foregoing propo-
sition made by Mr McLane, will thereby be removed.
The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr LcLane the assurances of his
highest consideration. ABERDEEN.
Louis McLane, Esq. &c. &c. &c.
French Claims] DIPE.OMATIC WRITING. 595
125. Claims against the French Government, for Spoliations on American
Commerce, since September, 1800.
Condensed from Lyman’s Diplomacy, and from Official Papers.
In 1793, the French began to capture our vessels, irritated at the course, pur-
sued by this government. And as early as September of the next year, we find
the claims arranged under separate heads, though there are no means within reach
of ascertaining the precise amount of each class.
1. Injuries by the embargo at Bordeaux, July 1793;-the number of vessels
detained under this act said to be 103.
2. For supplies furnished St. Domingo.
3. Cargoes of provisions, &c. detained for delay of payment,
4. Vessels detained by cruisers of the French republic in violation of the
treaty of ’78.
5. Vessels taken at sea as above.
The demands on France kept continually increasing to the close of the century,
principally, however, for depredations in the West Indies. These claims, as creat-
ed to the close of the century, were finally renounced on the part of the U.S. by the
2d article of the convention of 1800, provided France abandon all her pretensions on
the score of a guaranty. By this act the American government virtually assumed
the demands of its own citizens. Not only the constitution forbids the govern-
ment from taking “private property” for public use “without just compensation,”
but, in this case, a full cquivalent, the surrender of the guaranty, was made by
France for the adoption of the claims by the United States. But hardly was the
instrument signed, when fresh claims arose on the construction of the provision,
intended to constitute a final settlement. No one would have supposed that an
article, inserted in a convention for the purpose of bringing this troublesome busi-
ness to a close, would have made it necessary for our own government to enter
into immediate explanations in behalf of its own citizens, or that 20,000,000 of
livres would have remained more than twenty years in the coffers of our treasury,
expressly reserved, by a subsequent convention, for the payment of a portion of
these claims. The restitutions, demanded by the United States, under the 4th
article of the convention of 1800, comprised three descriptions of cases:
1. Cases of capture, where no judicial proceedings were held.
2. Cases not definitively decided on, in French tribunals, the 30th Septem-
ber, 1800.
3. Captures made, subsequent to that date.
Under the 3d and 4th articles these claims were just, and to withhold the pro-
perty was, on the part of France, an act of complete injustice. 3. It has been said,
that by the 2d article of the convention of 1800, the United States adopted all the
claims of its citizens, subject to the three reservations above written. This con-
stitutes the first period in the history of these claims.
Then, as the next period, we have the third convention of 1803, by which this
government agreed to assume claims on France, prior to the 30th September, 1800,
for 20,000,000 livres, no settlement having been made of the disputed points under
the convention of 1800.
596 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
In less than a year after the convention of 1803, instructions were sent to the
minister in France to desire the French government to suspend all draughts in
favor of persons, whose claims might have been liquidated, till all the claims
were ascertained, and to propose a convention for the purpose of including, within
that of 1803, the unsettled matters of 1800, or to distribute the 20,000,000 livres,
provided by the convention of 1803, and make France debtor for such balance, as
might exceed that sum; an arrangement we could not suppose France would be
much disposed to accept. After the proofs we possessed of the extreme unwilling-
ness of that government to satisfy the undeniable claims of our citizens,—to execute
the 3d and 4th articles of the convention of 1800, it was a degree of generous
confidence, by no means desirable or necessary among nations, to leave any point,
whatever, for future discussions, particularly as the mode, in which American
creditors were likely to be treated, was well known to Mr Livingston in March,
1802. We find him in that month writing to this effect to the government:
“As to the contract demands, the Minister of Marine told me, I might as well
ask him to cut off his father’s head, as to ask payment. However, on this subject
I shall be better informed, when they reply to my note. I believe that they may
possibly put the debt upon their 5 per cent. loan, which is now at 57, but will, in
that case, fall considerably; so that, at most, the creditor, after waiting many
years, will sink half his debt; but, as they hint, necessity has no law.”
And, in the following May, [1802,] Mr. Livingston to the Minister of Exte-
rior Relations:
“I find every possible obstruction thrown in their way: first in the liquidation
of their debts, and next in affording a fund for their payment, when, after a tedious
and expensive process, the debt is liquidated, I see the Board of Compatibility
extending to part of them a law, which, at the present price of stock, would rob
them of five-sixths of their capital; a law, which repeated declarations of past
legislatures have shown not to have been intended to comprise foreigners, and in
which they could not have been comprised without the most flagrant violation of
public faith, but which, in every event, is superseded by the fifth article of the
treaty, which expressly stipulates for the discharge of their debt.
“I see the commercial capital of my fellow-citizens, the only means of their
subsistence, withheld from them till the interest is equal to the principal sum, and
yet no allowance made for that interest in the liquidation of the account. I see
others of them, after sustaining heavy losses by the destruction, committed at St.
Domingo, compelled to become creditors of France by an act of power. And while
the agent of France, in America, is declaring to the government of the United
States, that every measure of justice is offered by the prize courts to the claimants
here, I see those very claimants reduced to beggary by their decisions.
“You will admit, sir, that the attempt to include the American creditor in the
list of those, who have had two-thirds of their debt struck off, and the total silence
of the Boards, with respect to the interest, are not calculated to inspire confidence
or to revive credit.”
It never could have been said, that the convention of 1803 was an instrument
to carry into execution the provisions of the one of 1800. It should, rather, be
called a convention of exceptions to that, for no claim could be allowed under it,
unless falling within some one of the following conditions:
French Claims.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 597
1. Whether the debt was due in its origin to an American citizen.
2. Whether it existed before the 30th September, 1800.
3. Has such an American citizen established a house of commerce in foreign
countries, in partnership with foreigners.
4. Can he, by the nature of his commerce, be considered as domiciliated
abroad.
5. Has he, under the circumstances of his case, a right to the protection of
the United States.
6. Was the merchandise, or other property, American, when it passed into
the hands of the French government.
7. Does the claim arise from supplies, embargoes and captures made at sea,
excluding from the word supplies freight, indemnity and demurrage,
except where they are claimed as incidental to embargoes.
In 1804 Mr Livingston was instructed to negotiate a convention, additional to
that of 1803, for the purpose of removing doubts on the subjects of freights and
indemnities. 2. To provide compensation for the separate property of American
citizens, connected with foreign partners; 3. and also for those vessels, that were
taken after the convention of 1800, and before its ratification. To this proposition
the following answer was made by the Minister of Exterior Relations:
“You will not have forgotten, that it was then agreed upon, between the two
governments, to place, under the charge of the United States, all the claims of
Americans upon France, and to make an approximate valuation of them. The res-
pective plenipotentiaries agreed to take, as a basis, the sum of all the claims, as
well liquidated as unliquidated, which have been presented to the French govern-
ment by the Americans;–this sum amounted to twenty millions, and as there was
room to expect, that the unliquidated portion would undergo some reduction, the
American plenipotentiaries were persuaded, that even by admitting afterwards
some claims, which might not have been comprehended in the list, this addition
of claims, compensated by the reduction that others would undergo at the time of
the liquidation, could never exceed 20,000,000, the whole amount.
“It was in consequence of these dispositions, that some months ago you de-
manded the admission of different claims, which had not been inscribed upon the
list of liquidation: the French government has shown itself disposed to consent
thereto to the amount of twenty millions, so that they do not at any time hereafter
exceed this sum, and that no part of the American claims be placed to the account
of France.
“In adhering to these dispositions, conformable to the treaty of 10th Floreal,
(1 May) and from which his Imperial Majesty will not deviate, any explanatory
convention would be superfluous, and the intention of his Imperial Majesty is to
keep from all future question an affair completely terminated. The convention of
the year 11 (1803) foresaw the whole case; the whole of the American claims are
to be placed to the account of the federal government; a list of them has been made.
The liquidation of the articles, of which it is composed, shall be decided before the
rest, if it does not reach the sum of twenty millions; other claims will be compre-
hended therein, but none shall be, which exceed this sum, because it is at this
point that the two governments are agreed to stop.” -
598 DIPLOMATIG WRITING. French Claims.
The convention of 1803 did not debar any citizen from pursuing such claim,
as he might have posterior to September 30, 1800;—the exercise of this right was
secured by a special stipulation. During the nominal war, that existed with France
towards the close of the last century, we captured from that power 83 vessels;–
11 were acquitted not being found armed, and 68 condemned, half to the captors
and half to the United States, all national vessels were either paid for, or restored.
A memorial was, however, transmitted to the government, requesting that these
vessels might be withheld, till it was ascertained whether France would make
proper provision for the claims of their citizens.
The year 1806, the commencement of the continental system, is the next and
third period of the history of the claims, but a class of an entirely different des-
cription was created under these various and hostile acts of the French government,
of which the Berlin decree was the first. It has been stated in debate in Congress
that the claims, prior to 1806, exceeded in amount 200,000,000 of dollars, they
do not probably exceed 12 or 14,000,000. They were estimated by the envoys in
France in 1803, at 20,000,000, but various deductions must be made from that sum
such as claims discharged by the council of prizes or commissioners, previous
payments, payments from theLouisiana purchase money, claims without proofs,
&c. Against these pecuniary claims the French government set off various de-
mands of a pecuniary, political, and mixt description,--such as injuries, resulting
from refusal to execute the guaranty of ’78,-from the President’s proclamation of
neutrality of 1793,-denying asylum to privateers and their prizes, and numerous
indulgencies granted to British ships of war, contrary to the treaty of alliance.
126. Eactract from Mr Gallatin’s Exposition of the French Claims in 1816.
Claims, arising under the Berlin, Milan, Rambouillet, and other decrees of
the imperial government of France from 1806 to 1810:
“The right to an indemnity, being founded on the law of nations, extends to
all cases, where there has been an evident infraction of that law, such as is recog-
nised by civilized nations.
“Of the acts of the former French government, openly violating that law;
those issued on the 21st November 1806, at Berlin, and on the 17 December 1807,
at Milan, were promulgated in the shape of public decrees, applicable, at least,
nominally, to other nations, as well as the United States. Other acts were, ex-
clusively, directed against America; appearing, also, sometimes under the form of
decrees, as that of Bayonne, of the 17th April 1808, and that of Rambouillet, of
the 23d March 1810; and, at times, being only special orders for seizing or selling
certain American vessels and cargoes. To these various acts, must be added the
wanton destruction, at different times, of American vessels on the high seas.
“That the Berlin and Milan decrees, so far as they declared liable to capture
and condemnation neutral vessels, pursuing an innocent commerce, and contra-
vening no municipal laws, were an evident violation of the law of nations, has not
been, and cannot be, denied. The plea of retaliation, grounded on a supposed
acquiescence of neutral powers in certain acts of Great Britain, and urged in jus-
tification of those decrees, was unjust in its principle, and altogether inadmissible,
when affecting a neutral instead of an enemy. And, even that pretence for plun-
French Claims.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 599
dering a friendly power was abandoned, when the two belligerent governments,
whilst continuing to capture the vessels of the neutral trading with their respective
enemy, permitted a direct commerce, by means of licenses. But that plea was,
in point of fact, destitute of foundation with respect to the United States. That
they had uniformly opposed the aggressions of Great Britain, on their neutral
rights, is notorious. It is not less true, and appears from all the public acts and
from the tenor of their negotiations with both belligerents, that it was solely ow-
ing to the acts of France, to the Berlin and Milan decrees, that still more decisive
measures of resistance were not early adopted against Great Britain. So long as
France and England equally continued to violate the neutral rights of America,
she could not have selected either of those nations for an enemy, without tamely
submitting to the aggressions of the other, and without deviating from that impar-
tial course, which it was her constant endeavour to pursue. And when, at last,
the French decrees had been revoked, so far as America was concerned, the perse-
verance of England in continuing her unlawful orders, and in violating the rights
of the United States, produced a declaration of war on their part, against that
country.
“Not only were the Berlin and Milan decrees an evident and acknowledged
violation of the law of nations; not ouly the plea of retaliation against England,
and of a presumed acquiescence in her aggressions was unfounded, with respect
to the United States; not only neither the treaties between France and the allied
powers are binding on America, nor the principles cdopted in those treaties appli-
cable to the relations in which she stood towards France; but those decrees were
also an open infraction of the treaties subsisting between the two counties; namely,
of the 12th, 13th and 14th articles of the convention of the 30th of September 1800,
which did not expire till the 31st of July 1809. For, it was therein stipulated, that
the citizens of either country might sail with their ships and merchandise (contra-
band goods excepted) from any port whatever, to any port of the enemy of the
other, and from a port of such enemy, either to a neutral port, or to another port
of the enemy, unless such port should be actually blockaded; that a vessel sailing
for an enemy’s port without knowing that the same was blockaded, should be
turned away, but neither be detained, nor her cargo be confiscated; that implements
and ammunition of war, should alone be considered contraband of war; and that
free ships should make free goods, extending that freedom even to an enemy’s
property, on board the ships belonging to the citizens of either country. The French
decrees, in violation of those stipulations, after having declared the British islands
and possessions in a state of blockade, although they were not pretended to be ac-
tually blockaded, made liable to capture and condemnation all American (as well
as other neutral) vessels sailing on the high seas, from or to an English port, or
even which might have been visited by an English vessel, as well as every species
of merchandise belonging to English subjects, or of English origin.
“With respect to property actually condemned, without intending to impair
the indisputable right of the United States, to an indemnity for every condemna-
tion made by virtue of decrees, violating the acknowledged law of nations, I will
beg leave to add some observations on the manner in which those decrees were
executed, for the purpose of showing that an investigation and revision of those
600 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
condemnations ought to take place, even, if it was admitted that France had a right
to issue the Berlin and Milan decrees, and to condemn vessels contravening
their tenor. The time necessary to obtain information in that respect, has occa-
sioned the delay which has taken place in making this communication, since the
last conference I had the honour to hold with your excellency.
“ 1. These condemnations have, as has already been stated, been made in con-
travention of an existing treaty; so far at least as relates to property seized or cap-
tured prior to the 31st of July 1809.
“2. Several of the condemnations, or rather acts of confiscation, were made
by what has been called “imperial decisions,” meaning thereby not those cases
where an appeal may have been made from the council of prizes to the council of
state, but those instances where the order of condemnation issued from that coun-
cil, or from Napoleon himself, without any previous regular trial and condemnation
by the council of prizes. Such proceedings must be considered as irregular and
arbitrary acts, contravening the usages and law of nations. It is sufficiently hard
for the neutral that his property should be tried exclusively by the tribunals of the
belligerent, where a natural bias exists in favour of the captors. It is at least ne-
cessary that the decisions should be made by a regular and permanent tribunal, act-
ing according to fixed rules, and affording every security of which such an institu-
tion is susceptible. But the United States have a right to demand that those im-
perial decisions should be annulled not only as contravening the usages and law of
nations, but as violating also an existing treaty. It had been stipulated by the
22d article of the convention, of the 30th September 1800, “that in all cases the
established courts for prize causes in the country to which the prizes might
be conducted, should alone take cognizance of them.” Of twenty-seven vessels
and cargoes (captured or seized prior to the 1st of November, 1810) which, as ap-
pears by a list now before me, were condemned by imperial decisions, eighteen
had been seized or captured, prior to the 31st of July 1809, the day on which the
convention expired.
“3. I have been assured that, upon investigation, it will be found that some
of the decisions of the council of prizes itself, have taken place, without observing
the forms prescribed by law; without giving opportunity to the parties of bringing
their proofs; without an examination of the ship papers, and, in fact, in obedience
to an imperial order. A decision of the council, dated 10th September 1811, and
by which six ships and cargoes were at once condemned, is particularly mentioned.
“4. The retrospective operation of the Rambouillet decree has already been
mentioned. It will also be found that, in several instances, the Milan decree has
received a similar construction, and that vessels have been condemned for having
contravened that decree, which could not have known its existence, having sailed
from American ports either before, or a short time after, it had been issued, and
the alleged infraction of the decree itself having, at least in one instance, taken
place prior to its date.
“5. It might have been expected, that, when the Berlin and Milan decrees
were declared to be revoked from and after the 1st November 1810, no farther
bondemnations would take place with respect to cases not yet decided at that time;
notwithstanding which, it appears that forty-eight ships and cargoes, previously
French Claims.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 601
seized or captured, were condemned subsequent to that day, namely, by the coun-
cil of Prizes, eighteen before, and ten after, the 28th of April 1811; and by imperiaſ
decisions, eleven before, and nine after, the last mentioned day. Yet the decree
of that day (28th April 1811) enacts and declares, that the Berlin and Milan decrees
are, from and after the 1st November 1810, definitively considered, as if they had
not existed (comme non avenus) with respect to American vessels.
“6. Several condemnations were made for frivolous pretences, of vessels cap-
tured after the 1st November 1810, or, in other cases which the general decrees
could not reach; such as alleged irregularities in the certificates of origin, or in
ship papers; presumed navigation under the British convoy; mutiny on board; in-
tention to remit the proceeds of sales throºgh England.
“It appears from the preceding statement, that, independent cf the illegality
of the Berlin and Milan decrees, there is sufficient cause for revision of the con-
demnations which have taken place. Nor is there any thing novel in that course.
A number of unlawful captures of American vessels having been made by Great
Britain during the commencement of her war with France, particularly by virtue
of certain British orders in council, of the 6th November 1793, it was agreed, by
the 7th article of the treaty of November 1794, between the United States and
Engiand, that full and complete compensation should be made by the British go-
vernment for the losses and damage sustained by citizens of the United States, by
reason of irregular or illegal captures or condemnations of their vessels and other
property, under colour of authority or commissions from his Britannic majesty;
and a sum exceeding twelve hundred thcusand pounds sterling, in specie, was
actually paid to American citizens, by the decision of the joint commission appoint-
ed in conſormity with the said treaty. ---
“From this view of the subject, I have the honor to propose to your excellen-
cy an arrangement ſounded on the following basis, in which, without abandoning
the just rights of the citizens the United States, a positive stipulation is avoided,
which would, at this time, bind the government of France to make componsation
enerally for all the condemnations under the Beriia and Milan decrees.
“ 1st. That the government of France will engage to make compensation to
the citizens of the United States: 1. For all vessels and cargoes captured, scized,
or sequestered, which have not been definitively condemned by the Council cf
Prizes, and the proceeds of which were placed either in the public treasury, in the
caisse d’amortissement, cr in any other public chest; and also for all vessels and
cargoes destroyed at sea, and likewise not condemned by the Council cf Prizes:
2. For the losses sustained by reason of such other irregular cr unlawful scizures,
captures, or condemnations, as will be deciced, by a joint commission, to have
been made contrary to public law and justice, or in contravention of existing treaties.
“2d. That a joint commission (or commissions) shall be established, with
power, 1. To liquidate the amount due for property cither destroyed at sea, cr
sequestered and not definitively condemned as aforesaid: 2. To decide in what
other cases of irregular or unlawful seizures, captures, cr condemnaticns, the go-
vernment of France is justly bound to make also compensation, and to what
amount.” :
In the summer of 1817, M. de Richelien informed Mr Gallatin, he wished it
understood, that the postponement for spoliations was not a rejection, that a por-
76
602 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. UFrench Claims,
tion of them was eonsidered as founded in justice, that he was not authorized to
commit his government by any positive promise, but that it was their intenticn to
make an arrangement for the discharge of just demands, as socn as they were
extricated from their present embarrassments: still he insisted on his former ground
that they could not, at present, recognise, cr adjust its amount.
127. Extract from Mr Gallatin’s Last Letter, on the French Claims, to
the French Government.
“I have special powers to negotiate a convention, providing for the just
claims of citizens of the United States against France, as also for the like claims
of French subjects against the United States, with such person or persons, as may
have a like authority from his most Christian Majesty.
“As minister of the United States, I am authorized to discuss the question,
respecting the construction of the 8th article of the Louisiana treaty, and to give
and receive explanations on that subject. But the negotiation on that point, having
been transferred to Washington, no special powers in that respect have been trans-
mitted to me. I had understood in the course of the conference, I had the honour
to have with your excellency on the 23d of September, and had accordingly writ-
ten to my government, that it was not intended to insist, that that subject should
be blended with that of private claims. It is, indeed, obvious that it would be
utterly unjust to make the admission of these to depend on the result of a negotia-
tion on a subject, with which they have no connexion whatever, and the difficulties,
respecting which, are of a date, posterior to that of the claims.
“All the representations, which his majesty’s government has made to that of
the United States, whether on private or on public subjects, have uniformly been
taken into consideration and received that attention, to which they are so justly
entitled. In no instance has the government of the United States declined to open
a discussion ch any subject thus offered to their consideration by France, or made
it a preliminary condition, that the discussion should, also, embrace some other
subject, in which they might happen to take a greater interest. The question,
respecting the 8th article of the Louisiana treaty, has in particular been the sub-
ject of a voluminous correspondence in the course of which the arguments in sup-
Tort cf the constructicn, insisted cn by cach party respectively, were made known
to the other. I have, in the mean while, for six years, made unceasing applica-
ticps to his majesty’s government ſcr the settlement cf claims to a vast amount,
affecting the intercst cf numercus individuals, and arising from ſlagrant violations
cf the law cf nations and cf the rights cf the United States, without having ever
been able to obtain, to this day, satisfaction in a single instance, creven that the
subject should be taken into consideration and discussed. After so many vexatious
delays, for which different causes have at different times been assigned, it cannot
now be intended again to pestpone the investigation of that subject by insisting
that it should be treated in connexicn with one foreign to it, and which has already
been discussed. The United States have, at least, the right to ask, that their
demands should, also, be examined and discussed, and, I trust, that since I am
authorized to treat, as well concerning the claims cf French subjects against the
United States, as respecting thcse cf American citizens against France, a distinct
negotiation to that effect will b2 opened without any further delay.”
instructions.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 60.
128. Extracts from the General Instructions of the Hon. M. Van Buren
to Pºm. C. Rives, Esq. Dated, Washington, 20th July, 1829.
Prom Oſicial Documents, Communicatcd to Congress,
—Assuming,what should not be contended,that one nation can find its justifi-
cation for her disregard of claims of admitted justice in a similar delinquency on the
part of other nations, still the circuinstances of the different cases would not, in
this instance, allow France to screen herself behind so ungracious a pretension. It
was, among other causes, for the aggressions upon our commerce under the orders
in council, that the United States made war upon Great Britain; and, having ne-
gotiated a peace without stipulation for indemnity in that particular, her case is
widely distinguishable from that of France. If we were now to prefer a claim
against France for the many millions of which the citizens of the United were des-
poiled by her previous to the year 1800, and for which no provision was made by
the treaty of that year, there might be some analogy in the cases, and, consequent-
ly, more force in the argument. The character of Murat’s domination in Naples,
too, furnishes a pretext to that Government to delay doing us justice, of which
France cannot avail herself; to say nothing of the influence which she herself had
in causing the injuries of which we complain, and the consequent impropriety of
all attempts to shelter herself under the cover of the Neapolitan aggressions.
The alleged irresponsibility of the present Government of France for the acts
of those which have preceded it, is matter of graver import, and, if it could be sus-
tained, would be an objection that would strike at the root of all our claims. The
first consideration worthy of notice, is the manner in which this widely operative
doctrine has been advanced by France. It was not until the discussion had con-
tinued for rising of a year between the Duke of Richelieu and Mr Gallatin, that the
former ventured to broach a doctrine so flagrantly unjust, and then it was done
hesitatingly, and in an informal conference. To the present day, notwithstanding
the discussions upon the subject of our claims have been carried on with no less
than eight different Ministers of Foreign Affairs, the principle has never been dis-
tinctly avowed in the official communications of the French Government. Of the
extent to which the acting Governments of France, upon whose act the claims of
our Citizens are founded, were acquiesced in by the French people, and recognized
by other nations, it cannot be necessary to say any thing. The facts are familiar
to you, are known to the world, and cannot be made matters of contestation. That
the present Government of France, is, by the established principles of public law
responsible for thcse acts, is not, at this day, an open question among civilized
nations. The consequences of an opposite doctrine would strike at the root of all
confidence in the dealings between different nations. If a people could discharge
itself of its obligations by changing a Government of its own establishment, or
which it had made legitimate by its acquiescence,all security for national transac-
tions would be at an end, and one of the greatest advantages which has been pro-
duced by the lights of civilization and improvement defeated. There are no Go-
vernments in Europe to which France could look for countenance in maintaining
such a doctrine, for there are none who have not themselves acted upon a different
principle.
69% DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
The doctrine advanced is no less inconsistent with her own conduct. In the
indemnity made by her to the principal powers of Europe, in the years 1814 and
1815, not only France, but all those powers, gave their assent in the most solemn
manner to the principle for which the United States contend. It is in vain to say
that those indemnities were for the debts of the preceding Government, and not for
spoliations, cr to refer to the condition of France at that period. There were reasons
of the most imperative character, to which it is not necessary to make to you
particular references, and which are not applicable to the United States, why the
abandonment of claims for spoliations on their part, should not furnish a rule for
the adjustment of those of which we complain; and France will not, it is believed,
avow even now, that those who came to deliver her from oppression, availed them-
selves of their power to increase that oppression, by making France responsible,
withoutright for injuries which they themselves had received from the same source.
So far from that being then supposed to be the case, the principle of indemnity
was claimed by the allies,and distinctly admitted by the French plenipotentiaries.
Whatever deductions the allied powers might, for various reasons, see fit to make
from the amount of their claims, the fact that whatever was allowed was claimed
and paid upon the avowed and uncontested principle of the responsibility of the
present Government of France for the acts of the former Government, is in no sense
doubtful. It is only so far that these transactions are entitled to a bearing upon
the present question, and their influence should be deemed obligatory. Even with
the United States does France act upon a different principle. Upon what grouds,
other than that the present Government succeeds of right to all the advantages se-
cured to France by stipulations made in favor of the former Government, is it, that
her claims under the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty are ſcunded; and could
she allow herself to contend that she should be permitted to reap all the advan-
tages accruing from the acts of the preceding Government, without being subject,
also, to the liabilities and disadvantages flowing from the same source! She has,
also, in the administration of her internal affairs, in many instances, and in the
mºst stºlemn marnºr given her assent to the obligatory character of the acts cf the
sovereign authority fºr the time being. Upon what other principle have the sales
of the tiational domains, and of the estates of the emigrants, been confirmed, or the
latter indemniſied for the property of which they had been divested by a former
Government! These were two of the most important acts of the existing Govern-
ment, an both find their justification in the same principle.
The President is not insensible to the consideratic ns cf delicacy that belong
to the sabject, and which grow out of past transactions, in which the present reign-
ing family of France have been made to suffer by the same power against whose
acts we now call upon them to indemnify us; nor is he unwilling to give to that
circumstance all allowable influence. If entitled to any weight at all, it can only
be as to the amount of remuneration upon which the United States should insist;
for it must not be forgotten, that, in respect to them also, the doctrine contended
against has bearings steering wide cf, and of infinitely greater importance,
than the subject under discussicn. The same principle which would exonerate
France from her liability for the claims in question, could, with equal propriety,
be made hereafter the pretext for questioning our title to torritories which consti-
tute two of the sovereign States which compose this confederacy-
Instructions.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, 605
The President's instructions to you are, that an earnest attempt be first made to
induce the French Government to open a negotiation upon the principles advocat-
ed by the late administration of this Government, but that in the event of a failure
to produce that result, you shall agree to one embracing all matters in difference
between the two countries. It is not believed that other than formal conferences
will be necessary to satisfy yourself on the first point. Should you, however,
find it otherwise, you will pursue such course as may seem to you best adapted to
effect the object in view.
It will be your special duty to see that the change of the present positions of
the two Governments be effected in such a form as not to commit this upon the
claims set up by France under the Louisiana treaty. The apprehension appears
to have been that, by consenting to negotiate upon the subject, we would admit
the construction set up by France, and thus bring the question down to one as to
the cytont of indemnity only.
If the great extent of our claims, the sacrifices which France has already been
called upon to make in consequence of the acts of the former Government, the state
of her finances, the improbability of obtaining supplies from the legislature, and
such like grounds, are urged against the allowance, by her, of our claims, you are
authorized to say that the President will so far respect considerations of that char-
acter, as to receive, in full satisfaction of all our claims, and as a definitive adjust-
ment of all matters in difference between the two countries, a gross sum, to be dis-
tributed amongst the claimants by the United States; provided that sum shall bear
a reasonable proportion to the actual extent or our claims.
April 20, 1830. On the subject of the abatement which may be required by
the French Government from the amount of indemnitics claimed on our part, you
are already apprised of the President’s views in relation to it; that he is anxious
to obtain satisfaction for all just claims whatever cf citizens of the United States
upon the French Government, without regard to the classes to which they belong;
that he is disposed to yield none, but upon unavoidable necessity, and to avert a
greater injury, by foregoing the opportunity to procure a satisfactory adjustment of
the best and largest portion of them. It is expected, therefore, that your strenuous
exertions will be used to induce the French Government to allow all that can be
sustained upon fair and equitable principles. The President is well aware, how-
ever, that there are considerations appertaining to the subject, which may lead that
Government to insist upon a reduction in reference to particular classes of the claims,
or, perhaps, the entire abandonment of such by this. In that case, it may be found
best to yield something of what, under other circumstances, might be insisted upon,
on our part, for the sake of obtaining all that is practicable. Should the necessity
of doing this, or to forego the opportunity of effecting an arrangement otherwise
desirable, become apparent and imperious, the President, in that case, would agree
to the adoption of such a course. -
The President concurs in the opinion which you have expressed, that, if reduc-
tions are insisted upon, the claim for interest, and those originating in transactions
antecedent to the treaties of 1800 and 1803, are the classes in which concessions
should be made. You are, therefore, hereby invested with his authority to abandon
6 {}6 DIPLOMATIC W RITING. [French Claims.
these, or a portion of them, under such renunciations as may be required by the
French Government, if it should appear that this made a sine qug non to the suc-
cessful prosecution of the residue ; but this is not to be proposed except in the
last resort.
The mode proposed by you for selecting the arbitrator, is deemed greatly pre-
ferable to that which was provided by the treaty cf 1794 between the United States
and Great Britain; and the President hopes that you will find no difficulty in
securing its adoption. If the French Government should refuse to enter into a
positive stipulation to pay for any proportion or classes of the property condemned,
you are authorized (the other claims being satisfactorily provided for,) to adopt the
basis upon which Mr Gallatin’s propositions to the Duke de Richelieu appear to
have been founded, by leaving that question to be determined by the joint com-
Imission.
You are, moreover, authorized to submit the restricted question upon the
eighth article of the Louisiana convention to the mixed commission, if it should
become indispensably necessary to a successful prosecution of your negotiation
upon the subject of claims; but, in that case, you will take especial care that the
submission be made in such a form as to exclude the general question of the future
and permanent construction of that article, according to the tenor of your general
instructions upon this head.
Nov. 8, 1830. If pretensions under the 8th article of the Louisiana conven-
tion, should prove to be the case, the President sees no objection to your conclu-
ding a convention with the French Government upon the basis of the propositions
contained in your note to Prince Polignac [May 20, 1830] stipulating a reciprocal
and reasonable reduction of the duties upon French wines on their importation into
the United States, taking proper care, however, that the stipulation for this reduc-
tion of duties does not conflict with our engagements to other nations, by which we
are bound to impose no higher duties upon articles the produce of the soil or industry
of those nations, than upon similar articles of other nations, when imported into
the United States, and a corresponding reduction of the duties upon our cottons,
when imported into France; but he would not be willing to consent to a longer
period than years for the continuance of such a convention, though there
would be no objection to its containing a provision for the further continuance of it,
indefinitely, unless one or other of the parties should give notice to the other, as
in the case of the convention with Prussia of the 1st of May, 1828, of its inten-
tion to arrest the operation of it.
The President is not now more disposed, than he ever was, to yield anything
of the just rights of his fellow-citizens; but he cannot so far disregard the force
of the considerations to which reference has just been made, as to decline receiving
in the most indulgent and conciliatory spirit, any reasonable offer which may be
made by the French Government in full satisfaction of our claims; provided it
shall bear a fair proportion to the amount which, upon a view of the whole subject,
shall be deemed sufficient to cover the claims which this Government ought, under
the circumstances, to insist upon. Your own acquaintance with the subject, as
derived from the instructions and documents furnished you by this department and
from other sources of local information, must be your guide in considering the
French Claims.l DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 607
amount which would be deemed acceptable by your Government, whom you wil;
ever find disposed to give a liberal support to any act of yours founded in the spirit
of your instructions, and dictated by existing circumstances, which shall have for
its object the real interests of the claimants, and the final adjustment of differences,
in the settlement of which, each day’s delay adds fresh injury to the interests
involved in them. I am, sir, with great respect, &c. M. WAN BUREN.
William C. Rives, Esq., &c. &c. &c.
129. Jiſr Rives to Mr Van Buren. Eact ract.
Paris, Feb. 25, 1830. My last despatch will have informed you of what had
passed between the minister and myself on the subject [of the vessels and cargoes
condemned under the Berlin and Milan decrees.] He [Polignac) had said that, while
his majesty's Government could not consent to pay, generally, for condemnations
under these decrees, on the naked ground of their being contrary to the law of
nations, in consequence of the heavy and indefinite demands of other powers, to
which the recognition of such a principle would subject them, that they would be
willing to go, as far as they could, in the payment of cases which might be distin-
guished by a peculiarity of circumstances. As there were special reasons in per-
haps all the cases of condemnation under the Berlin and Milan decrees, for setting
aside those condemnations, independent of the illegality of the decrees themselves,
(as, for example, that the condemnations were in contravention of the convention
of 1800, were not made by regular prize tribunals, or in the forms prescribed by
law, &c., &c., &c.) it immediately occurred to me that an article might be framed
which would, at the same time, consult the views as expressed by the minister,
and provide for the just claims of our citizens.
I preparéd an article arranging the condemnations which his Majesty's Govern-
ment should positively stipulate to pay, into separate classes according to special
grounds of reversal applying to each, with a supplemental clause, that they should
pay for all other cases of condemnation which, from any consideration, a mixed com-
mission should decide that his Majesty’s Government was justly bound to make
compensation for. In drawing this article, I was guided chiefly by the statement
contained in Mr Gallatin’s letter to the Duke de Richelieu of the 9th November,
1816; and the classification of cases I made, corresponded, as you will perceive,
in numerical order as well as in principle, with the specifications of that statement.
It seemed to me that such an article, while it was accommodated to the views
expressed by the minister of France, had a decided advantage for us over that
which had been proposed by Mr Gallatin to the Duke de Richelieu. According
to Mr Gallatin’s projet, the Government of France was not bound positively to
pay for any of the condemnations; but the whole question of their obligation to do
so, was made dependent upon the decision of a mixed commission. According to
that which I had thought of suggesting, the Government of France would positive-
ly bind itself to pay for five distinct classes of condemnations, comprehending, in
all probability, nearly the whole that had taken place, referring the question of its
obligation to pay in any cases which might not be included in those classes, to
the determination of a mixed commission. y
There is one other difference between the two projets,which, as you may deem
it important, I beg leave to invite your attention to. In the second section of Mr
Gallatin's first article, the decision of the mixed commission is to be governed by
{303 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
a consideration of what condemnations were “contrary to public law and justice,
&c.” In consequence of the jealousy and repugnance manifested by the Minister
of Foreign Affairs to any arrangement which would recognize the principle of pay-
ing for Bonaparte's violations of the law of nations, I thought it best to avoid any
express reference to public law, and, in lieu thereof, to leave it to the commission,
in general terms to decide what condemnations,not enumerated,his Majesty’s Govern-
ment “is justly bound to make compensation for.” The two forms of expression,
perhaps, are not intrinsically of different import, and it would seem that such was
Mr Gallatin’s understanding of them,as, in the second section of his second article,
in defining the functions of the mixed commission, he uses the phrase “justly
bound.”
The claims originating prior to the conventions of 1800 and 1803, and form-
ing the subject-matter of the two or three first classes of claims mentioned in my
instructions, I considered as virtually embraced by these articles, particularly by
the clause of the 1st article relating to supplies and debts, and the clause of the
second article relating to condemnations in contravention of the convention of 1800.
The latter clause was framed mainly with reference to condemnations under the
Berlin and Milan decrees prior to 31st July, 1809, which, besides their illegality
on general principles, were in violation of the 12th, 13th and 14th articles of the
convention of 1800, which secured to each party, in time of war, the benefit of an
unmolested commerce with the territories, or in the productions of the enemies cf
the other; but, it was recommended to me by the further consideration of making
France responsible, at the same time, for the more ancient claims arising frcm
condemnations contrary to the tenor of the 4th article.
As the classes of claims here referred to had not been insisted on in any of
the discussions which had taken place between the two governments for the last
twenty-five years, and seemed, indeed, to have been mutually considered as either
settled or abandoned, I thought it would have a very bad effect to bring them for-
ward distinctly and avowedly. Indeed I suppose that the motive for comprehend-
ing them in my instructions was not so much a distinct recognition of them, as to
swell the aggregate amount of our claims in the event of a proposition for a com-
promise en bloc, and thereby to enable us the better to obtain a sum adequate to
cover all the claims of a more unquestionable character.
As considerable abatements will, probably, be insisted on from the demands
of the projet, it would also be important for me to be informed, at the same time,
how far claims which might seem either rigorous or doubtful, (such as interest,
and the claims prior to 1800 and 1803,) may be eventually abandoned, if it should
become necessary as the sine qua non of an arrangement.
- Same to same.
Paris, September 8, 1830. I yesterday had a conversation with at the
Foreign Office, on his own invitation, which furnished a striking illustration of the
views and feelings of the new Government. He told me that he had, several
times, eonversed with Count Molé on the subject of our claims; that the minister
was anxious to cultivate the most friendly relations with the United States, and
that his dispositions, personally, on the subject of our claims, were favorable; that
the principle of responsibility he was ready to admit; but that, popular as our
nation was in France, our claims were not so; that a minister would incur great
French Claims.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 609
responsibility in a settlement of them; that Count Molé had thought of the organi-
zation of another commission, consisting of members of the two Chambers, to con-
sider and examine the subject, and had suggested it in a late council of ministers;
but, from a difference of opinion even on the principle of our claims, as I under-
stood him, the suggestion was not adopted ; that, under these circumstances, the
prospect of an adjustment would depend on a material reduction of the extent of
our demands, and that, in the amplitude we had given them, their admission would
be impossible.
I stated to that I regretted exceedingly to hear what he had just com-
municated to me; that I had hoped that the new Government of France would have
been animated with more liberal views; that the admission of the principle of
responsibility º (a principle which the late events in France rendered it impossible
to deny,) while its application was disputed, would be of very little avail; that,
in private transactions, an individual who should admit that he was indebted to
another, but disputed every item of the account, would oppose as great obstacles
to the demands of justice, as one who roundly denied that he was indebted at all;
that such a course on the part of France, with regard to our claims, while it seemed
to me alike unsuitable to the character of the question, of the parties, and of the
high interests involved, would only serve to increase the feelings of irritation and
dissatisfaction for which too much occasion had been already afforded ; that we
asked nothing but justice in the redress of undeniable wrongs; that, as the wrongs
had been great, the measures of redress ought to bear some fair proportion to the
magnitude of the injury ; that, with regard to the amount of our claims, if France
sought a reduction of them, it was incumbent upon her to say frankly what she
* JVote. On June 25, 1830, speaking of the principle of responsibility, to Prince Polignac,
JMr Rives said, “Your excellency, in referring again to the treaties of 1814 and 1815, says,
that you had not cited them as obligatory upon the United States, but only as a precedent of
respectable authority. Taken with the qualifications which a difference of circumstances
necessarily imposes, the government of the United States is far from declining the application
of this precedent. On the contrary, the principle of it gives conclusive support to our recla-
mations. In the note which I had lately the honor to address to your excellency, I stated the
difference of circumstances which rendered the particular rules of those treaties inapplicable
to the United States, but the fundamental principle of responsibility for the acts of the prece-
ding government of France, which is recognized and established by those treaties, applies
with all its force in favor of the reclamations of the United States. On the same principle
that the present government of France is responsible for the contracts of the preceding gov-
crnment in the case of belligerents, it is liable for the trespasses of that government on the
property of neutrals. The history, as well as the particular dispositions of the treaties of Pa-
ris, prove that violent and ſorcible wrongs were not, in general, comprehended in those trea-
ties among the acts of the preceding government, for which the restored government was
made responsible, because injuries of that description, in the case of belligerents, Wel'e COn-
sidered as calamities of war, and the natural consequence of the position in which the contract-
ing powers stood to each other. In that view, they would not have constituted a subject of
reclamation against the preceding government itself, and, of course, not against the restored
government. The property of neutrals, however, being lawfully exempt from all violence,
any forcible invasion of that property by the preceding government, constituted, at the least,
as strong a subject of reclamation against the present government of France, the general
principle of responsibility being once established, as any contracts of the preceding govern-
ment with the subjects of belligerents.”
77
610 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
was willing to pay, and if her offer approximated to justice, it would certainly be
considered, with every proper feeling, by the Government of the United States;
that considerations, however, of much higher importance than money, connected
with the general relations of the two countries, were involved in the adjustment of
this question; and in enforcement of this view, I took occasion to mention, (upon
the faith of indirect information of the successful issue of Mr. McLane’s negotiation,)
that Great Britain, setting a much higher value on the friendship of the United
States than France seems to do, had, in a case involving no demand upon her jus-
tice, and even at the expense of the interests of a large portion of her own subjects,
just settled the only question we had with her, in a spirit of liberal conciliation,
and with the enlightened policy of drawing closer her friendly relations with us.
I have the honor to be, &c. W. C. R.I.V.E.S.
To the Hon. M. Van Buren, Secretary of State.
130. Aff; Rives to Mr Van Buren. Eactract.
Proposition of the French Government, for the Adjustment of the Claims.
Paris, June 14, 1831. Sir : On the first instant, supposing that sufficient time
had elapsed for the deliberations of the council, F called again on the Minister of
Foreign Affairs for the purpose of receiving the final decision of the French Govern-
Iment. *
The minister told me that he had brought the subject again before the council,
and that it had been most maturely and deliberately considered ; that he and Mon-
sieur Perrier, the President of the council, had, with much difficulty, prevailed on
them to add one more million to the offer which had been already made me, but that
was unequivocally their witàmatum, and he was directed to announce it to me, in
the most solemn form, as such; that it was the opinion of the most enlightened
and influential men, members of both Chambers, that the offer of twenty-four
millions, heretofore made, was greatly too much ; that 5 , and
other leading members of the one Chamber or the other, whom he mentioned, had
already expressed that opinion to him, and emphatically warned him of the serious
difficulties to which this affair would expose ministers before the Chambers; that,
under these circumstances, nothing but high political considerations, and the strong
desire they felt to establish the most friendly relations with the United States, had
induced them to go as far as they had done, but that they had now advanced to a
limit which nothing whatever could induce them to pass.
I replied that, after the numerous and detailed discussions which had already
taken place, it was useless to discuss the adequacy of the proposition he had just
made: my only object was to know the final determination of the French Govern-
ment, that i might come to a determination alike ſinal on my own part, and thus
avoid the necessity of further unpleasant, as well as unprofitable discussions.
He repeated, that what he had just stated to me was the final and unchangeable
determination of the French Government, and he wished me to consider it as then
announced to me in the most solemn manner.
I then observed to Count Sebastiani, that nothing had yet been said of interest
upon the sum proposed to be paid by the French Government, but that it was an
indispensable element in judging of the proposition he had made, and must be
understood, before I could come to a decision upon that proposition.
French Claims.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 611
He replied that, under the circumstances of the case, interest was by no means
a matter of course; that their offer had always been accompanied with the express.
condition of payment in six years; that they were not bound, therefore, by the
addition of interest, to make it equivalent to a cash payment; but, nevertheless,
the council, in their anxious desire to determine the affair, had authorised him, if
I insisted upon it, to agree to pay an interest of four per cent., which was the
highest they had ever paid to a foreign government in a similar transaction.
With these explanations the interview terminated.
Finding no where a more authoritative estimate of the just amount of the
claims of our citizens than that contained in Mr. Gallatin's despatch of the 14th
January, 1822, to Mr. Adams, and in which he expresses the opinion that all the
claims of every description, justly due, do not exceed five millions of dollars, two
millions of which, he adds, “there can be no expectation ever will be obtained,”
I thought no time ought to be lost in securing the benefit of the proposition now
made by the French Government. I therefore prepared the projet of a conven-
tion, (of which a copy accompanies this despatch,) and, on the 3d of June, presented
it to the ministers. w
After reading it over, he signified his approbation of the principal dispositions
of it, with a special exception, however, of the fifth article, which contains a renun-
ciation of the French claims, and particularly of the claim founded on the eighth
article of the Louisiana treaty. He said there were claims of French subjects
against the United States of indispensable justice, which the American Govern-
ment could not certainly refuse to satisfy in the moment of obtaining justice for its
own citizens; and that, in regard to their claim under the eighth article of the treaty
of cession of Louisiana, it was too well founded, and of too much importauce to
be abandoned, without a fair and just equivalent, especially after the liberal pro-
position they had made for the payment of the claims of our citizens.
I observed, that no allusion having been made in the course of our negotiation
to the claims of French subjects, I had taken it for granted that there were none
which were supposed to merit the patronage of the French Government; and that,
with respect to the Louisiana question, I had flattered myself that the present
Government of France would no longer insist on a pretension which had been
heretofore used chiefly as an expedient for evading the justice due to our citizens.
He replied, that the negotiation in which we were engaged, as expressly
stated in the report approved by the king in October last, had three distinct objects:
first, the liquidation of the claims of American citizens against France; secondly,
the liquidation of the claims of French subjects against the United States; and,
thirdly, the adjustment of the great question respecting the execution of the Loui-
siana treaty: that the natural march of discussion was to treat these objects suc-
cessively; that he had not thought it necessary or proper to say any thing of the
claims of French subjects till those of American citizens had been disposed of:
but, having now come to an understanding respecting the latter, it remained to
adjust the former, as well as the reclamation relative to the eighth article of the
Louisiana treaty, which, he repeated, was too clearly founded in the language of
that instrument, as well as in the convictions of the French Government and nation,
ever to be gratuitously abandoned.
The minister, then, sent for Baron Deffandis to give information respecting
612 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
the claims of French subjects against the United States, as well as the manner in
which it was proposed to settle the Louisiana question. The Baron mentioned the
claim of the heirs of Beaumarchais ; the French vessels destroyed at Savannah
and Norfolk, in 1811; the four which were captured by Captain Stockton on the
coast of Africa, in 1822; and divers other claims, some of which I then heard of
for the first time. In regard to the manner of settling the question concerning the
eighth article of the Louisiana treaty, after alluding to the understanding which
had taken place in the time of Monsieur Polignac's ministry for an abandonment
of this pretension, in consideration of a temporary reduction of the duties on
French wines in the United States, he said that the commission, unanimously con-
curring in the opinion that the claim asserted by the French Government was clearly
supported by the language of the treaty, and the nature of the transaction itself,
thought that the proposed reduction of duties on French wines did not offer an
equivalent for its abandonment; but that the United States ought also to grant a
corresponding reduction of the duties on French brandies.
After some further conversation, which it is not important to detail, the
minister remarked that he was, as yet, very imperfectly informed as to the points
which remained to be adjusted, and that it would be necessary, therefore, to reserve
the discussion of them for another occasion.
Finding that the claim of the heirs of Beaumarchais, which alone amounted
to more than three millions of francs, was to be earnestly insisted on, I thought
it important to possess the mind of the ministers as promptly as possible with
those circumstances belonging to the history of the times, which had produced a
belief in the United States that the supplies which formed the subject of the claim,
were, in fact, derived from the gratuitous assistance of the French monarch.
On the 4th instant, therefore, I again called on him, and entered into an his-
torical exposition of this claim, and of the circumstances connected with it,
founded on the documents which had been published in the United States. Count
Sebastiani remarked that he knew very little of the intrinsic merits of this claim,
but it seemed to him that the Government of the United States stood committed by
the letter of Mr. Gallatin to the Duke de Richelieu, of the 2d December, 1816,
connected with the duke’s answer, to pay it, and it was a matter of much surprise
in France that it had not been heretofore paid. I replied by calling his attention
to the language of the correspondence between Mr. Gallatin and the Duke de
Richelieu, as not justifying the inference he had drawn from it.
The minister then said he had not yet had time to make himself thoroughly
acquainted with this claim, or the others which would be presented ; that he
would be necessarily occupied with other matters of great urgency before the
departure of the king, who was to set out on the 6th instant on an excursion into
the eastern departments; but that, if I would call again on Wednesday the 8th
instant, he hoped then to be able to enter with me cn this part of our negotiation.
In this state of things, I thought it important that the proposition which had
been made by the French Government for the adjustment of our claims should be
put on record, and, with that view, as well as to accelerate the progress of the
negotiation, I yesterday addressed to the minister a note accompanied by the pro-
jet of a convention, copies of both of which are herewith enclosed.
I have the honor to be, &c. W. C. RIVES.
To the Hon. Martin Van Buren, Secretary of State.
French Claims.] D; PLGA: AT:C W ERTANG. 613
Mr Rives to Mr Livingston.
Arrangements agreed upon.
Paris, June 29, 1831. On the 21st instant, the day proposed by the minister
for our interview, I again called at the office of Foreign Affairs. The minister said
he had read and considered my observations with attention; that he did not deem
it necessary to enter into a separate discussion of the several claims with me; that
the principal one, and greatly exceeding all the others in amount, was that of the
heirs of Beaumarchais; that the council before whom he had brought the subject,
considered the claim just, and had determined to insist upon it; he had reason to
believe, however, that the parties interested, in order now to secure their claim
in a certain and definitive manner, might be induced to accept a sum less than the
whole amount they had claimed; that the other claims among which there were
some of unquestionable justice, might, in like manner, be compromised, and that
the whole subject of private French claims might thus be terminated by a transac-
tion en bloc, and, in all probability, for two or three millions of francs.
On the following day (the 22d,) I called again on the minister of foreign Af-
fairs, as he had proposed, and found Baron Deffandis with him. The discussion
was resumed on the French claims, and particularly that of the heirs of Beaumar-
chais. After a great deal of conversation, which it is not deemed necessary to detail,
the subject was arranged by the minister’s agreeing to accept a gross sum of fifteen
hundred thousand francs in satisfaction of all the claims.
The claim of the heirs of Beaumarchais alone amounted to 3,700,874 francs.
From the peculiar nature of this claim, and the connection of the French Govern-
ment with it, the honor of the United States seemed now imperiously to demand
its adjustment, whether intrinsically well founded or not. The million * which,
with its interest, had been charged to the account of Beaumarchais, was not alleged
to have been paid to him by the United States. It was claimed as a gift put into
his hands by the French King for the purpose of purchasing the supplies with
which he had furnished the United States. But the French Government had re-
peatedly declared that it was not applied to the purchase of those supplies, but to
an object of secret political service, of which Beaumarchais had rendered a satisfac-
tory account to his own Government.
To get rid of this claim, amounting, alone, to more than three and a half mil-
lions of francs, and of others, (among which are some of clear justice,) amounting
to one million more, for a gross sum of one and a half million of francs, was an ar-
rangement so obviously advantageous for the United States, that I did not hesitate
to adopt it.
The question respecting the eighth article of the treaty of cession of Louisiana
then remained to be adjusted. The minister declared that the national sentiment,
as well as the convictions and determination of the French Government, render-
ed a simultaneous arrangement of this question the indispensable condition of the
* Note. M. de Richelieu replied to Mr Gallatin on the 16th Dec. 1826, in a manner en-
tirely favorable to the heirs of Beaumarchais: for he declared, formally, that “the million
given on the 10th of June, 1776, had immediately reached its intended destination, and that,
(according to the custom of that time,) a simple approval by the King was the only definite
account (piece comptable) of the use which had been made of it; (this approval was dated De-
cember 7, 1776, but a few months after the delivery of the money;) and that, moreover, from
a new examination of the facts, it appeared that the million in question had not been employ-
ed by M. Beaumarchais in purchasing the articles win.ch had been sent to the Univ'd States.”
Z
6!4. DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [French Claims.
acknowledgment of our reclamations; but that he was willing, with some little
addition, to arrange it on the same basis which had been agreed upon between
Monsicur fºolignác and myselſ. *
Moisie:tr Þavid, the Secretary General of the Bureau of Commerce, who had
been constited by the Minister of Foreign Affairs on this subject, was present, and
exhibited a projet he had prepared for a considerable reduction of duties on French
wines and brandies. I explained to the minister the considerations connected
with the interests of our industry, which rendered it impossible for me to accede
to any reduction of the duties on French brandies. After a protracted conversation,
with the details of which it is unnecessary to trouble you, it was finally agreed
that the United States should stipulate to reduce, for a term of ten years, the duties
on French wines to the following rates, by the gallon, to wit: on wines in bottles
from 30 to 22 cents, on white wines, in casks, from 15 to 10 cents, and on red
wines, in casks, from 10 to 6 cents; in consideration of which France should en-
tirely abandon her pretension under the eighth article of the treaty of cession of
Louisiana, and, moreover, agree to abolish the distinction now made in the French
tariff between the long Staple and the short staple cottons of the United States, the
offect of which will be a reduction of the duty Cn the former from 40 to 20 francs
the 100 kilogrames.
The motives and advantages of this arrangement on the part of the United
States, are so fully developed in my despatch of the 20th May, 1830, that I need
not here enter into the subject again. That the increased consumption of French
wines in the United States, under the reduced duties, will produce a material in-
crease of the revenue arising from this source, I cannot doubt; while the salutary in-
fluence of the measure on the public health and morals in the free introduction of a
cheap and unexciting drink, no hess recommends it to the approbation of an enlight-
ened patriotism, of which it is known, indeed, to have been long a favorite and
cherished object.
I will remark, only, that the proposition made to Monsieur Polignac in May,
1830, had chiefly in view a reduction of the duty on wines in cask. But the Min-
ister of Foreign Affairs desired a simultaneous reduction of the duties on other
wines, with a view of conciliating the winegrowing interest of Champaigne and
Bourgoyne, as well as of the south of France. Instead, therefore, of a reduction
of 50 per cent, in the duties on red wines in cask only, (which the calculations
made in my despatch of the 20th May, iS30, would require, in order to establish
an equality, in that respect with Madeira wines,) it was agreed to grant an average
reduction of about 33% per cent. in the duties on all kinds of French wines.
Satisfactory explanations were given by the minister in regard to the differ-
ence in the rates of duties established, at present, in France on the cottons of Tur-
key and India, and those of other countries; and I was convinced, indeed, notwith-
standing this difference of duty, that the cottons of the United States had nothing
to fear from a competition with the inferior qualities and reduced supplies of the
cottons of other countries.
I had every reason, therefore, to be content with the equalization of the duties
on the long staple and short staple cottons of the United States, operating a reduc-
tion of one-half of the duties now imposed on the former; especially as the real
French Claims] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. € 15
motive of the stipulated reduction of duties on French wines in the United States
was not to obtain commercial advantages, but to get rid of a claim of perpetual
privileges, founded on the language of a treaty which had heretofore proved an in-
vincible obstacle to the just reclamations of our citizens, and might be most oner-
ous and embarrassing for the future.
The arrangements which had been agreed upon in this interview, left nothing
to be done, but to settle, definitively, the form of the treaty in which they were t
be incorporated.
In a few days more, I have every reason to hope that the matter will be defi-
nitively consumated by the signature of the treaty.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, &c. W. C. RIVES.
The IIon. Edward Livingston, Secretary of State.
131. Mr Rives to Mr Livingston.
Result of the Negotiation.
Baris, July 8, 1831. Sir: I have the honor to transmit, herewith, the treaty
which has been concluded with the Government of France. It was reduced to
its definitive form on the 30th ultimo, but the necessity of submitting it to the
King who had just returned from his tour in the eastern departments, and the sub-
sequent absence of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who accompanied the King
in another oxcursion to Melum and Fontainbleau, on the 2d and 3d instant, prevent-
ed its signature till the 4th. -
In communicating the result of this long and ardous negotiation, I do not Sup-
pose it necessary to enter into analysis of the articles of the treaty, which either
sufficiently explains themselves, or are already explained by the details given in
my previous despatches. It will be perceived that the whole sum which the French
Government is to pay on account of the reclamations of citizens of the United
States for unlawful seizures, captures, &c., is twenty-eight and a-half millions of
francs. In regard to the adequacy of this sum to pay the just claims of our citizens,
I have already had the honor to refer to the despatch of Mr Gallatin of the 14th
of January, 1822; and beg leave here to cite the passage of it which relates to this
subject :
“Although I have enumerated all the cases within my knowledge, where actual condem-
nation had not taken place, I must add that it is possible that some vessels captured, and
probable that some burnt at sea whilst the Berlin and Milan decrees were in force, have not
yet been definiteley condemned. But there can be no expectation that indemnity will ever
be obtained either for those, or in any of the cases where there has been such condemnation.
From all the documents which I have yet seen, I do not believe that the total amount of this
last mentioned class, after deducting the cases where the destination of the vessels was con-
cealed, enemy’s property covered or which might generally afford plausible grounds for
condemnation, can exceed two millions of dollars in value. The Danish prizes, and the ves-
sels and cargoes seized at Naples, are not included in that estimate. The amount of seques-
trations and vessels burnt at sea, where no condemnation has taken place may be estimated
at about three millions of dollars. This last estimate cannot be far from the truth, since we
know the amount of the two largest claims, the St. Sebastian and the Antwerp sequestrations.
T he answer which this government may give to my last note, will show'whether we have any
thing to expect from its justice in any case whatever; for, if the Antwerp claim is rejected
there can be no expectation that they will voluntarily allow any other.” 2
If the opinion here expressed be correct, and certainly none enjoys, or is en-
616 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. LFrench Claims.
titled to more respect, the sum stipulated to be paid by the French government
will be amply sufficient to satisfy all the just claims of our citizens, of every des-
cription, comprehended in the scope of the negotiation.
The schedules founded on statements of the claimants, which have from time
to time been presented to Congress, carry the amount of the claims much higher;
but, for obvious reasons, they are not a safe guide either in regard to the validity
or the amount of the claims. During the past winter, I put these schedules into
the hands of a most intelligent countryman, whose practical acquaintance with
such subjects, and a personal knowledge of many of the transactions themselves,
derived from a residence in Europe at the time, gave particular value to his opinion.
He communicated to me the result of his examination in a letter, a copy of which,
as showing the large deductions to be made from the schedules, and as containing
other observations which may be found useful in the ultimate investigation of the
claims, I here with transmit.
The result which has been gained in the interest of the claimants, has not
been achieved without the greatest difficulty. The correspondence of Mr Crawford,
of Mr Gallatin, and of Mr Brown, with the Department of State (the unfavorable
parts of which have, for obvious reasons, not heretofore been given to the public)
shows that they regarded this whole subject as almost entirely hopeless. The diſ-
ficulties, instead of being diminished, have been increased by the recent revolution
here; the causes of which have been hinted at in several of my previous despatch-
es, and particularly in that of the 8th August, 1830. The more popular genius of
the new government in creating a greater tenderness for the public purse, and
stronger sympathies with the interests of the tax-payers, has itself been a serious
obstacle; to which have been added the pressure of extreme financial embarrass-
ments, and the absorbing pre-occupation of European politics.
An arrangement which, amid so many difficulties, has secured for claims of
our citizens (prosecuted in vain for the last twenty years, and a large portion, if
not the whole, of which has been considered as desperate) a sum sufficient, in all
probability, to pay every cent justly due, and nearly treble the amount pronounced
to be due by the commission charged with their examination here which has, at
the same time, extinguished claims of French subjects against the United States,
to the amount of near five millions of francs, by a stipulation to pay a million and
a-half; and has finally gotten rid of a most embarrassing claim (founded on the
language of a treaty) of perpetual privileges in the ports of one of the States of the
Union, by a temporary measure, intrinsically advantageous to ourselves, and in the
definitive settlement of these unpleasant questions, has laid a lasting foundation of
harmony and friendship between two countries having the most important common
interests, political and commercial: an arrangement marked by these features can-
not, I trust, fail to be satisfactory, and to justify the responsibility which, under
the discretionary powers the President has been pleased to confide to me, I have
not hesitated to assume both in the progress and termination of this complex ne-
gotiation. I have the honor to be, &c. W. C. RIVES.
To the Hon. Edward Livingston, Secretary of State.
Classification.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 617
132. Classification of the French Claims, as furnished by the Department
of State, in the Instructions to Mr Rives, 20th February, 1829.
First Class. Claims prior to 30th Sept. 1800, recognized by the fourth
and fifth articles of the treaty of that date, but either pretermitted by the
treaty of the 30th of April, 1803, or, through various causes, not included in
the settlement made at Paris by the board of claims, and remaining in force
by virtue of the treaty of 1800, and the 10th article of that of 1803, amounting
per schedule here with, to - - º º -> º -> º sº
Second Class. Claims accruing between the 30th September, 1800, and
the 30th April, 1803, for debts contracted within that period, and provided
for by the 12th article of the treaty of 1803, amounting, as per schedule, to 134,786 06
Third Class. Claims accruing between the 30th of September, 1800,
and the 30th April 1803, from all causes other than debts, and captures made
between the date and ratification of the treaty of 1800; those debts and cap-
tures being provided for by the 4th and 5th articles of that treaty, and inclu-
$1,488,833 99
ded in the first class, amounting, as per schedule here with, to - ſº 75,704 55
Fourth Class. Claims between the 30th April, 1803, and the year 1805,
and arising from all causes whatsoever, amounting, as per schedule, to - 1,065,081 98
Fifth Class. 1st. Claims subsequent to 1805, chiefly growing out of
the decrees and orders of the French government, on which no final con-
demnation was passed, amounting as per schedule, to - $6,256,647 69
2d. Claims of the same nature, but finally condemned
by the Council of prises, Council of state, or by imperial
decisions and orders,amounting as per schedule here with, to - 3,026,231 84
9,282,879 53
Exclusive of interest—aggregate * * * * * * sº $12,047,286 09
133. Claims on Naples. JMr Livingston to Mr Nelson.
Extract. Instructions, dated Washington, October 27, 1831.
It appears that, on the 31st March, 1809, a modification of the Berlin and
Milan decrees was adopted by the Government of Naples, which admitted certain
enumerated articles, imported in neutral vessels; but finding the Americans reluc-
tant to place themselves in their power under the general promise of protection
implied by this decree, a special invitation was made to the merchants of the Uni-
ted States, by a decree dated on the 30th of June, 1809, and officially communi-
cated to their consul, by which the Americans, by name, were promised the free
disposal of their cargoes, if accompanied by the usual papers, provided they had
not been in a port of Great Britain, or had not been visited by her cruisers.
As soon as the tenor of Murat’s decree could be known, several enterprising mer-
chants of the United States, putting faith in the promises it held out to them, fitted
out vessels with rich cargoes for Naples. The first two or three that arrived were
fairly dealt by ; their cargoes were sold, their returns were taken in, and they were
suffered to depart without molestation; but when, tempted by their show of good
faith, an additional number had been drawn within their grasp, and the prey became
worth taking, the whole were, by order of king Murat, seized, confiscated, and sold,
without a colorable pretext. The protests of the masters were disregarded; the
complaints of the consul treated, for many months, with contemptuous silence;
and when, at last, an answer was given, the robbery was said to be justified by an
act of Congress, passed on the first March preceding, which forbade commercial
intercourse between the United States and both France and England; an act not
relating to Naples in the remotest decree, and which, having passed four months
before the decree inviting the American vessels into the ports of Naples, could
78
618 DIPLOMATIC WRITING, [Claims on Naples.
never have justified the seizure of them after they came there. The number of
vessels and cargoes thus faithlessly seized and sold was forty-nine.
Your mission has been resolved upon, for the purpose of making a strong and
decisive attempt to procure a just indemnity to our injured citizens, and, at the
same time, assert the honor of our coustry, which suffers every day that we delay
to enforce the demand. The time and circumstances arc considered favorable for
prosecuting it. The time—immediately after France, whose example was followed,
and whose authority was relied upon, has yielded to the justice of our claims.
The circumstances—the commencement of a new reign, when the mind of a young
prince may be supposed more susceptible of the feelings of justice than that of
his predecessor, soured by the misfortunes inflicted upon him and his family by
the former occupant of his throne; and not least, the known determination of the
President to suffer no wrong. You will, therefore, at a convenient time, after the
ceremonies of your presentation, cnter on the business of your mission, in a man-
ner to convince the Government of the Two Sicilies that we are in Carnest in exact-
ing the full indemnity so long due to our citizens.
Convey in strong but respectful language, the idea that it was a ſirm resolve
of the President, on his entering on the duties of his office, to assert in the most
efficacious manner, the rights and claims of the mercantile class of his fellow
citizens upon foreign Governments. That his avowed principle is to make no
demand not founded in justice; but, as far as his functions will permit, to submit
to no wrong; that he has carefully cyamined all the circumstances of our demand
upon the Neapolitan Government; that the principle on which it is founded appears
to him incontestible, and that, therefore, your mission has been resolved on to bring
it to a close, to the end that, if it should unfortunately happen, (an event that he
cannot bring himself to anticipate,) either that a satisfactory answer should be
denied or delayed up to the period necessary for a communication to Congress, he
may submit to that body a statement of the demand he has made, and aſterwards
execute whatever measures they may decm it due to the protection of their fellow
citizens, and the honor of their country, to pursue.
134. Mr Pinkney to the Marquess di Circello. Extract.
“Naples, Aug. 16, 1816. The general principle, that a civil society may contract
obligations through its actual government, whatever that may be, and that it is not
absolved from them by reason, simply, of a change of government or of rulers, is
universally received as incontrovertible. It is admitted, not merely by writers on
public law as a speculative truth, but by states and statesmen as a practical rule,
and accordingly history is full of cxamples to prove, that the undisturbed possessor
of sovereign power in any society, whether a rightful possessor or not, with reſer-
ence to other claimants of that power, may not only be the lawful object of allegi-
ance, but, by many of its acts in quality of sovereign de facto, may bind the society
and those, who come after him, as rulers, although their title be adverse to, or even
better than his own. The Marquess di Circello does not need to be informed, that
the earlier annals of England, in particular, abound in instruction upon this head.
“With regard to just and beneficial contracts, entered into by such a sove-
reign with the merchants of foreign nations or (which is the same thing) with regard
to the detention and confiscation of their property for public uses, and by his
Claims on Naples.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 61C
authority in direct violation of a pledge of safety, upon the faith of which, that
property arrived within the reach of cofifiscation, this continuing responsibility stands
upon the plainest foundation of natural equity.
“It will not be pretended, that a merchant is called upon to investigate, as he
prosecutes his traffic, the title of every sovereign, with whose ports and under the
guaranty of whose plighted word he trades. He is rarely competent. There are
few in any station, who are competent to an investigation, so full of delicacy, so
perplcNed with facts and principles of a peculiar character, far removed from the
common concerns of life. His predicament would be, to the last decree, calamit-
ous, if, in an honest search after commercial profit, he might not take governments
as he finds them, and consequently rely at all times upon the visible, exclusive,
acknowledged possession of supreme authority.
“The undersigned will now, for the sake of perspicuity and precision, recall
to the recollection of his Excellency the Marquess di Circello the situation of the
government of Murat at the cpoch of the confiscations in question. Whatever
might be the origin or foundation of that government, it had for some time been
Cslablished. It had obtained such obedience as, in such times, was customary, and
had maniſestcd itself, not only by active internal exertions of legislative and execu-
tive powers, but by important external transactions with old and indisputable regu-
lar governments. It had been (as long aſterwards it continued to be) recognised
by the greatest potentates as one of the European family of states, and had inter-
changed with them ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls. And
Great Britain by an order in council of the 26th April 1809, which modified the
system of constructive blockade, promulgated by the orders of November 1807,
had excepted the Neapolitan territories with other portions of Italy from the opera-
tion of that system, that neutrals might no longer be prevented from trading with
them.”
“The wrong, which the government of Miurat inflicted upon American citizens,
wanted nothing, that might give to it atrocity or effect as a robbery, introduced by
treachery; but, however pernicious or execrable, it was still reparable. It left in
the sufferers and their nation a right, which was not likely to be forgotten or aban-
doned, of sceking and obtaining ample redress, not from Murat simply, (who indi-
vidually was lost in the sovereign) but from the government of the country, whose
power he abused. By what course of argument can it be proved, that the incon-
testable right, from which that government could never have escaped, has been
destroyed by the reaccession of his Sicilian Majesty, after a long interval, to tho
sovereignty of the same territories?
“The territories, under the sway of Murat must be supposed to have returned
to his Sicilian Majesty less exhausted, more embellished and more prosperous,
than if the property of American citizens had not, in the mean time, been sacri-
ficed to cupidity and cunning. It must further be remembered, that a part of that
property was notoriously devoted to the public service. Some of the vessels, sei-
zed by orders of Murat were, on account of their excellent construction, converted
into vessels of war, and as such commissioned by the Government; and the under-
signed is informed, that they are now in the possession of the officers of his Sic-
ilian Majesty, and used and claimed as belonging to him.”
“Murat did not,” replied the Mar. di Circello, “deem himself authorized to
620 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Claims on Naples.
decide in any way, (as to sequestration) and submitted the report (of Agar, Sec-
retary of the treasury,) to his brother in law Napoleon, who decreed in margin,
that the vessels and cargoes should be confiscated, because the embargo laid in
the ports of the United States induced him to believe, that the produce must be
British property, and its introduction into the continent a breach, therefore, of
the too famous Berlin and Milan decrees.
—“ Murat then, let it be repeated, was but the passive instrument of the will
of Bonaparte in the confiscation of the American ships, and if this could give birth
to responsibility, such responsibility should no longer be imputed to the country,
over which he reigned, and still less to the government, which has there resumed
its lawful authority.
“The other and not less important consequence is, that the treasury, which
was the fund of the State, never enjoyed the proceeds of the confiscations, and that,
instead of being employed to alleviate the burdens of the people, or applied to the
improvement or embellishment of the country, as is supposed, in the note of the
16th of August, those proceeds only served to feed the caprices and the oriental
pomp of the family of Murat and his adherents.”
135. Mr Nelson to the Prince of Cassaro. Extract.
Naples, January 31, 1832.
The principle of the liability of the nation to effectuate the engagements made,
to redress the injuries inflicted, and to profit by all the just advantages acquired
by its Government de facto, is too broadly asserted by all writers upon national law,
and too recently and generally exemplified in the practice of the Governments of
Europe, to be now called in question. Independently of all authority, it is verified
and sustained by the most obvious considerations of natural equity.
The citizens of one nation, in their intercourse with those of another, cannot
be required to look beyond the acknowledged possession of the political and civil
power. A contrary doctrine, introduced into the international code, would be preg-
nant with the most fearful consequences, fatal alike to private interests, and the
internal tranquillity of nations; provocative of a continual intervention between
independent powers, essentially subversive of the right of self-government. To a
principle so radically vicious, the Government of the United States can never yield
its sanction. It will never consent that it should be made applicable to its own
interests, nor will it assume it in regard to other nations.
136. Prince of Cassaro to Mr Nelson.
Translation. Extract.
Naples, May 30, 1832. From an attentive examination of Mr. Nelson’s note,
it appears that he undertakes to establish this principle—that citizens of one
country, in their intercourse with another, cannot be expected to look beyond the
acknowledged possession of the political and civil power. From this principle
it follows, of course, that he who is in acknowledged possession of the sove-
reignty of a country, should be regarded, by foreigners, as the legitimate sovereign
thereof.
Hence, it is pretended, that Murat having pledged his faith to the Americans,
his act is to be obligatory on the nation over which he then ruled, and on its legi-
timate Sovereigns after their restoration to the throne.
Adhering to this principle, the undersigned considers as capable of demon-
Claims on Naples.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 621
stration, that no indemnification is due to the American merchants for the losses
they sustained, inasmuch as they were wrong in confiding in Murat, whom they
ought not to have viewed as the absolute, entire, and supreme possessor of this
kingdom. In proof of this, it will be proper to recapitulate the circumstances
under which Murat reigned, and from which it will be seen that the continental
portion of the Neapolitan dominions was at that time only a great feud of the
French empire:
On the 15th of July, 1808, Joachim Murat was invested by his brother-in-
law, Napoleon, with the title of King of Naples; which was made hereditary in
his lineal male descendants; in failure of whom, the crown reverted to him who
had bestowed it, or to his legitimate, natural, or adoptive successors. To the
crown of Naples was added the dignity of high admiral of France.
The supreme sovereignty of Naples, consequently, resided in Napoleon; by
virtue of which, he directed the political relations of this kingdom with other
countries, just as he did those of the various States over which he had unjustly and
forcibly placed other individuals of his own family. It was upon the strength of
this supremacy that he issued the atrocious Berlin decree, extending to the king-
doms of Spain, Naples, Etruria, and Holland; and, shortly after, that monument
of his arbitrary disposition, the Milan decree.
These are points in history, of the truth of which no one doubts; nor did the
American Merchants doubt that the abovementioned decrees applied to them like-
wise, for they did not immediately despatch cargoes for Naples. Mr. Nelson
asserts that they demanded security. No evidence of this, however, has been
found among our archieves, notwithstanding the most diligent search. From whom
could they receive such security? From Napoleon or from Muratº Certainly
from Napoleon, as Murat was merely the executor of those execrable decrees in
Naples. If Napoleon’s command was paramount throughout the whole extent of
the French empire in such a case as this, certainly the possession of that part of
the sovereignty which regulated said political system resided in Napoleon, and not
in Murat.
Hence, according to Mr. Nelson’s own principle, the American merchants
erred in trusting to Murat; who, as was clearly shown in the note to Mr. Pinkney,
did not dare to disobey the inexorable Napoleon, and therefore confiscated the
American vessels, notwithstanding his word had been pledged for their safety.
137. Mr Nelson to the Prince of Cassaro. Eactract.
- Naples, June 29, 1832.
It remains to inquire, whether the responsibility of the Government of Murat,
for the wrongs shown to have been committed by it, has devolved upon that of his
present Majesty. That it has, the undersigned is persuaded may be rendered
apparent by a recurrence to principles incontestibly established by the authority
of publicists of acknowledged reputation, and by the confirmatory practice of most
of the powers of modern Europe.
The following are the principles maintained by the government of the U.States:
That a nation is a moral person, capable of contracting obligations and of com-
mitting wrongs; that, as a moral person, it is bound to perform the one and to re-
dress the other; that this obligation is independent of, and remains unaffected by,
changes in its actual government; that, whoever comes to the possession of its sove-
reign power, takes it subject to this obligation; that neither a revolution in a State
622 DIPLOMATIC, WRITING, [Claims on Naples.
nor a change in its rulers, or the form of its government, can dispense it from the
duty of its performance; but that, as long as the nation exists, the obligation exists;
and that, even in the case of conquest, its validity remains unimpaired.
It further maintains, that the acts of the rulers of a State, whilst engaged in
the exercise of its sovereign powers, are the acts of the State itself. That to con-
stitute them such, it is sufficient that they proceed from its actual government, with-
out reference to the source or tenure of its authority. That this is especially true
in regard to the action of a government upon the interest of strangers; that foreign
nations, in their dealings with States, may and must regard the undisturbed poses-
sors of the Sovereign power as its rightful possessors; and that this duty results from
their obligation to forbear from all interference with the internal policy of such States.
It believes that these principles are consonant to reason; that they are recom-
mended by considerations of public convenience; and that, apart from the protection
afforded by their application, there can exist no security in the intercourse of na-
tions. It maintains that the establishment of a diſſerent doctrine would draw after
it the most pernicious consequences; that under its sanction, every revolution in a
government would avail to cancel the obligations of the nation represented by it;
that, by inviting, on the part of foreign traders, an inquisitorial scrutiny into the
Origin and sufficiency of the titles of its rulers, the independence of every State
would be ceaselessly invaded, and its internal tranquility constantly disturbed;
that, in a word, it would provoke a continual intervention between independent
powers, and thus essentially subvert all the rights of sciſ-government.
Applying these principles to the case of the American claimants, it insists
that, from 1809 to 1815, Murat was the actual possessor of the sovereign power
of the Kingdom of Napies; that its Government was in his hands; that, as its
ruler, he represented its politieal power; that his public political acts were the acts
of the Neapolitan nation; that the American confiscations were his acts, because
the decrees which enforced them were issued in his name and by his authority,
and were executed by the power of his Government ; that they were, therefore,
imputable to the Neapolitan nation ; that, being founded in manifest and admitted
wrong, the Neapolitan nation was morally bound to repair the losses occasioned by
them ; and that the nation which contracted this obligation, notwithstanding the
change in its rulers, still exists, and, through his Majesty’s Government, which
represents its power, and is now bound to redeem it.
The undersigned has said that the principles contended for by the American
Government are sustained by “the authority of publicists of acknowledged repu-
tation.” In support of this position, he refers his exccidency to Wattel's Laws of
Nations, book I, ch. 4, sect. 40, and book 2, ch. 18, sect. 324, as explanatory of
the representative relations subsisting between a sovereign and his subjects, of the
obligations growing out of these relations, and of the duty of their fulfilment by
the nation to which they attach. A satisfactory discussion and exposition of the
whole doctrine applicable to this controversy, his excellency will find in Baron
Puffendorff’s invaluable Treatise on the Rights of Nature and of Nations. The
author, in lib. 8, ch. 12, sect. 2, uses the following decisive language:
“De ce que nous verons de dire il paroit comment ou doit resondre une ques-
tion proposée par Aristóte, savoir, si, lors’qu'un peuple passe, du gouvernement
absolu d'un monarque, ou d’oligarchie, au gouvernement populaire; l'état ainsi
devenue libre doit garder, les traités, les contracts, et les autres actes du roi, ou
Claims on Naples.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 623
des grands, sous la domination des quels ilétoit au paravant? Ceux qui soutenient
la negative, se fondoient, sur ce que l’état ne prouvait étre tenu que de Son propre
fait, n'était pas obligé d'accomplir les engagemens d'un monarque absolu, ou d'un
petit nombre de grands dont l’autorité avoit été fondée uniquement sur la force, et
non pas rapportée à l'utilité publique; de sorte qu'alors ce n'étoit pas proprement
un 6tat; mais c'est la sans contredit une raison bien frivole. Car une tete malade
me laissepas pour cela d’être une tâte; ainsi ce que les cheſs de l’état ont fait,
quelque vicieux et dereglés qu'ils fuissent, est cense fait par tout le corps de l'état.”
The principles asserted in the foregoing extract, his excellency will not fail
to perceive are substantially, if not precisely, those upon which the American
demands are supported. The writer maintains and illustrates his vicw by a very
strong example, that the acts of the government of a State are the acts of the State
itself. That no revolution or change in the governinent can discharge the State
from the obligations which the acts of its rulers have imposed on it; that the
responsibility of the State reposes upon ſhe fact of the actual existence of the govern-
menſ, without being in anywise affected by iſs organization or character. That, whether
rightful or otherwise, its obligation is not varied. That, in the significant language
of the author, “aithough the head may be sick, it does not, therefore, cease to be
a head;” and that a government founded on ſacre force is as competent to charge
the nation ruled by it as if it were legitimate.
Nor can the force of this reasoning, or the weight of the high authority by
which it is sustained, be weakened in its application to the present controversy,
by an attempt to show that the Government of Murat was ſounded in usurpation.
Without stopping to cnquire into the nature of Murat’s title to the throno of Naples,
which the undersigned may well admit to have becn doſective relatively to Ferdi-
nand, its legitimate sovereign, he insists that, as its actual, undisturbed possessor,
the Government of the United States, and its citizens under its protection, were
justified in dealing with him as with the rightful sovereign; and that all the obli-
gations growing out of their intercourse with his kingdom were as binding upon
the Neapolitan nation as if it had been under the rule of Ferdinand himself. The
nation was the same, by whomsoever it may have been governed; and it was wifſ,
the nation, and not its governor in his personal capacity, that the American merchants
72aintained iſleir intercourse.
So fixed and cardinal, indeed, is this principle in the view of writers upon
public law, that even in the case of admitted usurpation, as understood by them,
it is unequivocally asserted. Vattel, in his Treatise upon the Laws of Nations,
distinctly affirms it. In book 4, ch. 5, devoted to the discussion of the rights of
States to receive and entertain public ministers, which he determines to be an
incident of sovereign power, he considers the question, “whether foreign nations
*may receive the ambassadors and other ministers of a usurper, and send their ministers
to him # Which he thus decides: “In this particular, foreign powers take for
their rule the circumstance of actual possession, if the interest of their affairs so
require: and, indeed, there cannot be a more certain rule, or one that is more agreeable
to the law of nations and the independence of States. As foreigners have no right to
&nterfere in the domestic concerns of a nation, they are not obliged to canvass and scru-
tinize her conduct in the management of them, in order to determine how far it is just
or unjust. They may, if they think proper, suppose the right to be annexed to the
Possession.” Even admitting, then, Murat to have been a usurper, the American
62%, DIPLOMATIC WRITING. LClaims on Naples.
merchants were justified in treating with him as a legitimate sovereign. They had
not the right “to canvass or scrutinize” his title to the throne which he occupied,
but were bound to suppose “the right annexed to the possession” of the powers
of Government. It would be superfluous to add, that the power thus to treat,
necessarily implies the validity of the obligations which the intercourse imposed;
and, as these attached to the nation, the nation was and still remains responsible
for their fulfilment,
And his excellency will find this view of the subject supported by Puffendorff
in the third section of the chapter already referred to, in which he asserts and
illustrates the doctrine contended for by the American Government; maintaining
that it is reasonable that the acts and engagements of a usurper, after he has been
driven from his usurped dominion, should be regarded as obligatory upon the nation
represented by him; and distinguishing between the power of a restored sovereign
over those acts of a usurper which affect the internal interests of the kingdom,
which he admits may be abolished, and those that relate to the interests of Strangers,
which he decides to be beyond the control of the new government.
138. Mr Welson to the Prince of Cassaro. Extract.
Naples, September 12, 1832.
Neither the dignity of the Government of the United States, nor the duty it
owes to its citizens, will justify or sanction submission to further delay: I am there-
fore specially instructed to demand an explicit answer to the following inquiry:
Will the Government of his Sicilian Majesty rendersatisfaction for the seizures
and confiscations made by the Neapolitan Government during the reign of Murat,
of the property of American citizens, and take measures for the prompt and full
payment of the same!
I am further instructed to apprize his Majesty's Government that the frigate
United States, now in the port of Naples, has been despatched to receive the an-
swer to this specific demand; that she will wait for it twenty days; and if, at the
expiration of that time, a satisfactory reply shall not have been given, and ask
proper provision made for the payment of the claims preferred, I am directed to
for my passports to return to the United States, when it will devolve on the Presi-
dent to take such measures for the vindication of the rights of his fellow citizens
as his constitutional duties shall direct.
139. JMr Nelson to the Prince of Cassaro.
Naples, October 1, 1832. Sir: The propositions, preferred in a spirit of lib-
eral compromise, having been rejected by his Majesty, I feel it to be my duty to
declare no longer obligatory upon the Government of the United States, which re-
mitted to its original rights, will hold the Sicilian Government responsible for the
whole value of the vessels and cargoes seized by Murat, for the expense of the
masters and agents in claiming the property, for the charges to which the American
Government has been put in supporting the American seamen belonging to the
confiscated ships and their conveyance home, and for any expense which may be
hereafter incurred in the further prosecution of the claims of its citizens.
140. Prince of Cassaro to JMr Nelson.
Naples, 2d October, 1832. The undersigned has received Mr Nelson's note
the , and has the honor of sending him herewith a passport, agreeably to his
claims on Naples. DIPLOMATIC writing. 625
request, and of informing him that proper arrangements have been made for the
free embarcation of his suite and baggage.
The undersigned, however, declares to Mr Nelson, by order of the King, that,
although he may have thought proper to quit the country, yet the Sicilian Govern-
ment does not consider the negotiation terminated; as his Majesty, actuated by that
spirit of conciliation which forms so distinguished a trait in his character, has con.
ceived certain propositions, which, being similar to those agreed upon in the late
convention between France and the United States, seem likely to accommodate the exist-
ing differences.
His Sicilian Majesty, urged by a sincere desire to maintain and strengthen
his amicable relations with the United Sates, and to dispel the existing difficulties,
is determined to bring the affair in question to a conclusion, and, as the departure
of Mr Nelson will render that impossible here, his Majesty will send immediately
to the United States a Diplomatic Agent, furnished with proper instructions, and
with the powers neeessary for making a treaty, and thus ending the negotiations
here begun.
Having thus communicated to Mr Nelson the determination of his Majesty,
the undersigned renews to that gentleman the assurances of his esteem.
THE PRINCE OF CASS ARO.
141. Mr Nelson to Mr Livingston.
Issue of the Negre;ation.
Naples, October 8th, 1832. Sir: I have the honor to inform you that, after I
had received my passports, which my last despatch apprized you I had demanded,
and on the very day assigned for my audience of leave, I received a note from the
Prince of Cassaro, in which he stated that urgent duties would prevent the
King from seeing me according to appointment, and suggested the expediency of
another interview on the following day. To this proposal I, of course, acceded,
and have been constantly occupied since in the business of my negotiation, which
I have great pleasure in informing you has been brought to an issue, highly favora-
ble, as I think, to the interests of the claimants. The treaty is now preparing, and
will be signed in a day or two. In the meantime, I have obtained from the Secreta-
ry for Foreign Affairs a written statement of the terms of the settlement.
By this agreement, this Government stipulates the payment of two millions
one hundred and fifteen thousand ducats, in instalments, with interest. This sum,
I believe, will very nearly cover the principal of all the just and well-founded claims.
The negotiation has been a very arduous one; but if the result should prove
satisfactory to the Government of the United States, I shall find in its approbation
a full remuneraticn for the toils and vexations to which I have been exposed during
it progress. I have the honor to be, &c. JOHN NELSON.
142. Our Relations with the Netherlands,
Condensed from Lyman’s Diplomacy.
The treaty, made in 1782, having no limitation, continued in force till the
creation of the kingdom of the Netherlands and the consolidation of the Dutch and
Belgic provinces in 1814 and '15. Separate from the great and lucrative trade car-
ried º the Dutch East and West Indies, and colonies on the American con-
7
626 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Wetherlands.
tinent, this country has had from 1794 (with the exception of '99, when Holland
was invaded by an English and Russian army, and during nearly the whole year
her ports declared to be in vigorous blockade) a vast direct commerce till 1808 and 9.
But the diplomatic relations, subject to uncommon vicissitudes, have been inter-
rupted the greater part of the time. Holland fell the same year with Austrian
Flanders, and the country on the left bank of the Rhine.
From that period we trace the original Dutch confederacy through the suc-
cessive changes of a national assembly, a Batavian republic, an aristocratic legis-
lature, an elective monarchy, an hereditary monarchy, a department in 1810 of the
imperial government, and lastly, to its union in 1814 and '15, with Belgium. The
United States have not followed step by step these revolutions in its government;
but a friendly intercourse has always been maintained, and till the abdication of
Louis in July, 1810, many openings were found for trade, notwithstanding the
severity, with which the continental system was attempted to be enforced. The
special application of that system to Holland, however, in 1809, and the following
years, subsequently gave rise to the same controversy, on the subject of illegal
seizures, the government has had with Spain and Naples. American property to
a great amount was unjustly seized, and, ultimately, confiscated. * That, which
was not liable to the operation of the Berlin and Milan decrees, was sequestered
under the 10th article of the treaty of Paris of March 1810. It is in these words:
“Every description of merchandise that has arrived in the ports of Holland in Ame-
rican vessels since the 1st January, 1809, or which shall hereafter so arrive, shall be put
under sequestration, and shall belong to France, to be disposed of according to circumstan-
ees and the political relations of that country with the United States.”
This treaty, the Dutch admiral Verhuel was obliged to sign with M. de
Champagny. It was the preliminary step to the abdication of Louis, an event,
indeed, that followed a few months after. Louis in his own hand made observa-
tions on the different provisions of this treaty. They have been preserved, and
have since been published in a manner, that leaves no doubt of their authenticity.
In regard to the 10th article just quoted he remarks: “I expect, from the justice of
the Emperor, that he will express his intentions in a different way, as it respects
this property. I think it should be treated as property, under similar circum-
stances, has been in Spain and Naples, and that the same date should be assigned
for the application of the article.” This arrangement would have placed the pro-
perty in depôt subject to future examination and decision. The history of the
claims of this country on the Dutch government does not differ in principle from
that on Spain or Naples. -
The negotiations with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, since the peace of
1815, present little variety or novelty. They relate solely to claims for spoliations,
and to the concluding of a commercial convention, containing the doctrine of recip-
rocal importation and charges and duties.
In 1818 an attempt was made by the United States to renew the ancient treaty
of 1782 with modifications, adapted to the actual condition of both countries.
This failed in consequence of the law of March 3d, 1815, requiring the repeal of
* These confiscations, known as the “Antwerp” and the “Holland” claims, are now in
a eourse of liquidation: the memorials, in both cases, have been received by the commission-
ers under the French treaty of July 4, 1831.
Aetherlands.] DIPLOMATIG WRITING. 627
all discriminating duties on the part of foreign nations, as it regarded the United
States, while it provided only a partial repeal on the United States, as it regarded
foreign countries. The statute did not rescind the charge on tonnage, and the im-
port only on merchandise, the produce or manufacture of the nation, to which the
vessel, in which imported, belonged. On the other hand, the Netherlands law
repealed the countervailing duty both on tonnage and merchandise whatever might
be its origin. This inequality of municipal regulations proved fatal to a renewal
of the treaty of 1782, one of the most ancient in the collection, and the only one,
concluded with the Dutch Government. The course of trade of the Netherlands,
also, presented great difficulties. Few articles, either of the produce or manufac-
ture of that kingdom, were objects of exportation, that branch of trade consisting
principally of foreign productions.
In the supposition, that the law of March, 1815, was abrogated in regard to
the Netherlands, it would have been necessary to have gone through an entire
revision of all the modern commercial treaties. The proposition of the U. S. demand-
ing to be admitted into the Dutch colonies on the footing of the most favored
nation, constituted another serious obstacle. This was rejected from the considera-
tion, that the United States possessed no colonies, and could offer no terms of
reciprocity in that particular; a refusal, partaking somewhat of an invidious air,
for, as most other nations held colonies, whether small or large, the prohibition
appeared to apply exclusively to this country.
That power, at the close of the great political reforms, regenerations, remodel-
lings and recastings of 1844, 1815, owned but the small and decayed islands of
St. Eustatia and Curacoa, (and two others so obscure as hardly to merit being men-
tioned) whose whole produce was confined to a few articles and in limited quan-
tities. On the other hand, a country, affording the greatest variety of native staple
products, able at this moment to supply all Europe with flour, tobacco, lumber and
cotton wool, with a most extensive coast, and whose markets must every day
become more valuable from the rapid increase of wealth and population, was denied
admittance to these islands, because she possessed no colonies, whose trade could
be offered in return. The application of the principle in this particular case, cer-
tainly, appears altogether abstract. There are, also, occasions, when a trade with
the United States is of indispensable necessity to save the islands from starvation,
caused by drought or hurricanes. No foreign country, it is true, is under an obli-
gation, (except, indeed, urged by those great principles of humanity and civiliza-
tion, which fall little short, of necessity, of the most rigid kind) to rescue a popu-
lation in that unfortunate condition from suffering or death. All are at liberty to
forego the temporary advantages, that this lamentable state of things offers. But
there seems to be some equity, or reason in requiring, that a trade, occasionally of
the greatest importance to the islands themselves, should be accompanied with a
benefit and security of a less precarious and even capricious character to the people,
that can alone conduct it. In a practical view it is the more remarkable, that the
Netherlands should hold to a colonial monopoly with so much earnestness, as the
commerce of the kingdom is now confined chiefly to a traffic in foreign products
and manufactures.
The commercial treaty of 1822, was not renewed by the American minister,
but arrangements equally beneficial, though of a less permanent character, was
628 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. LAWetherlands.
effected by means of corresponding municipal regulations. In October, 1816, the
Netherlands adopted the terms offered by the countervailing duty law of March
1815, to which we have already referred, and in all imposts and tonnage charges,
placed the trade of this country on a footing of equality and reciprocity. But as the
act of March 1815 repealed only the impost on merchandise under certain circum-
stances, the United States, in order to establish on their part a more perfect equali-
ty and reciprocity, in April 1818, removed, also, the tonnage charged in regard to
Netherlands ships. Matters remained in this state till the Autumn of 1822, when
the Netherlands government, either perceiving that the carrying trade from their
ports was falling into foreign hands, or not deriving equal advantages with the
United States from the system of reciprocity, in consequence of the circumstance,
that most of their exportations consisted of articles, not the produce or manufacture
of their own country, in favour of which only our countervailing duties were re-
scinded, published a new tariff of duties, which, among other things, provided,
that “one tenth of the duties, paid upon the importation or exportation of all goods,
shall be returned, when the same are imported, or exported in Dutch vessels.” It
is unnecessary to say, that this provision was a direct bounty on Dutch navigation,
and as direct an encroachment cn the system of equality and reciprocity, though
the minister, M. de Nagell was not disposed to affix to it that interpretation.
By the laws of 12th June 1821 and 10th August last, the duties remain with-
out distinction the same for foreign ships and for national. This restitution of a
tenth for merchandise, imported by the ships of the Netherlands, has done no more
(as the 11th article of the law of the 12th July 1821, expresses it) than to give en-
couragement and proper aid to the works of the nation. This restitution, therefore,
supplies the place of the premiums of encouragement, which the government
might have granted to every ship, built in the Netherlands, a disposition, which
certainly never could have given room to the American government to complain cf
an inequality of treatment in respect to their ships. If the government of the United
States had found it good to grant a similar premium to the American ships, surely
the King could have found in that no cause of remonstrance. His Majesty would
have only seen in it a bounty, intended to encourage cr favour the manufactures cf
the nation.
The act of January 7, 1824, in anticipation of the restoration of countervailing
duties, on the part of foreign nations, with whom the principle of reciprocity was
not secured by treaty, gave full authority to the President to withdraw by proclama-
tion from the navigation of countries, adopting that course, the privileges and ad-
vantages, conferred by the acts of March 1815 and April 1818. But as the Nether-
lands government maintained, in its correspondence on the subject, that the ten
per cent. bounty of August 1822 was solely intended to encourage national ship
building, and, by no means, to affect the tonnage or impost charges on exportations
crimportations, and, as the act of January 1824, did not, in precise terms, invest
the executive with power to determine what should be considered a revival of coun-
tervailing duties on the part of a foreign nation to the disadvantage of the United
states, a doubt arose, whether the inequality, created by the Netherlands tariff,
could be counteracted by the retaliatory provisions of that law; the matter was,there-
2 tº s :
Portugal.] DIPLOMATIC writing. 629
143. Intercourse with Portugal.
Extract from the General Instructions of the State Department to Gen. Dearborn, in 1822.
Independently of the changes in the diplomatic relations of the two countries,
which have resulted from the removal of the king from Rio de Janeiro to Lisbon,
other accidental circumstances have concurred to cause some irregularity and dis-
order in them. In the spring of the year 1819, Mr. John Graham was appointed
minister plenipotentiary of the United States to the Court of Brazil, to succeed
Mr Thomas Sumpter, junior, who had resided there in that capacity, almost from
the time of the transfer of the Portuguese government thither. Mr Graham, within
little more than a year from the time of his departure on that mission from the Unit-
•ed States, was compelled to return home, and barely lived to reach this country.
About the same time the Chevalier Correa de Serra, who had for several
years resided as the minister plenipotentiary of Portugal in this country, was re-
called and left the United States. A resolution of the senate of the United States
in March, 1821, recommended to the President the appointment of a minister to
the Court of Brazil, but the return of the king of Portugal to Europe, very shortly
afterwards, rendered a compliance with this resolution unavailing.
The departure of that prince from Rio de Janeiro had been preceded by various
movements of a revolutionary character, as well there, as in Portugal. He had,
immediately before embarking, appointed, as his minister to the United States, the
person, who since his arrival in Europe, has acted as his secretary of state for
foreign affairs. And it appears that since the revolution there, which has invested
the Cortes with a principal pcrtion of the sovereign authority, the policy of main-
taining ministers of the plenipotentiary rank from that country has been suspended.
A chargé d'affaires has been appointed to repair to Washington, but has not yet
arrived. In the mean time, that office has been discharged by the Chevalier Amado
Grehon, who had been secretary of legation to Mr Correa, and recently a Mr Decosta
has been hero, and announced himself, as attached to the legation, and to exercise
the powers of consul general.
After the invasion by the Brazilian Portuguese government of Montovideo and
the eastern shore of the river La Plata, a revolutionary government under the name
of the Oriental Republic of La Plata, and subject to the authority of a military
chief, named Artigas, for several years maintained a defensive war, at once, against
them and against the rival revolutionary republic, styled the United Provinces of
La Plata. The latter, the seat of government of which was at Buenos Ayres, never
came to a state of declared war with Portugal, but the Republic of Artigas did,
and that commander issued commissions for privateers and letters of marque against
the Portuguese, under which the commerce of that nation was, for three or four
years, much annoyed. Of the captures made by these privateers, several were
brought into the ports of the United States, and frequent complaints were received
from Mr Correa, that some of the privateers were fitted out within the U. States,
and partly manned by their citizens. To this complaint every attention, compat.
ible with the rights of the citizens of the United States and with the laws of nations,
was paid by this government. The laws, for securing the faithful performance of
the duties of neutrality, were revived and enforced. Decrees of restitution were
pronounced by the judicial tribunals, in all cases of Portuguese captured vessels,
630 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Portugal.
brought within the jurisdiction of the United States. And all the measures, within
the competency of the Executive, were taken by that department of the government
for repressing the fitting out of privateers from our ports, and the enlisting of our
citizens in them.
These measures, however, do not appear to have been altogether satisfactory
to the Portuguese government, doubtless, because they were not sufficiently under-
stood by them. Shortly before the Chevalier Correa de Serra left the United
States, he addressed to this department several notes, containing lists of Portuguese
vessels captured by privateers, alleged to have been fitted out in the United States,
or partly officered and manned by citizens of this country. To these lists were
added claims of indemnity, to a large amount, upon the United States, for the value
of these vessels and cargoes, and with them was connected a demand for the ap-
pointment of a joint commission, to be appointed by the two governments, to deter-
mine and assess the amount of damages to be paid by the United States for these
captures. As there was no precedent for the appointment of such a commission
under such circumstances, and as not a single case of capture had been alleged, for
which the United States were justly responsible, this proposal was, of course,
denied, and nothing further was heard upon the subject, until the 1st of April last,
when a note was received from the present chargé d'affaires of Portugal, leading
to a correspondence, copies of which are now furnished you. With regard to
the proposal, contained in the letter from Mr Almada of the 1st of April, of a treaty
of commerce, in which special advantages shall be granted to the United States,
even if it were offered by itself and separately from the inadmissible condition,
connected with it, we should not consider it as desirable, or compatible with the
true policy of either nation. We have never sought exclusive advantages in our
treaties with any foreign nation. The policy of the United States, on the contrary,
has invariably been to form its commercial institutions and engagements on the
broadest and most liberal principles of reciprocity. We are neither solicitous nor
unwilling to treat with Portugal upon subjects of commerce; but, if we do treat, it
must be upon those principles, and in conformity with thema. The convention of
3d July 1815, with Great Britain, so far as it goes, exhibits the system, upon which
we are desirous of settling our commercial arrangements with other nations, and
the only one upon which we should be inclined to treat with Portugal.
Lisbon, December, 13, 1822. In addition to all the other circumstances, says
Gen. Dearborn, which I have mentioned, as excuses on the part of this government
for procrastination, that which I consider the most important, is the fear of offending
Great Britain, especially since receiving the assurance, that that government would
guaranty the integrity of Portugal. This government, knowing that no commer-
cial convention will be agreed to on the part of the United States, but such as will
place our merchants on an equal footing with those of the most favored nation
and Great Britain being not only the most favored, but the most peculiarly favored
nation, by the treaty of 1810, which will so far expire in July, 1825, as will allow
Portugal to make such alterations, as circumstances may require, or as she may
deem expedient, and as any treaty or convention, that would be acceptable to the
United States, must place us on the same footing with Great Britain, it is very
obvious, that this government must, under existing circumstances, feel embarrassed
Portugal.] DIPLOMATIC wRITING. 631
and, of eourse, be disposed to procrastinate the negotiation, which had eommensed,
informally, with a fair prospect of success.
In January 1823, the Count da Lapa, many years minister at St. Petersburg,
was intrusted with the negotiation on the part of Portugal. Some forms of conven-
tions were exchanged, but no solid progress appears to have been made.
“I have not heard, says Mr Dearborn, from the Count da Lapa since the 10th,
ultimo, when he agreed to make out the form of the first head of the treaty, and
call on me within the course of that week, but subsequently to our last meeting,
a report was made to the Cortes on the subject of the present existing treaty with
England, particularly in relation to the article, which stipulates, that certain Eng-
lish manufactures should be admitted into Portugal on paying a duty of fifteen per
cent. on their cost. The report concluded by saying, that under existing circum-
stances, the Portuguese government have the right to suspend the operation of the
article alluded to, until new negotiations should be had on the subject. The re-
port was sanctioned by a vote of the Cortes. I presume that the discussion of this
subject by a committee, and by the Cortes has occasioned a long delay on the part
of the Count da Lapa. By the above mentioned report it appears, that negotiations
have been going on between Portugal and Great Britain for sometime with a view,
on the part of the former, of effecting such alterations in certain parts of the exist-
ing treaty, as would enable her to enter into such liberal and reciprocal commercial
treaties with other nations, as would be acceptable. But it appears by the said
report, that England, as might be expected, is very unwilling to relinquish any of
the exclusive advantages, she now enjoys under the present treaty; and I am per-
suaded, that this government still finds itself embarrassed by certain stipulations
in her treaty of 1810 with Great Britain, and that to that source the long delays, I
have experienced, are to be principally attributed. I am satisfied, however, that
the government is very earnestly engaged in endeavouring to effect such arrange-
ments with England, as may be necessary for preparing the way for a liberal and
reciprocal treaty with the United States.”
In a letter from General Dearborn in May, 1824, we have an account of a pro-
ceeding by Don Miguel, at Lisbon, who then attracted, as he yet does, great attention
in Europe:
“Very early in the morning of the 30th of April, the young prince, Don
Miguel, had the troops assembled at different points; one body of them surrounded
the residence of the King at the palace of Bemposta, while detachments were
ordered to arrest the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and Minister of War and Marine,
together with several members of the King's household, and many other respec-
table persons. Between 9 and 10 o’clock in the morning, it was proposed that
the members of the diplomatic corps should meet at the house of the Nuncio,
where it was concluded, that it would be proper to endeavor to ascertain, whether
the King was a prisoner or not, and that, for that purpose, it would be expedient
to proceed in a body towards the palace; the whole corps proceeded accordingly,
and after passing the great square, where a large body of troops were formed under
the immediate command of the Prince, we proceeded to within a short distance of
the palace, where we were stopped by a military guard, and compelled to leave our
carriages, and then allowed to proceed to and enter the palace in the presence of a
large body of troops, regularly formed. We found the King quite overwhelmed
632 Asº
DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Portugal.
with fear and distress, accompanied by two of his chamberlains and Lord Beres-
ford. The appearance of the diplomatic corps evidently gave him great relief; he
was asked, whether he considered himself a prisoner: he said that he could not
say, whether he was or not; but that he was surrounded by a body of troops, over
whom he had no control. We were informed, that the Queen had arrived at the
palace, and was in that part of it, which is exclusively occupied by the Prince.
After conversing, and waiting in a state of suspense until about one o'clock, P. M.,
a letter of proclamation from the Prince was received by the King. In the course
of two hours, the Prince arrived with a large body of cavalry: he dismounted, and
soon after presented himself to the King, and with the aid of Lord Beresford,
made a speech to his father, promising to obey his orders and be an obedient sub-
ject, then, on his knee, kissed the King's hand and promised to remove the troops;
and in almost an hour the troops were dismissed. The King then requested the
diplomatic corps to stay, and partake of a dinner, which he had ordered for them.
We stayed, and had an excellent dinner-then had a short conference with the
King, who requested us to call the next day at one o’clock, and we retired.”
“Lisbon, May 14, 1824. The King, being apprehensive of another attempt
for dethroning him, and his minister, the Marquess Palmella, having found it
necessary for the King to take refuge on board a British man-of-war, concerted
measures for going on board the Windsor Castle, a British seventy-four, and on
Sunday the 9th instant, about 12 o'clock, with considerable address, he effected
his object accompanied by two of the young princesses. The members of the
diplomatic corps immediately hurried on board, excepting myselſ, confiding in my
privilege as a minister, I remained with my family. As soon as it was known,
that the King was on ship-board, terror and consternation pervaded the city, it
being generally believed, that the Prince, with the adherents of the Queen, would
pursue the most violent measures, and endeavor to cut their way to the throne;
but fortunately the Prince, being either intimidated or deceived by the King, went
soon after into a boat, and followed the King on board the ship, where he was
confined, and in a few hours the city became tranquil.
“Yesterday, being the anniversary of the King's birth day, he received the
diplomatic corps on board the ship, where a great number of the nobility and offi-
cers attended, and, also, many ladies. At six o'clock, P. M., the Prince sailed for
France on board a Portuguese frigate, attended by a British frigate and a French
brig of war. The King bestowed many marks of his favor on the members of
the diplomatic corps, such as titles and orders, or both, on each member excepting
myself; and knowing that I could not receive either, the Marquess Palmella civilly
observed to me, that the King would have been happy to have noticed me, as he
had done the other ministers, if I could have accepted the same token of respect.
In the Executive Message to Congress of the 4th of December, 1832, it is
stated, that our “Demands against Portugal for illegal captures in the blockade
of Terceira, have been allowed to the full amount of the accounts presented by the
claimants, and payment was promised to be made in three instalments. The first
of these has been paid—the second, although due, had not, at the date of our last
advices, been received; owing, it was alledged, to embarrassments in the finances,
consequent on the civil war in which the nation is engaged.”
f
Greece.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 633
144. The Greek Patriots. Mr.ſldams to Mr Rush. Erfract.
Department of State, Washington, August 18, 1823. If, upon the receipt of
this letter, Mr. Luriottis should still be in London, it will be desirable that you
should deliver it to him in person, accompanied with such remarks and explanations
as may satisfy him and those whom he represents, that, in declining the proposal
of giving active aid to the cause of Grecian emancipation, the Executive govern-
ment of the United States has been governed, not by its inclination, or a sentiment
of indifference to the cause, but, by its constitutional duties, clear and unequivocal.
The United States could give assistance to the Greeks, only by the application
of some portion of their public force or of their public revenue in their favor, and
it would constitute them in a state of war with the Ottoman Porte, and, perhaps,
with all the Barbary powers. To make this disposal either of force or of treasure,
you are aware, is, by our constitution, not within the competency of the Executive.
It could be determined only by an act of Congress, which would assuredly not be
adopted, should it even be recommended by the Executive.
The policy of the United States, with reference to foreign nations, has always
been founded upon the moral principle of natural law—Peace with all mankind.
From whatever cause war between other nations, whether foreign or domestic, has
arisen, the unvarying law of the United States has been peace with both belliger-
ents. From the first war of the French Revolution, to the recent invasion of Spain,
there has been a succession of wars, national and civil, in almost every one, of
which, one of the parties was contending for liberty, or independence. To the first
revolutionary war, a strong impulse of feeling urged the people of the United
States to take side with the party which, at its commencement, was contending,
apparently, at least, for both. Had the policy of the United States not been
essentially pacific, a stronger case to claim their interference could scarcely have
been presented. They, nevertheless, declared themselves neutral, and the prin-
ciple, then, deliberately settled, has been invariably adhered to ever since.
With regard to the recognition of sovereign states, and the establishment with
them of a diplomatic intercourse, the experience of the last thirty years has served
also to ascertain the limits proper for the application of principles, in which every
nation must exercise some latitude of discretion. Precluded, by their neutral posi-
tion, from interfering in the question of right, the United States have recognized
the fact of foreign sovereignty, only when it was undisputed, or disputed without
any rational prospect of success. In this manner, the successive changes of
government in many of the European states, and the revolutionary governments
of South America, have been acknowledged. The condition of the Greeks is not
yet such as will admit of the recognition upon these principles.
Yet, as we cherish the most friendly feelings towards them, and are sincerely
disposed to render them any service, which may be compatible with our neutrality,
it will give us pleasure to learn, from time to time, the actual state of their cause,
political and military. Should Mr. Luriottis be enabled and disposed to furnish
this information, it may always be communicated through you, and will be received
with satisfaction here. The public accounts from that quarter have been, of late,
very scanty, and we shall be glad to obtain any authentic particulars which may
come to your knowledge, from this, or through any other channel.
I am, with great respect, &c., JOHN QUINCY ADAMS,
80
634. DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
145. The Independent States ºf South ..?merica and Mearico. Eact ract.
The Province of Buenos Ayres, (we learn from Lyman's Diplomacy) made
the most rapid and solid progress towards cmancipation. Their declara-
tion of independence, was communicated to the government of the United
States, by Don Manuel H. de Aguirre, who had arrived in this country, as a pub-
lic agent from La Plata, and private one from Chili. He was not, however, furnish-
ed with a commission of minister nor with a power to negotiate; and there was no
intimation in his letter of credence that he was even authorized to ask the acknow-
ledgment of his government, though this matter was much pressed in his subsequent
correspondence with the Department of State. We may mention in this connexion
thát Don Martin Thompson, an individual sent by the government of La Plata to
this country, the succeeding year, had been dismissed by the Director Puerreydon
for having transcended his powers. Several letters, in the course of 1817, 1818,
were addressed to the Secretary of State by Đon iſ. H. de .2guirre, soliciting the
acknowledgraent of the Provinces of Buenos Ayres, formerly the vice-royalty of
La Plata. No answers were given to those letters, though conferences were held
with him. The President declined to enter into any arrangements with this indi-
vidual, for he did not appear furnished with powers to negotiate, and the indepen-
dence of the provinces was far from being established at that period; several
portions of it being in possession of the Spaniards, Montevideo of the Portuguese,
and the eastern shore, under the government of General Artigas, who though
independent of the mother country, still maintained his independence of the Pro-
vinces of Buenos Ayres.
France, in forming an alliance with the United States and acknowledging
their independence at an early period of the war, was led to this step by obvious
and immediate political considerations and the expectation of future commercial
benefits. No eagerness was manifested in acknowledging the new states,
though the application of Don Manuel Aguirre had scarcely been declined,
when a renewed consideration of the same claims arose in the person of David C.
de Forrest, who solicited the government to allow him to be admitted as a Consul
General. This last application was made in May, 1818, but, as it was not ascer-
tained, whether the province claimed an entire or partial independence, the Presi-
dent did not think it expedient to accede to the proposition. Spain, it seems, had
still pretensions to the sovereignty, and it was the intention of Buenos Ayres to
offer special commercial favors to her for the purpose of obtai, ing a release from
them. Until it was determined, what would be the extent or character of these
privileges, no nation could prudently lay itself under the obligation of encounter-
ing the commercial disabilities, necessarily flowing from such an arrangement.
“It had not been intended to suggest to Mr. de Forrest, that it was in any
manner incompatible with the independence or sovereignty of a nation to grant
commercial advantages to one foreign state, and to withhold them from another.
If any such advantage is granted for an equivalent, other nations can have no right
to claim its enjoyment, even though entitled to be treated as the most favored nations,
unless by the reciprocal grant of the same equivalent. Neither had it been meant
to say, that a nation forfeited its character of acknowledged sovereignty, even by
granting, without equivalent, commercial advantages to one foreign power and
withholding them from another. However absurd and unjust the policy of a
nation, granting to one and refusing to another such gratuitous concesions might
South America.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. '635
it.
be deemed, the questions, whether they affected its independence or not, would
rest upon the nature of the concessions themselves. The idea meant to be conveyed
was, that the reservation of an indefinite right to grant hereafter special favors to
Spain for the remuneration of her claims of sovereignty, left it uncertain, whether
the independence of Buenos Ayres would be complete or imperfect, and it was
suggested with a view to give the opportunity to the supreme Director of explain-
ing his intentions in this respect, and to intimate to him that while such an indefi-
nite right was reserved an acknowledgment of independence must be considered
as premature. This caution was thought the more necessary, inasmuch as it was
known that, at the same time, while the supreme Director was insisting upon this
reservation, a mediation between Spain and her colonies had been solicited by
Spain, and agreed to by the five principal powers of Europe, the basis of which
was understood to be a compromise between the Spanish claim to sovereignty and
the colonial claims to independence.”
We shall not detain the reader with an account of Mr de Forrest's ap-
plication, particularly as he “declared himself unauthorized to agitate or discuss the
question with regard to the recognition of Buenos Ayres as an independent nation.”
Some observations, however, may be proper with reference to circumstances al-
leged by him, as arguing that a consul general may be accredited without acknow-
ledging the independence of the government from which he has his appointment.
The consul of the United States, who has resided at Buenos Ayres, had no other
credential than his commission. It implied no recognition by the United States
of any particular government, and it was issued before the Buenos Ayres declara-
tion of independence, and while all the acts of the authorities there were in the
name of the King of Spain.
During the period, while this government declined to receive M. de Onis
as the minister of Spain, no consul received an exeguatur under a commission from
the same authority. The Spanish consuls, who had been received before the con-
test for the government of Spain had arisen, were suffered to continue the exercise
of their functions, for which no new recognition was necessary. A similar remark
may be made with regard to the inequality alleged by Mr de Forrest to result from
the admission of Spanish consuls officially to protest before our Judicial tribunals,
the rights of Spanish subjects generally, while he is not admitted to the same pri-
vileges with regard to those of the citizens of Buenos Ayres. The equality of lights,
to which the two parties to a civil war are entitled in their relations with neutral
powers, does not extend to the rights, enjoyed by one of them by virtue of treaty
stipulations, contracted before the war, neither can it extend to rights, the enjoyment
of which essentially depends upon the issue of the war. That Spain is a sove-
reign and independent power, is not contested by Buenos Ayres and is recognised
by the United States, who are bound by treaty to receive her consuls. Mr de For-
rest’s credential letter, asks that he may be received by virtue of a stipulation, in
supposed articles concluded by Mr Worthington, which he was not authorized to
make, so that the reception of Mr de Forrest, upon the credential on which he
founds his claim, would imply a recognition not only of the government of the su-
preme Director Puerreydon, but a compact as binding upon the United States,
which is a mere nullity.
636 BIPLOMATIC WRITING. | South America.
“Consuls are, indeed, received by the government of the United States from
acknowledged sovereign powers, with whom they have no treaty. But the exe-
quatur for a consul general can obviously not be granted without recognising the
authority from whom his appointment proceeds as sovereign. ‘The consul,’ says
Wattel (book ii. chap. 2. § 34) ‘is not a public minister; but as he is charged with
a commission from his sovereign, and received in that quality by him, where he resides,
he should, to a certain extent, enjoy the protection of the law of nations.”
“If from this state of things, the inhabitants of Buenos Ayres cannot enjoy the
advantage of being officially represented before the courts of the United States by
a consul, while the subjects of Spain are entitled to that privilege, it is an inequali-
ty, resulting from the nature of the contest, in which they are engaged, and not
from any denial of their rights, as parties to a civil war. The recognition of them
as such, and the consequent admission of their vessels into the ports of the United
States operates with an inequality against the other party to that contest and in their
favour.”
An application, made the same year from Venezuela, was speedily disposed
of. We shall present a relation of this transaction in the words of the parties:
“Most Excellent Sir, Having been appointed by the government of the re-
public of Venezuela its representative near the United States of North America,
I have the honor to inform you of my arrival in this city, for the purpose of dis-
charging the trust committed to me: To effect this I have to request, that you will
be pleased to inform me, at what time it will be convenient for you to afford me an
opportunity of presenting my respects to you personally, and of communicating to
you the object of my arrival in the federal city. I have, &c.
“. LINO DE CLEMENTE.
“Washington, 11th December, 8th year of the Republic, A. D. 1818.
“The Secretary of State of the U. S. North America.”
Reply of the Secretary of State.
Sir, Your note of the 11th inst. has been laid before the President of the United
States, by whose directions I have to inform you, that your name having been
avowedly affixed to a paper, drawn up within the United States, purporting to be
a commission to a foreign officer for undertaking and executing an expedition, in
violation of the laws of the United States, and, also, to another paper avowing that
act, and otherwise insulting to this government, which papers have been transmit-
ted to Congress by the message of the President of the 25th of March last, I am
not authorised to confer with you, and that no further communication will be re-
ceived from you at this department.
“I am, sir, with due consideration, &c.”
Without travelling through a historical detail of events, it will be suffi-
cient to observe, that in Chili as in Buenos Ayres, the moving causes of the revolu-
tion were not the oppressions of the Spanish Monarchy. The people of Chili
were not first awakened by persecutions and sufferings to a sense of their power
and their rights, they had always been quiet for more than two centuries and a
half. The united vigilance and cares of church and state had tamed every restless
spirit and checked every wayward thought. The rulers and the pastors of the
South America.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 37
people had diligently removed every hope of liberty, and passive obedience had
become a habit. When the wars, arising out of the French revolution, involving
and disturbing all the nations of Europe, overwhelmed the peninsula of Spain,
drove the ancient dynasty from the throne, produced a struggle for the sceptre and
broke loose at once those carious bonds of mere prejudice and superstition, which
held the various parts of that great monarchy together, such was the state of the
mother country, that it was manifest the colonies could no longer be governed as
as formerly. Each one consequently began calmly to think of self-government,
not as a matter, to which he had been excited and persecuted, nor in a spirit of
rebellion, but as a deplorable act of necessity in obedience to a melancholy fatality,
which had rent asunder the several parts of a great empire, that had been, until
then so quietly and happily united.
Not satisfied with the representations of the colonial agents, but convinced,
that some progress towards independence had been made, and desirous to secure
for this country their full and just share of any commercial advantages, that might
be offered, the government determined in 1517, to despatch three special commis-
sions to South America for the single purpose of obtaining some just and precise
notions of the real situation of affairs there. Messrs. Theodoric Bland, Caesar A.
Rodney and George Graham were selected and sailed in a frigate in December 1817,
for the River La Plata, with instructions to examine into the condition of Buenos
Ayres and Chili. The latter business was undertaken by the first named indivi-
dual. Nothing, we believe, contained in the reports, transmitted by these gentle-
men, inspired regret at the delay of the government in the recognition of the new
States.
Not discouraged by the unsatisfactory result of the first commission, the go-
Vernment appointed, in the summer of 1820, Messrs T. B. Provost and John M.
Forbes, agents for commerce and seamen for Chili and Buenos Ayres. The reader
will observe, that these individuals were not furnished with powers or instructions
in any sense called diplomatic, though directed to make representations (as will be
seen in the paragraph we are about to recite from a letter from the department of
state) on subjects of obvious interests to this country:
“The commercial intercourse between the United States and those countries,
though not very considerable, is deserving of particular attention. Whatever accu-
rate information you can obtain, relating to it, as well as to the commerce of those
countries with other nations and to their internal trade, will be particularly accept-
able. The condition of our seamen there will, also, deserve your notice. The per-
formance of these duties will involve also the political relations between those
countries and the United States. In the progress of their revolution Buenos Ayres
and Chili have, to the extent of their powers, and, indeed, far beyond their natural
means, combined maritime operations with those of their war by land. Having no
ships or seamen of their own, they have countenanced and encouraged foreigners
to enter their service, without always considering how far it might affect either the
rights or the duties of the nations, to which those foreigners belonged. The priva-
teers, which, with the commissions and under the flag of Buenos Ayres, have com-
mitted so many and such atrocious acts of piracy, were all either fitted out, manned
and officered by foreigners at Buenos Ayres, or even in foreign countries, not ex-
6.38 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
cepting our own, to which blank commissions both for the ships and officers were
transmitted. In the instructions to the late Commodore Perry, which his lament-
ed decease prevented from being executed by him, and a copy of which is now
furnished to you, certain articles of the Buenos Ayrean privateering ordinance were
pointed out, particularly liable to the production of these abuses, and which, being
contrary to the established usages among civilized nations, it was hoped, would
have been revoked or made to disappear from their otherwise unexceptionable code.
These instructions were renewed to Commodore Morris, but the time of his stay
at Buenos Ayres was so short, and he was there at a moment of so great a change in
the ruling power of the state, that although he communicated to then existing Direc-
tor, the substance of the representations which Commodore Perry had been instruct-
ed to make, we know not that it was attended with any favourable result. You
will consider the parts of Commodore Perly’s instructions, which may be still ap-
plicable on your arrival in South America, as directed to yourself, and should you
proceed to Chili, will execute them there, no communication upon the subject having
yet been made there. Among the incoiſ veniences, consequent upon this system of
carrying on maritime warfare by means of foreigners, has been occasionally and to a
considerable extent, the enticement of seamen, belonging to merchant ves-
sels in the ports of Buenos Ayres and Chili from their engagements, to
enlist them in privateers or other armed vessels of those countries, in attending
to the numerous trials and convictions for piracy, which have recently afflicted our
guntry, and cast an unusual gloom over our annals, you will remark that a great
proportion of the guilty persons have been seamen thus engaged—foreigners at
Buenos Ayres, or enlisted in our own ports in violation of our laws.”
The exertions of Mr Forbes were so far successful, as to procure a decree,
issued by the government of Buenos Ayres on the 6th of October 1821, forbidding
the granting of privateer commissions.
We have, hitherto, not had occasion to mention Peru, where, hefore 1819, 20,
no revolutionary movement took place. This backwardness is, we believe, fully
explained in the following paragraph from a letter of an intelligent gentleman, well
acquainted with the situation of the Spanish Provinces:
“The landed estates are in the hands of large proprietors and are cultivated by
slaves. They are fearful that an attempt to change the form of government would
be attended by a loss of their property, and from the great number of blacks and
muiattoes in this viceroyalty, the contest would probably terminatc in the same
manner as the contest of St. Domingo.”
So far from taking any part in the republican movements of Chili, Peru even
in 1813, sent an army into that vice-royalty and re-established the royalist govern-
ment. But in 1817, 18, the Peruvians were expelled by General St. Martin with
an army from Buenos Ayres, who succeeded in the summer of 1821, after defeating
Canterac, La Serna and other Royalist officers, in taking Lima and finally Calloa,
the only place remaining in possession of the King's forces. The independence of
the Province was declared July 15, 1821.
South America.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 639
In Mr Rush's Memoranda, of the 31st July, 1818, he discloses the following
official interview, with the British Secretary of State, for Foreign Affairs:
Had an interview with Lord Castlereagh, by appointment, at the French
ambassador’s, yesterday. He informed me that the court of Madrid had
made propositions to Great Britain to mediate between Spain and her colonies, and
invited the European Alliance to join. The invitation was given in a note from the
Spanish ambassador in London, written early this month. He had not known of
it at the time of our interview on the sixteenth, having then just got back from
Ireland, and a convenient opportunity of noticing it had not offered when we were
together afterwards. He had therefore sought this interview. He could not bet-
ter unfold the subject than by putting into my hands the notes that had passed; first,
the one from the Spanish ambassador; next, the answer of the British government,
drawn up a few days ago; thirdly, as coupling itself with the subject, a note of
the British government of the twenty-eighth of August 1817, addressed to the al-
lied powers and made known to Spain, containing the sentiments of Great Britain
as to a mediation at that time.
I read each note. The introductory matter of the Spanish ambassador's spoke of
the rebellious nature of the war in the colonies, of the past clemency of Spain, and
her continued willingness to terminate the quarrel. It then laid down the follow-
ing as the basis on which a mediation was asked. 1. An amnesty to the colonies
on their being reduced. Lord Castlereagh explained this word, which was a trans-
lation from the Spanish, by saying that Spain did not mean conquered, but only
that the colonies must desist from hostility. 2. The king of Spain to employ in
his public service in America, qualified Americans as well as European Spaniards.
3. The king to grant the colonies privileges of trade adapted to the existing pos-
ture of things. 4. The king to acquiesce in all measures the mediating powers
might suggest to effect the above objects.
The British answer approved the propositions, as general ones, but called for
explanations by which the meaning of some of them might be rendered more defi-
nite. It expressed an opinion that the dispute ought to be healed without taking
away the political supremacy of the parent state. It declared that the trade of the
colonies ought to be free to the rest of the world, the mother country being placed
upon a footing of reasonable preference. Lastly it made known, that Great Britain
would do no more than interpose friendly offices, using no compulsion should they
fail. - . -
The British note of August 1817, related chiefly to the commercial freedom
of the colonies and the non-employment of force. It was very explicit on the first
point, going the length the United States had done, of saying that Great Britain
would accept no privileges of trade at the hands of the colonies not open to other na-
tions; and on the second point, unequivocally disavowing all intention of forcing
the colonies by arms, into any measures whatever. The proffered mediation at
this period, went off on the question of the slave trade, Britain insisting on its abo-
lition by Spain on terms to which the latter would not then assent.
When I had finished reading them, his lordship asked if I was in possession
of the views of my own government as to a basis of settlement.
I replied in the affirmative: informing him that the desire of my government
was, that the colonies should be completely emancipated from the parent state.—
It was also of opinion, that the contest never would, or could, be settled otherwise.
640 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
I added, that the United States would decline taking part, if they took part at all,
in any plan of pacification, except on the basis of the independence of the colonies.
This was the determination to which my government had come, on much de-
liberation, and I was bound to communicate it in full candour. It had hoped that
the views of Great Britain would have been the same.
His lordship appeared to receive the communication with regret. He admitted
that the United States stood in different relations to the contest, from those which
Great Britain held; as well by reason of the European engagements of the latter,
as other causes. Still, he sincerely desired that our two governments should have
acted in full harmony of opinion. He perceived the deep interest which the United
States had in the whole question; on which account their concurrence with Europe
on all the grounds of mediation, although they took no part in it, would not have
been without an influence in rendering it effectual. The fundamental point of
difference was further discussed between us; but I gave his lordship no reason to
suppose that the determination of the United States would undergo a change. The
conversation was conducted and terminated in a spirit altogether conciliatory.”
The conclusion of the year 1821, leſt little doubt of the ultimate fate of all the
Spanish provinces. The deputies of Co ombia to the Cortes in Spain that year
insisted at once on independence, and would not assent to any engagement upon
any other basis, while those of Mexico were authorized to forego an acknowledg-
ment, and do not appear even to have aspired to it.
The time had now arrived, when this government determined to recognise some
of the new states in South America. This memorable disposition was communi-
cated to Congress in a message, March 8th, 1822, as follows:
146. Proposition to recognise the Independence of Mexico and the South
./?merican States communicated to Congress in a Message from President
Monroe, dated Washington, March 8th, 1822.
“The revolutionary movement in the Spanish provinces in this hemisphere,
attracted the attention, and excited the sympathy of our fellow-citizens from its
commencement. This feeling was natural and honorable to them, from causes
which need not be communicated to you. It has becn gratifying to all to see the
general acquiescence which has been manifested, in the policy which the consti-
tuted authorites have deemed it proper to pursue in regard to this contest. As soon
as the movement assumed such a steady and consistent form, as to make the suc-
cess of the provinces probable, the rights to which they were entitled by the law of
nations, as equal parties to a civil war, were extended to them. Each party was
permitted to enter our ports with its public and private ships, and to take from them
every article which was the subject of commerce with other nations. Our citizens,
also, have carried on commerce with hoth parties, and the government has pro-
tected it with each, in articles not contraband of war. Through the whole of this
contest the United States have remained neutral, and have fulfilled, with the ut-
most impartiality, all the obligations incident to that character.
This contest has now reached such a stage, and been attended with such decisive
success on the part of the provinces, that it merits the most profound consideration,
whether their right to the rank of independent nations, with all the advantages
incident to it, in their iniercourse with the United States, is not complete. Buenos
Ayres assumed the rank by a formal declaration in 1816, and has enjoyed it since
ºn ºf {} {{?!, () ,? A'i'i ( WRITHNG. 641
1810, free from invasion by the parent country. The provinces composing the
republic of Colombia, after having separately declared their independence, were
inited by a fundamental law of the 17th of December, 1810. A strong Spanish
fºrce occupied at that time certain parts of the territory within their limits, and
v. aged a destructive war. That ſorce has since been repeatedly defeated, and the
whole of it either made prisoners or destroyed, or expelled from the country, with
* ! .
t |
º
te exception of all inconsiderable portion only, which is blockaded in two fortresses.
The provinces on the Pacific have likewise been very successful. Chili declared
independence in 1818, and has since enjoyed it undisturbed, and, of late, by the
assistance of Chili and Buenos Ayres, the revolution has extended to Peru. Of the
imovement in Mexico, our information is less authentic; but is it nevertheless, dis-
iinctly understood that the new government has declared its independence, and that
there is now no opposition to it there, nor a force to make any. For the last three
years the government of Spain has not sent a single corps of troops to any part of
that country; nor is there any reason to believe it will send any in future. Thus
it is manifest that all those provinces are not only in the full enjoyment of their
independence, but, considering the state of the war and other circumstances, that
there is not the most remote prospect of their being deprived of it.
When the result of such a contest is manifestly settled,the new governments have
a claim to recognition by other powers,which ought not to be resisted. Civil wars too
often excite feelings which the parties cannot control. The opinion entertained by
other powers, as to the result, may assuage those feelings, and promote an accom-
modation between them, useful and honorable to both. The delay, which has
been observed in making a decision on this important subject, will, it is presumed,
have afforded an unequivocal proof to Spain, as it must have done to other powers,
of the high respect cntertained by the United States for her rights, and of their
determination not to interfere with them. The provinces belonging to this hemi-
sphere are our neighbors, and have successively, as cach portion of the country
acquired its independence, pressed their recognition, by an appeal to facts not to
be contested, and which they thought gave them a just title to it. To motives of
interest this government has invariably disclaimed all pretentions, being resolved
to take no part in the controversy, or other measure in regard to it, which should
not merit the sanction of the civilized world. To other claims a just sensibility
has been always felt, and frankly acknowledged; but they, in themselves, could
never become an adequate cause of action.
It was incumbent on this government to look to every important fact and
circumstance, on which a sound opinion could be formed; which has been done.—
When we regard, then, the great length of time which this war has been prosecu-
ted, the complete success which has attended it in favor of the provinces; the present
condition of the parties, and the utter inability of Spain to produce any change in
it, we are compelled to conclude that its fate is settled, and that the provinces
which have declared their independence, and are in the enjoyment of it, ought to
be recognized.
Of the views of the Spanish government on this subject, no particular informa-
tion has been recently received. It may be presumed that the successful progress
of the revolution, through such a long series of years, gaining strength and extend.
S 1
6.42 DIPL{}\; ATIC Vº, RíTHN C. [South America.
ing annually in Cvery direction, and embracing, by the iate important events, with
little exception, all the dominions of Spain, south of the United States, on this
continent; placing, thereby, the complete sovereignty over the whole in the hands
of the people, will reconcile the parent country to an accommodation with thern,
on the basis of their unqualified independence. Nor has any authentic information
been recently received of the disposition of other powers respecting it. A sincer,
desire has been cherished to act in concert with them in the proposed recognition,
of which several were sometime past duly apprized, but it was understood that they
were not prepared for it. The immense space between those powers, even those
which border on the Atlantic and these provinces, makes the movement an affair
of less interest and excitement to them than to us. It is probable, therefore, that
they have been less attentive to its progress than we have been. It may be presumed.
however, that the late events will dispel all doubt of the result.
In proposing this measure, it is not contemplated to change thereby, in the
slightest manner, our friendly relations wi th either of the parties, but to observe,
in all respects, as heretofore, should the war be continued, the most perſect nou.
trality between them. Of this friendly disposition an assurance will be given to
the government of Spain, to whom it is presumed it will be as it ought to be, satis-
factory. The measure is proposed under thorough conviction that it is in strict
accord with the law of nations; that it is just and right, as to the parties, and that
the United States owe it to their station and character in the world, as well as to
their essential interests, to adopt it. Should congress concur in the view herein
presented, they will doubtless see the propriety of making the necessary appropria-
tions for carrying it into effect. JAMES MON ROE.
147. Report of the House of Representatives.
Xtracts from a report of the House of Representatives, made on the subject of
the above communication :
“That the provinces of Buenos Ayres after having, from the year 1810, pro-
ceeded in their revolutionary movements without any obstacle from the government
cf Spain, formally declared their independence of that government in 1816. After
various intestine commotions and external collisions, those provinces now Cnjoy
domestic tranquillity and a good understanding with all their neighbors, and actually
exercise, without opposition from within, or the fear of annoyance from without,
all the attributos of sovereignty.
“The provinces of Venezuela and New Granada, after having separately
declared their independence, sustained, for a period of more than ten years, a deso-
lating war against the armies of Spain, and having severally attained, by their
triumph over those armies, the object for which they contended, united themselves
on the 19th of December, 1819, in one nation, under the title of ‘The Republic of
Colombia.”
“The Repúblic of Colombia has now a well organized government, instituted
by the free will of its citizens, and exercises all the functions of sovereignty, fear-
less alike of internal and foreign onemics. The small remnant of the numerous
armies, commissioned to preserve the supremacy of the parent state, is now block-
aded in two fortresses, where it is innoxious, and where, deprived, as it is, of ałł
A $4.3.
South ºff merica, i)} i^{,03: A'i'HC WRITING. 643
hope of succor, it must soon surrender at discretion; when this event shall have
occurred, there will not remain a vestige of foreign power in all that immense repub-
lic, containing between three and four millions of inhabitants.
“The province of Chili, since it declared its independence in the year 1818,
has been in the constant and unmolested enjoyment of the sovereignty, which it
then assumed. *.
“The province of Peru, situated like Chili beyond the Andes, and bordering
on the Pacific Ocean, was, for a long time, deterred from making any effectual
effort for independence by the presence of an imposing military force, which Spain
had kept up in that country. It was not, therefore, until the 12th of June of the
last year, that its capital, the city of Lima, capitulated to an army, chiefly com-
posed of troops from Buenos Ayres and Chili, under the command of General San
Wiartin. The greatest part of the royal troops, which escaped on that occasion,
retreated to the mountains, but soon left them to return to the coast, there to join
the royal garrison in the fortress of Calloa. The surrender of that fortress, soon
aſter, to the Americans, may be regarded as the termination of the war in that
rºuarter.
“The revolution in Mexico has been, somewhat, different in its character and
progress, from the revolutions in other Spanish American provinces, and its result,
in respect to the organization of its internal government has, also, not been pro-
eisely the same. Independence, however, has been as emphatically declared
and as practically established since the 24th of August last by the “Mexican
Empire,” as ever it has been by the republics of the South ; and her geogra-
phical situation, her population and her resources, eminently qualify her to main-
tain the independence she has thus declared and now actually enjoys.
“I Who is the rightful sovereign of a country, is not an enquiry permitted to
foreign nations, to whom it is competent only to treat with the ‘powers that be.”
“There is no difference of opinion on this point among the writers on public
law: and no diversity with respect to it in the practice of civilized nations. It is
unnecessary here to cite authority for a doctrine familiar to all, who have paid the
slightest attention to the subject, nor to go back for its practical illustration to the
civil wars between the houses of York and Lancaster. Have we not, indeed,
within the brief period of our own remembrance, beheld governments vary
their forms and change their rulers, according to the prevailing power or passion
of the moment, and doing so in virtue of the principle now in question, without
materially and lastingly affecting their relations with other governments? Have
we not seen the emperors and kings of yesterday receive on the thrones of exiled
sovereigns, who claimed the right to reign there, the friendly embassies of other
powers, with whom those exiled sovereigns had sought an asylum,_and have we
not seen to-day those emperors and kings thus courted and recognised yesterday,
reſt of their sceptres, and, from a mere change of circumstances, not of right, treated
as usurpers by their successors, who, in their turn, have been acknowledged and
caressed by the same foreign powers 4
“ . Even when civil war breaks the bonds of society and of government, or, at
least, suspends their force and eſſect, it gives birth in the nation to two indepen-
dent parties, who regard each other as enemies and acknowledge no common
judge.” It is of necessity, therefore, that these two partics should be considered
644 D: PHL(; , ; , Łi C VV RHTiN G. [South ºtherica,
by foreign states as two distinct and independent nations. To consider or treat
them otherwise would be to interfere in their domestic concerns, to deny them the
right to manage their own affairs in their own way, and to violate the essential
attributes of their respective sovereignty. For a nation to be entitled to respect in
foreign states, to the enjoyment of these attributes, and to figure directly in the
great political society, it is sufficient that it is really sovereign and independent,
that it governs itself by its own authority and laws. The people of Spanish America
do notoriously so govern themselves, and the right of the United States to recognise
the governments, which they have instituted, is incontestable. A doubt of the
expediency of such a recognition can be suggested only by the apprehension, that
it may injuriously affect our peaceful and friendly relations with the nations of the
Cther hemisphere.
“No nation in Europe, excepting Spain herself, has hitherto, opposed force
to the independence of South America. Some of those nations have not only con-
stantly maintained commercial and friendly intercourse with them in every stage
of the revolution, but indirectly and cfficiently, though not avowedly, aided them
in the prosecution of their great object. To these the acknowledgment by the
United States of the attainment of that object must be satisfactory.
“To the other nations of Europe, who have regarded the events occurring in
Spanish America, not only without interference, but with apparent indifference,
such an acknowledgment ough, not to be offensive.
“The nations, who have thus, respectively, favored or never opposed the
Spanish American people during their active struggle for independence, cannot, it
is believed, regard with dissatisfaction the formal recognition of that independence
by a nation, which, while that struggle lasted, has religiously observed towards
both the conflicting parties all the duties of neutrality. Your committee are, there-
tore, of opinion, that we have a right on this occasion confidently to expect, front
what these nations have done or forborne to do, during the various fortunes of the
civil war, which has terminated, that they will frankly approve the course of policy.
which the United States may now think proper to adopt in relation to the success-
ful party in that war. It surely cannot be reasonably apprehended, that nations,
who have thus been tranquil spectators, the apparent well wishers, if not the eſſicient
supporters of this party, and who have not made the ſaintest attempt to arrest its
progress, or to prevent its success, should be displeased with a third power, for
merely recognising the governments, which, owing to that success, have thus been
vitally permitted or impliedly approved in acquiring the undisputed, and exclusive
control of the countries in which they are established.”
“Resolved, that the house of representatives concur in the opinion expressed by the pre-
sident in his message of the 8th of March, 1822, that the American provinces of Spain, which
have declared their independence and are in the enjoyment of it, ought to be recognized by
the United States as independent nations.
“Resolved, that the committee of ways and means be instructed to report a bill, appro-
priating a sum, not exceeding one hundred thousand dollars, to enable the presidelit to give
due effect to such recognition.”
[Accordingly, on the 4th of May 1822, an act of Congress Inade an appropria-
tion of 100,000 dollars “for such missions to the independendent nations on the
American continent as the President of the United States might decn proper.”]
South Jºmerica. {3}}}},{}\; ATHE WY RETN (; . 645
148. Protest of the Spanish Minister, Don Joaquin de Jinduaga.
In the National Intelligencer (the envoy writes March 9th, 1822, to the
Secretary of State) of this day I have seen the message, sent by the President
to the House of Representatives, in which he proposes the recognition by the
United States of the insurgent governments of Spanish America. How great my
surprise was, may be easily judged by any one, acquainted with the conduct of
Spain towards this Republic, and who knows the immense sacrifices, which she
has made to preserve her friendship. In fact, who could think that in return for
the cession of her most important provinces in this hemisphere; for the forgetting
of the plunder of her commerce by American citizens; for the privileges granted
to this navy, and for as great proofs of friendship as one nation can give to
another; this Executive would propose, that the insurrection of the ultra marine
possessions of Spain should be recognized? And, moreover, will not his astonish-
ment be augmented to see that this Power is desirous to give the destructive exam-
ple of sanctioning the rebellion of provinces which have received no offence from
the mother country, to those to whom she has granted a participation of a free consti-
tution, and to whom she has extended all the rights and prerogatives of Spanish
citizens! In vain will a parallel be attempted to be drawn between the emancipa-
tion of this Republic, and that which the Spanish rebels attempt, and history is
sufficient to prove, that, if a harrassed and prosecuted province has a right to break
its chains, others, loaded with benefits, elevated to the high rank of freemen, ought
only to bless and embrace more closely the protecting country which has bestowed
such favors upon them.
But, even admitting that morality ought to yield to policy, what is the pre-
sent state of Spanish America, and what are its Governments, to entitle them to
recognition? Buenos Ayres is sunk in the most complete anarchy, and each day
sees new despots produced, who disappear the next, Peru, conquered by a rebel
army, has, near the gates of its capital, another Spanish army, aided by part of
the inhabitants. In Chili, an individual suppresses the sentiments of the inhabi-
tants, and his violence presages a sudden change: on the coast of Firma, also, the
Spanish banners wave, and the insurgent Generals are occupied in quarrelling
with their own compatriots, who prefer taking the part of a free power, to that of
being the slave of an adventurer. In Mexico, too, there is no Government; and
the result of the questions which the chiefs commanding there have put to Spain,
is not known. Where, then, are those Governments which ought to be recogni-
zed? where the pledges of their stability! where the proof that those provinces
will not return to a union with Spain, when so many of their inhabitants desire it!
and, in fine, where the right of the United States to sanction, and declare legiti-
mate, a rebellion without cause, and the event of which is not even decided?
I do not think it necessary to prove, that, if the state of Spanish America were
such as it is represented in the message; that, if the existence of its Governments
were certain and established; that, if the impossibility of its reunion with Spain
were so indisputable; and that, if the justice of its recognition were so evident, the
powers of Europe, interested in gaining the friendship of countries so important
for their commerce, would have been negligent in fulfiling it. But, seeing how
646 DIPLOMATIC W = ITING. [Sºulſ, .3merica.
distant the prospect is or even this result, and ſaithful to the ties which unite them
with Spain, they await the issue of the contest, and abstain from doing a gratuitous
injury to a friendly Government, the advantages of which are doubtful, and the
odium certain. Such will be that which Spain will receive from the United States
in case the recognition proposed in the message should take effect? and posterity
will be no less liable to wonder that the power which has received the mostproofs
of the friendship of Spain should be the one delighted with being the first to take
a step which could have only been expected from another, that had been injured.
Although I could enlarge upon this disagreeable subject, I think it useless to
do so, because the sentiments which the message ought to excite in the breast of
every Spaniard, can be no secret to you. Those which the King of Spain will ex-
perience at receiving a notification so unexpected, will be doubtless, very disagreea-
ble, and at the same time that I hasten to communicate it to His Majesty, I think
it my duty to PROTEST, as I do solemnly PROTEST, against the recognition of
, the Governments mentioned, of the insurgent Spanish provinces of America, by the
{Jnited States; declaring that it can, in no way, now, or at any time, lessen or invali-
date, in the least, the right of Spain to the said provinces, or to employ whatever means
may be in her power to re-unite them to the rest of her dominion.
I remain, &c. J0 AQUIN DE ANI) UAGA.
149. Reply of jír Adams to ºr Anduaga.
Department of State, Washington, 6th April, 1822. Sir, Your letter of the
9th of March was, immediately after I had the honor of receiving it, laid beſore
the President of the United States, by whom it has been deliberately considered,
and by whose direction I am in replying to it, to assure you of the earnestness
and sincerity with which this Government desires to entertain, and to cultivate,
the most friendly relations with that of Spain.
This disposition has been manifested, not only by the uniform course of the
United States, in their direct political and commercial intercourse with Spain, but
by the friendly interest which they have felt in the welfare of the Spanish nation,
and by the cordial sympathy with which they have witnessed their spirit and energy
exerted in maintaining their independence of all foreign control, and their right of
self government.
In every question relating to the independence of a nation, two principles are
involved, one of right, and the other of fact ; the former exclusively depending
upon the determination of the mation itself; and the latter resulting from the success-
ful execution of that determination. This right has been recently exercised, as
well by the Spanish nation in Europe, as by several of those countries in the
American hemisphere, which had for two or three centuries been connected as
colonies with Spain. In the conflicts which have attended these revolutions, the
United States have carefully abstained from taking any part respecting the right
of the nations concerned in them, to maintain or new organize their own political
constitutions, and observing, whenever it was a contest by arms, the most impar-
tial neutrality. But the civil war in which Spain was for some years involved,
with the inhabitants of the colonies in America, has, in substance, ceased to exist.
Treaties equivalent to an acknowledgment of independence, have been concluded
South ºffmerica.] BHPLOśATIC WRITING. 6.
by the commanders and vice roys of Spain herself, with the Republic of Colom-
bia, with Mexico, and with Peru; while, in the Province of La Plata, and in Chili,
no Spanish force has, for several years, existed, to dispute the independence which
the inhabitants of those countries had declared.
Under these circumstances, the Government of the United States, far from
consulting the dictates of a policy questionable in its morality, yielded to an obli-
gation of duty, of the highest order, by recognizing as independent states, nations,
which, after deliberately asserting their right to that character, have maintained
and established it against all the resistance which had been, or could be, brought
to oppose it. This recognition is neither intended to invalidate any right of Spain,
nor to affect the employment of any means which she may yet be disposed or
enabled to use, with the view of reuniting those provinces to the rest of her domin-
ions. It is the mere acknowledgment of existing facts, with the view to the
regular establishment, with the nations newly formed, of those relations, political
and commercial, which it is the moral obligation of civilized and Christian nations
to entertain reciprocally with one another. It will not be necessary to discuss
with you a detail of facts, upon which your information appears to be materially
different, from that which has been communicated to this Government, and is of
public motoriety; nor the propriety of the denominations which you have attri-
buted to the inhabitants of the South American provinces. It is not doubted that
other and more correct views of the whole subject, will very shortly be taken by
your government, and that it will, as well as the other European governments,
show that deference to the example of the United States, which you urge it as the
duty and policy of the United States to shew to theirs. The eſſect of the example
of one independent nation upon the counsels and measures of another, can be just,
only so far as it is voluntary; and as the United States desire that their example
should be followed, so it is their intention to follow that of others, upon no other
principle. They confidently rely, that the time is at hand when all the govern-
ments of Europe, friendly to Spain, and Spain herselſ, will not only concur in the
acknowledgment of the independence of the American nations, but in the senti-
ment that nothing will tend more effectually to the welfare and happiness of Spain,
than the universal concurrence in that recognition.
I pray you, sir, to accept the assurauces of my distinguished consideration.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
150. Extract from a JManifesto addressed by Spain to the Courts in Europe,
in 1823, in consequence of the President’s Message of 9th March, 1822.
His Catholic Majesty, in calling the attention of his august allies towards the
dissident Spanish Provinces of America, judges it not only useless, but unseason-
able to examine the causes, which produced in those countries, a desire to separate
from the mother country; it is sufficient for his Catholic Majesty to have the con-
solation that it was not the abuse of power, nor the weight of oppression which
originated so serious an event, and that only extraordinary circumstances and the
terrible crisis, in which Spain saw herself compromised to free her throne and dig-
nity from the imminent risk of a foreign usurpation, could occasion a disunion sº
fatal between the members of one and the same family.
648 DiPi,GMATIC W. RiTING. | South .3merict,
His Catholic Majesty does not present himself to those provinces, as a resent-
ful monarch before his misled subjects, but as a pacific mediator in the discords of
his children. He casts a veil over the past, in order to see the present without
any kind of prejudice, and contemplates the actual situation under all the relations,
which unite it with the future,
His Catholic Majesty extends his views to a more extensive horizon and con-
siders this great question as an European question. A long time passed, before
the prodigious effects of the discovery of the new world were perceived in this
continent; nobody could foresee them, much less calculate thern. The same, his
Majesty judges, may be said of the great events which are agitating America, and
whose effects must influence, necessarily, and in a very rapid manner, the lot of
Europe. It is not possible to determine the degrees of this influence, nor the
alterations it must produce in the reciprocal relations of the one and the other
hemisphere; but his Catholic Majesty hesitates not to affirm, that the transaction,
which fixes the lot of the Spanish provinces of America, and puts an end to the
blind and impetuous course of its revolution, will be one of the benefits, the most
unemorable for the civilized world.
There will, perhaps, be superficial spirits, who will see a Solid and established
government and a constituted nation in each province, which may have declared
its independence, and who, without attending to obstacles of any kind, nor to the
principles of public right, nor to the best known maxims of the law of nations,
will believe, that the mere fact of the separation of a province from the state, of
which it formed a part, renders its existence legitimate.
But the governments fortunately know, by a sad experience, the effects, which
are produced by a similar overthrow of principle, they foresee the consequence of
its propagation, not less fatal to legitimate governments, than to the integrity of
nations, and are well aware of the consequences to Europe of sanctioning in Ame-
rica, as some pretend, the undefined right of insurrection.
Thus it is, that his Catholic Majesty believes not only interested in this ques-
tion those nations who possess colonies and establishments in Ultramar, to whicl,
the same theory could be applied, but that he, also, considers this business as inti-
mately connected with those conservatory principles, that offer securities to all
governments and guaranties to society.
151. Eactracts from Mr JAdams’ Instructions to Mr Jinderson, Minister
Plenipotentiary to Colombia, dated 27th May, 1823.
Exposition of the Principles upon which the United States are desirous of founding their
future Political Intercourse with the new Nations of South America.
It was impossible that such a system as Spain had established over her colo-
nies, should stand before the progressive improvement of the understanding in
this age, or that the light shed upon the whole earth by the results of our Revo-
lution should leave in utter darkness the regions immediately adjoining ourselves,
The independence of the Spanish colonies, has proceeded from other causes,
and has been achieved upon principles in many respects different from ours. In
our Revolution the principle of the social compact was, from the beginning, in
immediate issue. It originated in a question of right, between the government in
Europe, and the subject in America. Our Independence was declared in defence
Instructions.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING, - 649
of our liberties, and the attempt to make the yoke a yoke of oppression was the
cause and the justification for the casting it off.
The President has considered the question of recognition both in a moral and
political view, as merely a question of the proper time. While Spain could enter-
tain a reasonable hope of maintaining the war, and of recovering her authority,
the acknowledgment of the Colonies as Independent States, would have been a
wrong to her; but she had no right, upon the strength of this principle, to
maintain the pretensions, after she was raanifestly disabled from maintaining the
contest, and by unreasonably withholding her acknowledgment, to deprive the
Independents of their right to demand the acknowledgment of others. Tô fix
upon the precise time, when the duty to respect the prior sovereign:right of Spain
should cease, and that of yielding to the claim of acknowledgment would com-
mence, was a subject of great delicacy, and to the President, of constant and
anxious solicitude. It naturally became, in the first instance, a proper subject of
consultation, with other Powers, having relations of interest to themselves, with
the newly opened countries, as well as influence in the general affairs of Europe.
es The recognition of the Independence of Buenos Ayres became a subject of con-
sideration at the deliberations of the Congress of Aix la Chapelle, in October,
1818. There is reason to believe that it disconcerted projects which were there
entertained of engaging the European Alliance in actual operations against the
South Americans, as it is well known that a plan for their joint mediation, between
Spain and her Colonies, for restoring them to her authority, was actually matured
and finally failed at that place, only by the refusal of Great Britain to accede to
the condition of employing force eventually against the South Americans, for its
accomplishment. Some dissatisfaction was manifested by several members of the
Congress at Aix la Chapelle, at this avowal on the part of the United States, of
their readiness to recognise the independence of Buenos Ayres. . .
The formation of the Republic of Colombia, by the fundamental law of 17th
December, 1819, was notified to this Government, by its Agent, the late Don
Manuel Torres, on the 20th February, 1821, with a request that it might be reco-
gnized by the Government of the United States, and a proposal for the negotiation
of Treaties of Commerce and Navigation, founded upon the basis of reciprocal utility
and perfect equality, as the most efficacious means of strengthening and increasing
the relations of amity between the two Republics.
The request and proposal were renewed in a letter from Mr. Torres, of the
30th of November, 1821, and again repeated on the 2d of January, 1822.
Under these circumstances, a resolution of the House of Representatives of
the United States, on the 30th of January, 1822, requested of the President to lay
before the House the communications from the Agents of the United States, with
the Governments South of the United States, which had declared their Indepen-
dence; and those from the Agents of such Governments here, with the Secretary
of State, tending to shew the political condition of their Governments, and the
state of the war between them and Spain. In transmitting to the House the
papers called for by this resolution, the President, by his message of 8th March,
1822, declared his own persuasion that the time had arrived when, in strict con-
ºmit; to the law of nations and in the fulfilment of the duties of equal and
2
650 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
t
impartial justice to all parties, the acknowledgment of the Independence declared
by the Spanish American Colonies could no longer be withheld.
On the 17th day of June, 1822, Mr Manuel Torres was received by the Presi-
dent of the United States as the Chargé d'Affaires from the Republic of Colom-
bia, and the immediate consequence of our recognition was the admission of the
vessels of the South American nations, under their own colors, into the ports of
the principal maritime nations of Europe. -
The European alliance of Emperors and Kings have assumed, as the founda-
tion of human society, the doctrine of unalienable allegiance. Our doctrine is foun-
ded upon the principle of unalienable right. The European allies, therefore, have
viewed the cause of the South Americans as rebellion against their lawful sovereign.
We have considered it as the assertion of natural right. They have invariably
shewn their disapprobation of the revolution, and their wishes for the restoration
of the Spanish power. We have as constantly favored the standard of indepen-
dence and of America. In contrasting the principles and the motives of the Eu-
ropean Powers, as manifested in their policy towards South America, with those
of the United States, it has not been my intention to boast of our superior purity,
or to lay a claim of merit to any extraordinary favor from South America in return.
Disinterestedness must be its own reward: but, in the establishment of our future
political and commercial intercourse with the new Republics, it will be necessary
to recur often to the principles in which it originated: they will serve to mark the
boundaries of the rights which we may justly claim in our future relations with
them, and to counteract the efforts, which it cannot be doubted, European negotia-
tors will continue to make in the furtherance of their monarchical and monopoli-
zing contemplations. *
In the letter of 20th February, 1821, from the late Mr Torres, demanding the
recognition of the Republic of Columbia, it has been observed, that the additional
proposal was made, of negotiating “treaties of navigation and commerce, founded
upon the bases of reciprocal utility and perfect equality, as the most efficacious
means of strengthening and increasing the relations of amity between the two
Republics.” - ſe
In compliance with this proposal, among the documents furnished you, for
proceeding upon the mission to which you have been appointed, of Minister
Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Colombia, is a full power which will author-
ize you to negotiate with any Plenipotentiary or Plenipotentiaries of that Govern-
ment duly provided with like powers, such a treaty. The President wishes, howe-
ver, that every step in such negotiation should be taken with full deliberation. The
treaty, if concluded, must, as you are aware, be reserved subject to ratification
here, with the advice and consent of the Senate, by the constitutional majority of
two-thirds, as by the constitution of Colombia, (article 120,) their treaties, to be
valid, must receive the consent and approbation of their Congress.
Our commercial relations with the Colombian Territory, are of so recent origin,
and have depended so much upon the revolutionary condition of that country, under
which they have arisen, that our knowledge of their state and character is very im-
perfect, although we are certain that they are altogether different from those which
may be expected to arise from permanent interests; when the Independence of the
Instructions.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 651
Republic shall be universally recognized, and a free trade shall be opened to its
inhabitants, with all parts of the world. The only important point now to be
settled, as the radical principle of all our future commercial intercourse, is the
basis proposed by Mr Torres, of reciprocal utility and perfect equality, As the
necessary consequence of which, you will claim that, without waiting for the
conclusion of a treaty, the commerce and navigation of the United States, in the
ports of the Colombian Republic, should be received on the footing of equality
with the most favored nation. It is hoped, indeed, that on your arrival at the place
of your destination, you will find the principle already settled; assurances to that
effect having been given by the Minister of Foreign Relations, to Mr Todd.
The spirit of the Colombian Constitution, is explicitly that of entire and un-
qualified independence; and the sentiments expressed by Dr Gual to Mr Todd, have
been altogether conformable to it. He has declared, that the intention of the
Government is to treat all foreign nations upon the footing of equal favor and of
perfect reciprocity. This is all that the United States will require, and this so
far as their interests are concerned, they have a right to exact.
It had been, in the first instance, proposed by Mr Torres, that the Treaty of
Commerce and Navigation should be negotiated here, and he informed me that a
Minister would be appointed, with powers and instructions sufficient for conclud-
ing it at this place. Dr Gual has informed Mr Todd, that the views of the Colom-
bian Government have since undergone a change; and although they have appointed
Mr Salazar as Envoy Extroardinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the United
States, and in March last he was under instructions to proceed forthwith upon his
mission to this country, they were nevertheless, exceedingly desirous that the
Treaty should be negotiated there. -
The President deems it of no material importance to the United States whether
the Treaty shall be negotiated at Washington or at Bogota; but the proposal
having first been made for concluding it here, it was natural to inquire what it was
that produced the change in the wishes of the Colombian Government with regard
to the seat of the negotiation. Dr Gual intimated confidentially to Mr Todd, that
it had proceeded from two causes; one, the desire to establish a precedent, which
might prevail upon the great European Governments to negotiate likewise with
the Republic at its own Capital, and thereby hasten them to the recognition of
Colombian Independence; and the other a jealousy of their own negotiators in Eu-
rope, who were apt to become themselves entangled with European intrigues, and
to involve the Republic in unsuitable and perplexing engagements. With regard
to the second of these causes, whatever occasion may have been given to the distrust
ot their own agents which it avows,it could have no application to their transaction,
with the United States. By assuming the principles of independence, equality,
and reciprocity as the foundations of all our negotiations, we discard all the incen-
tives and all the opportunities for double dealing,overreaching and corrupt caballing.
We shall ask nothing which the Colombian Republic can have any interest to deny.
We shall offer nothing for which she may be unwilling to yield the fair equivalent.
To the other reason, however, the President the more readily accedes, because
perceiving its full force, it gives him an opportunity of manifesting in action the
friendly disposition of the United States towards the Republic, and their readiness
652 : DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [South Jłmerica.
to promote by all proper means the recognition of its Independence, by the great
European Powers. *$ * a • * ,
In the negotiation of all commercial Treaties there is undoubtedly an advan-
tage, at least of convenience, enjoyed by the party which treats at home; and this
advantage requires greater importance, when as is now the case with both parties,
the Treaty to become valid must obtain the consent of the legislative assemblies.
This advantage in the ordinary course of things accrues to the party to whom the
proposal of negotiation is first made. Independent then of all questions of prece-
dence, and without resorting to the example of the first Treaties negotiated by the
United States, both of which considerations have been mentioned by Mr Todd to
Dr Gual, the United States might insist upon having the negotiation concluded
here, not only as the first proposal of it was made to them, but because the proposal
itself was that it should be concluded here. The President, however, is well
aware of the stimulus which a Treaty negotiated, and even a negotiation known to
be in progress at Bogota, will apply to the attention of European interests, and
has no doubt that it will press them to the recognition more powerfnlly than they
have been urged by the example, or are likely to be by the exhortations of the North
American Government. You are accordingly furnished, by his direction, with
the full power, necessary for the conclusion of the Treaty.
The only object which we shall have much at heart in the negotiation, will be
the sanction by solemn compact of the broad and liberal principles of independence,
equal favors, reciprocity. With this view I recommend to your particular attention
the preamble, and first four articles of the first Treaty of amity and commerce be-
tween the United States and France, concluded on the 6th of February, 1778. The
preamble is believed to be the first instance on the Diplomatic Record of Nations,
upon which the true principles of all fair commercial negotiation, between Inde-
pendent States were laid down and proclaimed to the world. That preamble was
to the foundation of our commercial intercourse with the rest of mankind, what the
Declaration of Independence was to that of our internal Government. The two
instruments were parts of one and the same system, matured by long and anxious
deliberation of the founders of this Union in the ever memorable Congress of 1776;
and as the Declaration of Independence was the fountain of all our municipal insti-
tutions; the preamble to the Treaty with France laid the corner stone for all our
subsequent transactions of intercourse with foreign nations. Its principles should
be therefore deeply impressed upon the mind of every statesman and negotiator of
this Union, and the first four articles of the Treaty with France, contain the prac-
tical exposition of those principles which may serve as models for insertion in the
projected Treaty, or in any other that we may hereafter negotiate with any of the
rising Republics of the South. - g -
There is indeed a principle of still more expansive liberality, which may be
assumed as the basis of commercial intercourse between nation and nation. It is
that of placing the foreigner, in regard to all objects of navigation and commerce,
upon a footing of equal favor with the native citizen, and to that end, of abolishing
all discriminating duties and charges whatsoever. This principle is altogether
congenial to the spirit of our institutions, and the main obstacle to its adoption
consists in this: that the fairness of its operation depends upon its being admitted
Instructions.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 653
universally. For, while two maritime and commercial nations should bind them-
selves to it as a compact operative only between them, a third Power might avail
itself of its own restrictive and discriminating regulations, to secure advantages
to its own People, at the expense of both the parties to the Treaty. The United
States have nevertheless made considerable advances in their proposals to other
nations towards the general establishment of this most liberal of principles of
commercial intercourse. , , * * * -
Among the usual objects of negotiation in treaties of commerce and naviga-
tion, are the liberty of conscience, and of religious worship. Articles to this ef-
fect have been seldom admitted in Roman Catholic countries, and are even inter-
dicted by the present constitution of Spain. The South American Republics
have been too much under the influence of the same intolerant spirit: but the Colom-
bian Constitution is honorably distinguished by exemption from it. The 10th and
11th articles of our treaty with Prussia, or articles to the like effect, may be
proposed for insertion in the projected treaty; and after setting the first example in
South America, of a Constitution unsullied by prohibitions of religious liberty,
Colombia will deserve new honors in the veneration of present and future ages,
by giving her positive sanction to the freedom of conscience, and by stipulating
it in her first treaty with these United States. It is, in truth, an essential part of
the system of American Independence. Civil, political, commercial, and reli-
gious liberty, are but various modifications, of one great principle, founded in the
unalienable rights of human nature, and before the universal application of which,
the Colonial Domination of Europe, over the American hemisphere, has fallen,
and is crumbling into dust. Civil liberty can be established on no foundation of
human reason, which will not at the same time demoistrate the right to religious
freedom. The tendency of the spirit of the age is so strong towards religious liber-
ty, that we cannot doubt it will soon banish from the Constitutions of the Southern
Republics of this hemisphere: all those intolerant religious establishments, with
which they have hitherto been trammelled. Religious and military coercion will
be alike discarded from all the institutions framed for the protection of human
rights, in civil society of independent nations; and the freedom of opinion and of
faith, will be guarantied by the same sanction as the rights to personal liberty and
security. To promote this event by all the moral influence which we can exer-
cise, whether of example, of friendly counsel, or of persuasion, is among the du-
ties which devolve upon us in the formation of our future relations with our Sou-
thern neighbors; and in the intercourse which is hereafter to subsist between us,
as their citizens, who may visit, or transiently reside with us, will enjoy the benefit
of religious freedom in its utmost latitude: we are bound to claim for our country-
men, who may occasionally dwell for a time with them, the reciprocal exercise of
the same natural rights.- • - . *
Let Colombia look to commerce and navigation, and not to empire, as her
means of communication with the rest of the human family. These are the prin-
ciples upon which our confederated Republic is founded, and they are those upon
which we hope our sisters of the southern continent will ultimately perceive it to
be for their own welfare, no less than for that of the world, that they should found
themselves.—
654 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. | South America.
The Colombian Government, at various times, have manifested a desire that
the United States should take some further and active part in obtaining the reco-
gnition of their Independence by the European Governments, and particularly by
Great Britain. This has been doneseven before it was solicited. All the Minis-
ters of the United States in Europe, have, for many years, been instructed to
promote the cause, by any means consistent with propriety, and adapted to their
end, at the respective places of their residence. The formal proposal of a con-
certed recognition was made to Great Britain before the Congress of Aix la
Chapelle. At the request of Mr. Torres, on his dying bed, and signified to us
after his decease, Mr. Rush was instructed to give every aid in his power, without
offence to the British Government, to obtain the admission of Mr. Ravenga; of
which instruction, we have recent assurances from Mr. Rush that he is constantly
mindful. Our own recognition, undoubtedly, opened all the ports of Europe to
the Colombian flag, and your mission to Colombia, as well as those to Buenos
Ayres and Chili, cannot fail to stimulate the Cabinets of maritime Europe, if not
by the liberal motives which influenced us, at least, by selfish impulses, to a
direct, simple, and unconditional recognition. We shall pursue this policy steadily
through all the changes to be foreseen, of European affairs. There is every rea-
son to believe that the preponderating tendency of the war in Spain, will be to
promote the universal recognition of all the South American Governments; and, at
all events, our course will be to promote it by whatever influence we may possess.
By the general usage of nations, independent of treaty stipulations, the pro-
perty of an enemy is liable to capture in the vessel of a friend. It is not possible
to justify this rule upon any sound principle of the law of nature; for, by that
law, the belligerent party has no right to pursue or attack his enemy without the
jurisdiction of either of them. The high seas are a general jurisdiction common
to all, qualified by a special jurisdiction of each nation over its own vessels. As
the theatre of general and common jurisdiction, the vessels of one nation and their
commanders have no right to exercise over those of another any act of authority
whatsoever. This is universally admitted in time of peace. War gives the bel-
ligerent a right to pursue his enemy within the jurisdiction common to both; but
not into the special jurisdiction of the neutral party. If the belligerent has a
right to take the property of his enemy on the seas, the neutral has a right
to carry and, protect the property of his friend on the same element. War gives
the belligerent no natural right to take the property of his enemy from the vessel
of his friend. But as the belligerent is armed, and the neutral, as such, is defence-
less, it has grown into wsage that the belligerent should take the property of his
enemy; paying the neutral his freight and submitting the question of facts to the
tribunals of the belligerent party. It is evident, however, that this w8age has no
foundation in neutral right, but has arisen merely from force, used by the belliger-
ent, and which the neutral, in the origin, did not resist, because he had not the
power. But it is a usage, harsh and cruel in its operation, and unjust in its nature:
and it never fails, in time of maritime war, to produce irritation and animosity
between the belligerent and the neutral. So universally has this been ſound to be
its consequence, that all the maritime natiºns of modern Europe have shown
their sense of it, by stipulating in treaties the contrary principle, namely, that the
Instructions.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. - 655
property of an enemy shall be protected in the vessel of a friend. Great Britain
herself, the most unwilling to admit this principle, because the most enabled to
use the force, upon which the usage is founded, has recognized the superior Justice
and expediency of the other principle, by stipulating it at distant intervals of time,
in two treaties with France; the treaty of Utrecht, and the treaty of Commerce,
of 1786.
In the seven years war, the king of Prussia resisted the capture, by British
vessels, of the property of their enemies, in the vessels of his subjects, then neu-
trals, and made reprisals upon British property for such captures. The question
was then ultimately settled by a compromise, under which the British Government
paid a large sum of money for indemnity to the Prussian subjects who had suffered
by those captures. The armed neutrality of the American war, is a memorable
example of the testimony by all the civilized nations of the world, to the principle,
that the protection of all property, excepting contraband of war, on board of neu-
tral vessels, by neutral force, is of natural right—and of this principle there can
be no question. If, however, a belligerent power, founded upon the usage which
has superseded the natural right, practices the seizure and condemnation of enemy's
property found in the vessel of a friend, it remains for the neutral to decide, whether
he will acquiesce in the usage, or whether he will maintain his natural right by
force. No neutral nation is bound to submit to the usage : for it has none of the
properties which can give to any usage the sanction of obligatory law. It is not
reasonable. It is not conformable to the law of nature. It is not uninterrupted.
But reduced to the option of maintaining its right by force, or of acquiescing in
the disturbance of it which has been usual, the neutral nation may yield, at one
time, to the usage, without sacrificing her right to vindicate by force the security
of her flag at another. And the belligerent nation, although disposed to admit
the right of neutrals to protect the property of her enemy upon the seas, may yet
justly refuse the benefit of this principle, unless admitted also by the enemy, for
the protection of her property, by the same neutral flag. Thus stands the state
of this question upon the foundations of natural, voluntary, and customary law.
How stands it between us and the Republic of Colombia, on the ground of
conventional law By a treaty between the United States and Spain, concluded at
a time when Colombia was a part of the Spanish dominions, and so far as the
Spanish laws would admit, enjoyed the benefit of its stipulations, the principle
that free ships make free goods, was expressly recognized and established. Is it
asserted that by her declaration of independence, Colombia has been entirely
released from all the obligations, by which as a part of the Spanish nation she
was bound to other nations ! This principle is not tenable. To all the engage-
ments of Spain with other nations, affecting their rights and interests, Colombia,
so far as she was affected by them, remains bound in honor and in justice. The
stipulation now referred to is of that character, and the United States, besides the
natural right of protecting by force, in their vessels on the seas, the property of
their friends, though enemies of the Republic of Colombia, have the additional
claim to the benefit of the principle, by an express compact with Spain, made when
Colombia was a Spanish country. Again, by the late treaty of 22d February,
1819, between the United States and Spain, it is agreed that the 15th article of the
treaty of 1795, in which it is stipulated that the flag shall cover the property, shall
f
656 1)IPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
be so understood with respect to those Powers, who recognize the principle: but,
if either of the two contracting parties shall be at war with a third party, and the
other neutral, the flag of the neutral shall cover the property of enemies whose
governments acknowledge the principle, and not of others.
A resolution of the House of Representatives of the late Session of Congress,
requests the President of the United States to enter upon and to prosecute, from
time to time, such negotiations with the several maritime powers of Europe and
America, as he may deem expedient for the effectual abolition of the African Slave
Trade; and its ultimate denunciation as Piracy, under the Law of Nations, by the
consent of the civilized world.
In pursuance of this object you will communicate to the Colombian Govern-
ment copies of the several acts of our Congress, for the suppression of the Slave
Trade, of the 20th of April, 1818,” (United States laws, vol. vi. p. 225.) of 3d
March, 1819,” (p. 435.) and of 15th May, 1820,” (p. 529.) pointing their attention
particularly to the fourth and fifth sections of the last, which subject to the penal-
ties of piracy every citizen of the United States guilty of active participation in
the African Slave Trade. The adoption of this principle in the Legislative code
of all the maritime nations, would, of itself, probably suffice for the suppression
of the trade. But, as it would yet not authorize the armed vessels of any one
nation to capture those of another, engaged in the trade, a stipulation to that effect
may be agreed to by the Treaty, conditioned that the captor shall deliver over the
captured party to the tribunals of his own country for trial, to which should be
added some guard of responsibility upon the capturing officer, to prevent the abu-
sive exercise of his power. -
Our intercourse with the Republic of Colombia, and with the Territories of
which it is composed, is of recent origin, formed, while their own condition was
altogether revolutionary, and continually changing its aspect. Our information
concerning them is imperfect, and among the most important objects ot your mis-
sion will be that of adding to its stores; of exploring the untrodden ground, and
of collecting and transmitting to us the knowledge by which the friendly relations
between the two countries may be extended and harmonized to promote the welfare
of both, with due regard to the peace and good will of the whole family of civilized
man. It is highly important that the first foundations of the permanent future
intercourse between the two countries should be laid in principles, benevolent and
liberal in themselves, congenial to the spirit of our institutions, and consistent
with the duties of universal philanthropy.
... In all your consultations with the Government to which you will be accredited,
bearing upon its political relations with this Union, your unvarying standard will
be the spirit of independence and of freedom, as equality of rights and favors will
be that of its commercial relations. The emancipation of the South American
Continent, opens to the whole race of man prospects of futurity, in which this
Union will be called, in the discharge of its duties to itself and to unnumbered ages
of posterity, to take a conspicuous and leading part. It involves all that is precious
in hope, and all that is desirable in existence, to the countless millions of our fel-
low creatures, which, in the progressive revolution of time, this hemisphere is des-
timed to rear and to maintain.
* See pages 114, 116, and 122, of this volume, for these laws, at large.
South America.j DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 657
- That the fabric of our social connections with our Southern neighbors may
rise, in the lapse of years, with a grandeur and harmony of proportion correspond-
ing with the magnificence of the means, placed by Providence in our power, and
in that of our descendants, its foundatious must be laid in principles of politics
and of morals, new and distasteful to the thrones and dominations of the elder
world; but co-extensive with the surface of the globe, and lasting as the changes
of time. • * * * \ . JOHN Q. ADAMS.
152. Mr Middleton to Mr Clay. Eactract.
Friendly inter vention of the Emperor of Russia, for terminating the contest between Spain.
and Spanish America.
St. Petersburg, 27th Aug. (8th Sep.) 1825. Sir: We are left to infer from
the proposal (to wit:) that the Emperor shall lend his aid towards the conclusion of
the war between Spain and her Colonies,by interposing his good offices in the form
of pacific council to the mother country,that it has been communicated to the Allied
Cabinets, and I am fully of opinion, that the majority, if not the whole of them,
would agree to it. If such should be the event, the Diplomatic Committee sitting
at Paris will be instructed accordingly. The chief difficulty to be overcome will
be in the Cabinet of the King of Spain, where it is understood that all parties are
opposed to the independence of the Colonies. The necessity of the case, however,
begins to be so crying, that a hope may be entertained that even there the counsels
of wisdom may ere long be listened to. For obvious reasons we must not expect
to learn, officially, that such advice, as that alluded to above, has been given, un-
less it should be attended to. I have the honor to be, &c.
HENRY MIDDLETON.
153. Count Wesselrode to Mr Middleton.
St. Petersburgh, Aug. 20, 1825. The undersigned, Secretary of State, direct-
ing the Imperial Administration of Foreign Affairs, hastened to submit to the
Emperor the note with which Mr Middleton, Envoy Extroardinary and Minister
Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, did the honor to address him, on
the 2d July last, accompanying a copy of the despatch from Mr Clay, in which that
Minister, in the name of the Cabinet at Washington, urges the necessity of con-
firming the general peace, by terminating the contest of the Spanish Colonies
against the government of his Catholic Majesty; of securing to Spain the peaceful
possession of the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico; and of effecting these objects
by the impartial intervention of Russia.
The principles of the Emperor were sufficiently known to the government of
the United States, to justify the perfect confidence that in expressing a wish for
the continuance and confirmation of the peace enjoyed by the world, it did represent
the most sincere desire of his Imperial Majesty, that, in professing a generous
solicitude for the rights of Spain, over her Islands in the West Indies, it avowed
principles that had long since been adopted by Russia, as the basis of her political
system; and that, in anticipating perfect impartiality and true disinterestedness
from her intervention, it was not deceived as to the sentiments of the Emperor,
in relation to all arrangements in which Foreign powers might be pleased to claim
or admit his good offices.
His Imperial Majesty felicitates himself with having inspired this confidence
in the United States of America, and the undersigned is charged to invite Mr
83
658 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
Middleton to convey to his Government the assurance of the high value at which
the Emperor estimates those sentiments, of which new evidence is furnished by
its present propositions.
The opinions of his Imperial Majesty as to the question discussed by Mr
Clay in his despatch, cannot be concealed from the Cabinet of Washington. His
Imperial Majesty has ever thought that justice, the law of nations, and the general
interest in having the indisputable titles of sovereignty respected, could not allow
the determinations of the mother country in this important case, to be prejudged
or anticipated. On the other side, whenever Spain has wished to discuss the future
condition of South America, has addressed overtures to all the Allied Powers of
Europe. It will not be possible, therefore, for his Imperial Majesty to change
principles in this negotiation, nor to institute it separately (isolément); and until
positive information has been received of the ulterior views of Spain, in regard to
her American possessions, of her decision upon the proposition of the United States,
and of the opinions of her Allies in relation to the same subject, Russia cannot
give a definitive answer.
She is, however, in the mean while, pleased to hope, that the United States,
becoming every day more convinced of the evils and dangers that would result to
Cuba and Porto Rico from a change of government, being satisfied, as Mr Clay
has said, in his despatch, with the present commercial legislation of these two
Islands, and deriving an additional motive of security from the honorable resolu-
tion of Spain not to grant to them any longer letters of marque, will use their
influence, in defeating, as far as may be in their power, every enterprise against
these Islands, in securing to the rights of his Catholic Majesty constant and proper
respect, in maintaining the only state of things that can preserve a just balance
of power in the sea of the Antilles, prevent shocking examples, and, as the Cabinet
of Washington has remarked, secure to the general peace, salutary guarantees.—
The undersigned seizes, with pleasure, this occasion to repeat to Mr Middleton,the
assurances of his very distinguished consideration. NESSEL ROHDE.
154. Extracts from President Adams’ Eaposition of his Motives for ap-
proving of the Panama Mission.
Communicated in a Message to the IIouse of Representatives of the United States.
Washington, March 15, 1826. The great revolution in human affairs which
has brought into existence, nearly at the same time, eight sovereign and indepen-
dent nations in our own quarter of the globe, has placed the United States in a
situation not less novel, and scarcely less interesting, than that in which they had
found themselves, by their own transition, from a cluster of colonies to a nation of
Sovereign States. The deliverance of the Southern American Republics from the
oppression under which they had been so long afflicted, was hailed with great
unanimity by the people of this Union, as among the most auspicious events of
the age.
In exercising the authority recognized by this act,” my predecessor, by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate, appointed, successively, Ministers
Plenipotentiary to the Republics of Colombia, Buenos Ayres, Chili, and Mexico.
Unwilling to raise among the fraternity of freedom, questions of precedency and
etiquette, which even the European monarchs had of late found it necessary in a
* Appropriating $100,000 for South American missions.
Panama Mission.j DIPLO M. ATIC WRITING. 659
great measure to discard, he despatched these ministers to Colombia, Buenos
Ayres and Chili, without exacting from those Republics, as, by the ancient prin-
ciples of political primogeniture he might have done, that the compliment of a
plenipotentiary mission should have been paid first by them to the United States.
The instructions prepared, under his directions, to Mr Anderson, the first of our
Ministers to the Southern Continent, contain, at much length, the general princi-
ples upon which he (the President) thought it desirable that our relations, political
and commercial, with these, our new neighbors, should be established, for their
benefit and ours, and that of the future ages of our posterity. A copy of so much
of these instructions as relates to these general subjects, is among the papers now
transmitted to the House.* Similar instructions were furnished to the Ministers
appointed to Buenos Ayres, Chili, and Mexico; and the system of social inter-
course which it was the purpose of those missions to establish from the first
opening of our diplomatic relations with those rising nations, is the most effective
exposition of the principles upon which the invitation to the Congress at Panama
has been accepted by me, as well as of the objects of negotiation at that meeting,
in which it was expected that our Plenipotentiaries should take part.
The House will perceive that, even at the date of these instructions, the first
treaties between some of the Southern Republics had been concluded, by which
they had stipulated among themselves this diplomatic assembly at Panama. And
it will be seen with what caution, so far as it might concern the policy of the
United States, and, at the same time, with what frankness and good will towards
those nations, he gave countenance to their design of inviting the United States
to this high Assembly for consultation upon American interests. It was not con-
sidered a conclusive reason for declining this invitation, that the proposal for
assembling such a Congress had not first been made by ourselves. It had sprung
from the urgent, immediate, and momentous common interests of the great com-
munities struggling for independence, and, as it were, quickening into life. From
them the proposition to us appeared respectful and friendly; from us to them it
could scarcely have been made, without exposing ourselves to suspicions of pur-
poses of ambition, if not of domination, more suited to rouse resistance and excite
distrust, than to conciliate favor and friendship. The first and paramount principle
upon which it was deemed wise and just to lay the corner-stone of all our future
relations with them was disinterestedness; the next was cordial good will to them;
the third was a claim of fair and equal reciprocity. Under these impressions,
when the invitation was formally and earnestly given, had it even been doubtful,
whether any of the objects proposed for consideration and discussion at the Con-
gress were such as that immediate and important interests of the United States
would be affected by the issue, I should, nevertheless, have determined, so far as
it depended upon me, to have accepted the invitation, and to have appointed minis-
ters to attend the meeting. The proposal itself implied that the Republics, by
whom it was made, believed that important interests of ours or of theirs, rendered
our attendance there desirable. They had given us notice, that, in the novelty of
their situation, and in the spirit of deference to our experience, they would be pleas-
ed to have the benefit of our friendly council. To meet the temper with which
this proposal was made, with a cold repulse, was not thought congenial to that
* See page 648 ante.
660 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. | South .America.
warm interest in their welfare, with which the People and the Government of the
Union had hitherto gone hand in hand through the whole progress of their Revo-
lution. To insult them by a refusal of their overture, and then invite them to a
similar Assembly to be called by ourselves, was an expedient which never pres-
ented itself to the mind. I would have sent Ministers to the Meeting, had it been
merely to give them such advice as they might have desired, even with reference
to their own interests, not involving ours. I would have sent them, had it been
merely to explain and set forth to them our reasons for declining any proposals of
specific measures to which they might desire our concurrence, but which we might
deem incompatible with our interests or our duties. In the intercourse between
nations, temper is a missionary, perhaps, more powerful than talent. Nothing was
ever lost by kind treatment. Nothing can be gained by sullen repulses and aspir-
ing pretensions.
Among the topics enumerated in official papers published by the Republic of
Colombia, and adverted to in the correspondence now communicated to the House,
as intended to be presented for discussion at Panama, there is scarcely one in
which the result of the meeting will not deeply affect the interests of the United
States. Even those in which the belligerent States alone will take an active part,
will have a powerful effect upon the state of our relations with the American, and
probably with the principal European, States. Were it merely that we might be
correctly and speedily informed of the proceedings of the Congress, and of the
progress and issue of their negotiations, I should hold it advisable that we should
have an accredited agency with them, placed in such confidential relations with
the other members, as would ensure the authenticity, and the safe and early trans-
mission of its reports. Of the same enumerated topics, are the preparation of a
manifesto, setting forth to the world the justice of their cause, and the relations
they desire to hold with other Christian Powers; and to form a convention of
navigation and commerce, applicable both to the confederated States and to their
allies.
It will be within the recollection of the House, that immediately after the close
of the war of our Independence, a measure closely analogous to this Congress of
Panama, was adopted by the Congress of our Confederation, and for purposes of
precisely the same character. Three commissioners, with plenipotentiary powers,
were appointed to negotiate treaties of amity, navigation, and commerce, with all
the principal Powers of Europe. They met, and resided for that purpose about one
year at Paris; and the only result of their negotiations at that time, was the first
treaty between the United States and Prussia—memorable in the diplomatic annals
of the world, and precious as a monument of the principles, in relation to com-
merce and maritime warfare, with which our country entered upon her career as a
member of the great family of independent nations. -
At that time, in the infancy of their political existence, under the influence of
of those principles of liberty and of right, so congenial to the cause in which they
had just fought and triumphed, they were able but to obtain the sanction of one
great and philosophical, though absolute sovereign, in Europe, to their liberal and
enlightened principles. They could obtain no more. Since then, a political
hurricance has gone over three-fourths of the civilized portions of the earth, the
desolation of which, it may with confidence be expected, is passing away, leaving,
Panama JMission.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 661
at least the American atmosphere purified and refreshed. And now, at this propi-
tious moment, the new-born nations of this hemisphere, assembling by their repre-
sentatives at the isthmus between its two continents, to settle the principles of their
future international intercourse with other nations and with us, ask, in this great
exigency, for our advice upon those very fundamental maxims, which we, from
our cradle at first proclaimed, and partially succeeded to introduce into the code of
national law.
If it be true that the noblest treaty of peace ever mentioned in history, is that
by which the Carthagenians were bound to abolish the practice of sacrificing their
own children, because it was stipulated in favor of human nature, I cannot
exaggerate to myself the unfading glory with which these United States will go
forth in the memory of future ages, if, by their friendly counsel, by their moral
influence, by the power of argument and persuasion alone, they can prevail upon
the American Nations at Panama, to stipulate, by general agreement among them-
selves, and so far as any of them may be concerned, the perpetual abolition of
private war upon the ocean. And, if we cannot yet flatter ourselves that this
may be accomplished, as advances towards it, the establishment of the principle
that the friendly flag shall cover the cargo, the curtailment of contraband war,
and the proscription of fictitious paper blockades, engagements which we may
reasonably hope will not prove impracticable, will, if successfully inculcated,
redound proportionably to our honor, and drain the fountain of many a future
sanguinary war.
The late President of the United States, in his message to Congress of the
second December, 1823, while announcing the negociation then pending with
Russia. relating to the Northwest coast of this continent, observed, that the occasion
of the discussions to which that incident had given rise, had been taken for asserting as a
principle in which the rights and interests of the United States were involved, that the
.American continents by the free and independent condition which they had assumed and
maintained, were thenceforward not to be considered as subjects for future colonization
by any European power. The principle had first been assumed in that negociation with
Russia. It rested upon a course of reasoning equally simple and conclusive. With
the exception of the existing European colonies, which it was in no wise intended
to disturb, the two continents consisted of several sovereign and independent na-
tions, whose territories covered their whole surface. By this, their independent.
condition, the United States enjoyed the right of commercial intercourse with every
part of their possessions. To attempt the establishment of a colony in those pos-
sessions would be to usurp, to the exclusion of others, a commercial intercourse
which was the common possession of all. It could not be done without encroach-
ing upon existing rights of the United States. The government of Russia has
never disputed these positions, normanifested the slightest dissatisfaction at their
having been taken. Most of the new American Republics have declared their
entire assent to them; and they now propose, among the subjects of consultation
at Panama, to take into consideration the means of making effectual the assertion
of that principle, as well as the means of resisting interference from abroad with
the domestic concerns of the American Governments.
662 DíPLOMATIC WRITING. [South America.
Whether the political condition of the Island of Hayti shall be brought at all
into discussion at the meeting, may be a question for preliminary advisement.
There are in the political constitution of Government of that People, circumstances
which has hitherto forbidden the acknowledgement of them by the Government of
the United States, as sovereign and independent. Additional reasons for withhol.
- ding that acknowlegement, have récently been seen in their acceptance of a nom-
inal sovereignty, by the grant of a foreign Prince: under conditions equivalent to
the concession by them, of exclusive commercial advantages to one nation, adap-
ted altogether to the state of colonial vassalage, and retaining little of indepen-
dence, but the name. Our Plenipotentiaries will be instructed to present these
views to the Assembly at Panama; and should they not be concurred in, to decline
acceding to any arrangement which may be proposed upon different principles.
The condition of the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico is of deeper import,
and more immediate bearing upon the present interests, and future prospect of our
{Jnion. The correspondence here with transmitted, will show how earnestly it has
engaged the attention of this Government. The invasion of those islands by the
united forces of Mexico and Colombia, is avowedly among the subjects to be mat-
ured by the belligerent States at Panama. The convulsions to which, from the
peculiar composition of their population, they would be liable, in the event of such
an invasion, and the danger therefrom resulting of their falling ultimately into the
hands of some European power, other than Spain, will not admit of our looking
at the consequences to which the Congress at Panama may lead, with indifference.
It is unnecessary to enlarge upon this topic: or to say more, than that all our ef-
forts in reference to this interest, will be to preserve the existing state of things,
the tranquillity of the islands, and the peace and security of their inhabitants.
I can scarcely deem it otherwise than surperfluous, to observe that the assem-
bly will be in its nature diplomatic and not legislative. That nothing can be
transacted there, obligatory upon any one of the States to be represented at the
meeting, unless with the express concurrence of its own representatives; nor even
then, but subject to the ratification of its constitutional authority at home. The
faith of the United States to Foreign Powers cannot otherwise be pledged. I shall,
indeed, in the first instance, consider the assembly as merely consultative; and al-
though the Plenipotentiaries of the United States will be empowered to receive and
refer to the consideration of their government, any proposition from the other par-
ties to the meeting, they will be authorized to conclude nothing unless subject to
the definitive sanction of this Government, in all its constitutional forms. It has
therefore seemed to me unnecessary to insist, that every object to be discussed at
the meeting should be specified with the precision of a judicial sentence or enume-
rated with the exactness of a mathematical demonstration. The purpose of the
meeting itself, is to deliberate upon the great and common interests of several new
and neighboring nations. If the measure is new and without precedent, so is the
situation of the parties to it. That the purposes of the meeting are somewhat
indefinite, far from being an objection to it, is among the cogent reasons for its
adoption. It is not the establishment of principles of intercourse with one, but
with seven or eight nations at once. That, before they have had the means of ex-
changing ideas and communicating with one another in common, upon these topics,
Panama Mission.j DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 663
they should have definitively settled and arranged them in concert, is to require
that the effect should precede the cause. It is exact as a preliminary to the meet-
ing, that for the accomplishment of which, the meeting itself is designed:
Among the inquiries which were thought entitled to consideration, before the
determination was taken to accept the invitation, was that, whether the measure
might not have a tendency to change the policy, hitherto invariably pursued by the
United States, of avoiding all entangling alliances, and all unnecessary foreign
COIlneCtions.
Mindful of the advice given by the Father of our Country, in his farewell ad-
dress, that the great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations, is, in extend-
ºng our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as
Possible; and faithfully adhering to the spirit of that admonition, I cannot over-
look the reflection, that the council of Washington, in that instance, like all the
counsels of wisdom, was founded upon the circumstances in which our country
and the world around us, were situated, at the time when it was given. That the
reasons assigned by him for his advice, were, that Europe had a set of primary
interests, which to us had none: or a very remote relation. That hence she must
be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which were essentially foreign
to our concerns. That our detached and distant situation, invited and enabled us
to Pursue a different course. That by our union and rapid growth, with an efficient
Government,the period was not far distant,when we might defy material injury from
external annoyance; when we might take such an attitude as would cause our
neutrality to be respected; and, with reference to belligerent nations, might choose
peace or war, as our interests, guided by justice, should counsel.
To the question which may be asked, whether this meeting, and the principles
which may be adjusted and settled by it, as rules of intercourse between the
American nations, may not give umbrage to the Holy League of European Powers,
or offence to Spain, it is deemed a sufficient answer, that our attendence at Panama
can give no just cause of umbrage or offence to either; and that the United
States will stipulate nothing there which can give such cause. Here the right of
inquiry into our purposes and measures must stop. The Holy League of Europe
itself was formed, without inquiring of the United States, whether it would, or
would not, give umbrage to them. The fear of giving umbrage to the Holy League
of Europe, was urged as a motive for denying to the American nations the acknow-
ledgment of their Independence. That it would...be viewed by Spain as hostility
to her, was not cnly urged, but directly declared by herself. The Congress and
administration of that day, consulted their rights and duties, and not their fears.
Fully determined to give no needless displeasure to any Foreign Power, the United
States can estimate the probability of their giving it, only by the right which any
foreign State could have. to take it from their measures. Neither the representa-
tion of the United States at Panama, nor any measure to which their assent may
be yielded there, will give to the Holy League, or any of its members, nor to
Spain, the right to take offence. For the rest, the United States must still as here-
tofore, take counsel from their duties, rather than their ſears.
Such are the objects in which it is expected that the Plenipotentiaries of the
{Jnited States, when commissioned to attend the meeting at the Isthmus, will take
664 DiPLOMATIC WRITING.. [South America.
part; and such are the motives and purposes, with which the invitation of the three
Republics was accepted. It was, however, as the House will perceive from the
correspondence, accepted only upon condition, that the nomination of Commis-
sioners for the mission should receive the advice and consent of the Senate.
That the Congress at Panama will accomplish all, or even any of the transcen-
dent benefits to the human race, which warmed the conceptions of its first proposer,
it were, perhaps, indulging too sanguine a forecast of events to promise. It is,
in its nature, a measure speculative and experimental. The blessing of Heaven
may turn it to the account of human improvement. Accidents unforeseen, and mis-
chances not to be anticipated, may haffle all its high purposes, and disappoint its
fairest expectations. But the design is great, is benevolent, is humane.
It looks to the melioration of the condition of man. It is congenial with that
spirit which prompted the Declaration of our Independence; which inspired the
preamble of our first treaty with France; which dictated our first treaty with Prussia,
and the instructions under which it was negotiated: which filled the hearts and
fired the souls of the immortal founders of our revolution.
With this unrestricted exposition of the motives by which I have been govern-
ed, in this transaction, as well as of the objects to be discussed, and of the ends,
if possible, to be attained by our representation at the proposed Congress, I submit
the propriety of an appropriation, to the candid consideration, and enlightened
patriotism, of the Legislature. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
[NotE. Mr Poinsett, in a letter to the Secretary of State, dated Mexico,
August 20, 1826, encloses an account of the installation of the American Congress,
at Panama, on the 22d of June, [1826] and of its sitting ten or eleven hours daily, till
15th July. The Ministers Plenipotentiaries of the Assembly were—For Colombia,
Señor Gual and Señor Briseño: For Peru, Senior Tudela and Señor Biduarre: For
Guatemala, Señor Larrizabel and Señor Molina: For Mexico, Don José de Me-
chellena and Don José Dominguez. The Ministers of the United States were not
present. The order of the Confederated States, was determined by lot, that the
Representatives of each should, alternately, hold the Presidency, for the direction
of the discussions. Mr Salazar, in a letter to Mr Clay, thus states the result:
that, on the 15th of July, were signed, at Panama—
“1st. A Treaty of Union, League, and Perpetual Confederation, between the four
States represented, to which the other Powers of America might have an opportunity to
accede within one year. 2dly. A Convention, for the renewal of the Great Assembly, annually,
in time of common war, and, biennially, during peace. 3dly. A Convention which fixes the
contingent, which each confederate should contribute, for the common defence. 4thly. An
Agreement, concerning the employment and direction of those contingents; and 5thly. Divers
Declarations that the Treaties which Colombia had formerly concluded with the United Mex-
ican States, Central Ameria, and Peru, should be included in those Treaties, with certain'
reservations.” ->
The Congress then, in consequence of the insalubrity of the climate, adjourned
to meet at Tacubaya, near Mexico, where Messrs Poinsett and Sergeant repaired
to attend; but the proposed meeting did not take place, and Mr Sergeant, after a
short delay, returned to the United States, and Mr Poinsett to his posit at Mexico.]
Brazilian Blockade.] BIPLOMATIC WRITING. 665
155. Mr Raguet to the Brazilian Minister of Foreign Affairs. Extract.
Brazilian Blockade.
The right to prevent the entry of Neutrals into the blockaded Ports of a Power
with which they are in amity, is the result of a concession in favor of the Belli-
gerent, but a concession only made for such a length of time as the blockading
party actually maintains the blockade. To prevent the entry of a neutral, even
for a moment, after the raising the blockade, would be a manifest infringement of
his rights; and if the doctrine were admitted, that a notice published in a distant
country, of a blockade which might by possibility be raised long before any vessel
could reach the designated port, was the only one requisite, the consequences would
be highly injurious to the interests of a distant nation, whose merchants would
be deprived of the advantages enjoyed by those near at hand, of furnishing sup-
plies to the party which had been, by the recurrence of peace, or other causes,
relieved from the distresses of a siege. In countries which are proximate to each
other, as Great Britain, France, Holland, and where the intercourse requires but
the lapse of a few hours or days, the institution or the withdrawal of a blockade
may be known in so short a period of time as to render the importance of the
principle here advocated less manifest than it is to the nations which are relatively
more distant, such as those which are located in different hemispheres. To meet
this argument by contending that a vessel is bound to call for information at a
neighboring port, would be substituting one measure of injustice for another.
Leaving out of the question the impracticability, in many cases, especially those
wherein whole coasts are blockaded, of complying with such a demand, no belli-
gerent has a right to compel a neutral vessel to perform a circuitous route to the
port of her destination; nor has he the right to impose upon her the necessity of
incurring the expense of port and other charges, in his own ports or those of any
other nation. So satisfied of the correctness of this principle was the Govern-
ment of Great Britain, that, in the year 1804, in consequence of a remonstrance
made by the American Government, against a declaration of a general blockade of
“the Islands of Martinique and Guadaloupe,” proclaimed by a British Naval
Commander, orders were issued to him “not to consider any blockade of those
Islands as existing, unless in respect of particular ports which may be actually
invested, and then not to capture vessels bound to such ports, unless they shall pre-
viously have been warned not to enter them.” +
The United States, maintaining the same principles, have always denied the
doctrine of general and diplomatic notifications of Blockades, as binding upon their
Citizens. Whenever they are made, however, they regard them as friendly offices
on the part of the Government from which they proceed; because it gives their
merchants an opportunity of taking into the calculation of their voyages the con-
tingency of a continued effective Blockade of the Ports designated, and affords
them an occasion for advancing their own particular views upon that branch of the
public code which has been so flagrantly violated by some of the principal Powers
of Europe. In the year 1816, the Government of the United States, having been
notified by the Spanish Minister at Washington, of a declaration of the blockade
of “the Ports of the Vice Royalty of Santa Fé,” lost no time in protesting against
* See page 530, of this vol. or the order of the British Admiralty, of June 5, 1804.
8
666 DIPLOMATIC WRITING, [Brazilian Blockade.
the general terms of the same; and its Representative at Madrid was instructed to
advise the Government of Spain, that “a Blockade, to be acknowledged by The
United States, as valid, must be confined to particular Ports, each having a force
stationed before it sufficient to intercept the entry of Wessels; and no Wessel shall
be seized, even in attempting to enter a Port so blockaded, till she has been previ-
ously warned away from that Port.” It was also notified that indemnity would be
claimed for all captures of American Wessels not made in aecordance with this
rule,
It is manifestly not the interest of the new independent American States, to
adopt in their practice the broadest possible construction of the laws of Blockade;
for the time may come when, being at war with the powerful maritime nations of
of Europe, they may find it all-important to be able to show that, like The United
States, they have always adhered to these maxims which have been received and
acknowledged as settled principles of National Law, and have always been ready
to observe those rules which, consistently with self-protection, have operated least
injuriously to neutral and friendly Nations. It is for this reason that the Under-
signed begs leave to invite the attention of his Excellency to the following consi-
derations, connected with the important question referred to.
The submission of Neutrals to the laws of Blockade, as above established, is
a concession granted to the Besieger, and can only be construed to extend so far
as shall promote his benefit. Any act, therefore, which can be shown to inflict a
positive injury upon a Neutral, without conferring a benefit on the Besieger in the
furtherance of his plans, must be inadmissible upon the common principles of natu-
ral justice. Thus, if a Neutral’s vessel and property are within a Port at the time
of the institution of a Blockade, it would be manifestly unjust to prohibit their
departure, inasmuch as by so doing extensive evils would be brought upon the
Citizens of friendly Nations in their pursuit of a lawful Commerce. It is, indeed,
difficult to imagine what justifiable motive could influence a Besieger to prevent a
Neutral from withdrawing from the besieged place his ships and property: for, by
such act, the means of escape and defence, as well as the means of prolonging the
contest, would, at the same time, be withdrawn from the enemy. With respect to
the right of neutral Ships to depart, there seems to be no difference of opinion
amongst Nations; but the same does not happen in regard to their cargoes. In the
year 1813, whilst Great Britain was at war with The United States, some of the
European Powers remonstrated against the unjustifiable pretensions of her system
of blockade, which embraced the chief part of the Coast of The United States;
and, in an answer given to the Minister of Sweden, it was contended that, although
neutral Vessels which had entered the American Ports without a knowledge of the
Blockade, might, in conformity with the established rule, be allowed to depart,
yet that this permission could not be extended to their cargoes. Special motives,
in this particular case, on the part of Great Britain, might amply account for a mea-
sure which she might not, perhaps, willingly have approved if adopted by any other
Power; and it is not to be wondered at, that a nation which already monopolized
so great a share of the commerce of the world, should have pursued a system cal-
culated to exclude from competition the capitals of other States.
The undersigned, on this occasion, renews, &c. CONDY RAGUET.
Brazils—Deserters] DIPLGMATIC WRITING. 667
156. Deserters. The ſºmerican to the Brazilian Waval Commander. Eact.
United States' Frigate Macedonian, off Montevideo, 21st December,1827. Sir,
I received to-day your Excellency’s letter dated yesterday; and I am greatly sur-
prised that your Excellency should be so misinformed with regard to the govern-
ment of the United States. -
The Treaty of 1822, between the United States and France, stipulates (Article
6.) not only that Deserters shall be mutually delivered up, but that, in case the
deserters be not apprehended until after the departure of the vessel to which they
belong, they may be imprisoned until an opportunity occurs to send them home;
provided, however, that the imprisonment shall not continue more than 3 months.
A similar stipulation is contained in the Treaty of 1788, (Article 9.) between the
same nations. But, in the absence of any Treaty Stipulation, the Civil Authority
within the United States delivers up deserters from Foreign vessels, whether of
war or commerce. Seamen from a vessel of war are always presumed to be
deserters, and the evidence of an officer suffices for their apprehension. In the
case of commercial vessels, if it appears by the shipping articles that the seamen
had bound themselves to perform the voyage to the United States, and back, they
are always compelled to do so. In the United States we have seamen enough, and
good enough; but even was it otherwise, Foreign seamen would not be encouraged
or permitted by the Civil Authority of the United States, to violate their contract.
The only exception to what I have stated, that ever has taken place within
the United States, is with regard to deserters from British ships of war; and the
only cause of this exception was, that the British government resorted to impress-
ment to man its ships of war, and frequently impressed citizens of the United
States. I can very safely put it to your Excellency, whether an American seamen
who had been impressed into the British service, and made his escape to the soil
of his country, should be driven by the government back to the British man-of-
war. In the treaty of 1794 between the United States and Great Britain, (article
27) it is stipulated, that all persons charged with murder or forgery, committed
within the jurisdiction of either, who shall seek asylum in the country of the other,
shall be delivered up to justice. Nothing is stipulated with regard to the delivery
of deserters; and unquestionably the silence of the treaty is to be attributed to the
extreme delicacy of the subject, growing out of the impressment of American sea-
men into the British service. Your excellency refers to an outrage upon the so-
vereignty of the United States, committed in 1807,” and imputes it to the doctrine
of the government of the United States, of not delivering up deserters from the
ships of war of other nations. The proclamation of the president of the United
States, upon that occasion, is now before me; and it is there expressly stated,
that the seamen in question had been previously ascertained to be native citizens
of the United States. During my present cruise, I have had a correspondence
with Rear Admiral Sir Robert Otway, upon the subject of deserters; and I volun-
teered to him the assurance, that British subjects deserting from their own ships,
should never receive any countenance from me.
I have the honor to be, &c. JAMES BIDDLE.
Admiral Rodrigo Pinto Guedes.
* The attack of the British Ship of War, Leopard, on the United States' Frigate Chesapeake.
668 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Brazils.
157. Right of Search. American to Brazilian Naval Comm’r. Ert.
- United States' Frigate Macedonian, off Monte Video, 25th January, 1s28.
Sir, I have received your excellency’s letter of the 24th instant.
The various authorities cited by your excellency convince me that I was cor-
rect, in my letter of the 15th inst.” in stating that “the right of a belligerent cruiser
to search merchant vessels, met wifh on the high seas, is at present indisputable,
though it has, at different periods, and by several nations, been disputed, and even
resisted;” and “this right is conceded, because, without it, the destination and
ownership of the property could not be properly ascertained, nor whether there
was contraband on board.” In admitting this right to the belligerent cruiser, it does
not follow that there is any obligation upon the merchant vessel voluntarily to
deviate from her course, in order that the cruiser may exercise this right, nor any
penalty or imputation upon her for not doing so. The doctrine of your excellency
is, that, by endeavoring to avoid a cruiser, a merchant vessel thereby renders her-
self liable to confiscation; and I repeat, that his imperial majesty’s government
deceives itself, if it supposes, that the government of the United States will submit
that such a doctrine be enforced against the property of its citizens.
In 1807, France decreed that every vessel, to whatever nation belonging, that
should have submitted to be searched by a British cruiser, was lawful prize, and
should be seized, upon entering any port of France, or her allies, or upon being
met at sea by French ships of war or privateers. In consequence of this decree,
it became the interest, and was the practice, of neutral vessels bound to the ports
of France or her allies, to avoid all cruisers at sea. But the admiralty courts of
Great Britain never set up the pretension, that a neutral vessel became liable to
confiscation, by endeavoring to avoid a cruiser at sea. The doctrine asserted by
Sir William Scott was, that “by the Law of Nations, as now understood, a delib-
erate and continued resistance to search, on the part of a neutral vessel to a lawful
cruiser, is followed by the legal consequence of confiscation. Chitty’s Law of
Nations, Chap. V, page 193. And the same author, deducing principles from the
decisions of Sir William Scott, continues as follows: “A rescue effected by the
crew, after capture, when the captors are in actual possession, is considered a
resistance within the application of the penalty. In the case of the Elsabe, it is laid
down as settled, that the resistance of the convoying ships is the resistance of the
whole convoy ; whence, it follows, that in such cases the whole convoy is sub-
ject to confiscation. But, from the case of the Pennsylvania, it appears that,
if a neutral vessel has been captured, and the captors, whether from want of
hands to navigate her, or for the sake of making other prizes, or from any other
motive, allow the neutral commanders to resume the direction of the vessel, with-
out any express agreement binding those commanders to bring her in for adjudi-
cation, in pursuance of the original capture, then the escape of the neutral will
not be regarded as a rescue or resistance. On the same principle, it was said by
the Court, in the case of the Saint Juan Baptista, that a mere attempt to escape be-
jore any possession assumed by the captor, does not draw with it the consequences
of condemnation. And the same case further establishes, that, unless the neutral
vessel have reasonable grounds to be satisfied that a war has actually broken out,
even a direct resistance will not superinduce the penalty; for, without a war,
Venezuelean Decree.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 669
there is no such thing as a neutral character, nor any foundation for the several
duties which the Law of Nations imposes on that character. Nor has the penal-
ty been deemed to attach in those instances where a disposition to resistance has
at first been betrayed, but afterwards abandoned without being actually carried in-
to operation.” Chap. W. page 194.
In the trial of an American vessel, the government of the United States is a
party to the question of the legality of the blockade, as well as that of His impe-
rial 34ajesty ; and the decision of it, therefore, must be conformable to the estab-
lished Law of Nations. I have the honor to be, &c.
Admiral Rodrigo Pinto Guedes. JAMES BIDDELE.
O
158. Relative to a Proposal to Search flonerican Vessels for Deserters,
by a French Naval Commander at Rio de Janeiro. Eatract.
United States’ Ship Cyane, Rio de Janeiro, June 11th, 1826.
Until I could learn the ultimate decision on an affair which presented, on the
5th instant, I have refrained from bringing to your notice an attempt which was
of the eve of being made, in the examination of some of our merchant vessels,
by Commodore Frederic du Plantys, commanding His Most Christian Majesty
the King of France's Frigate La Seine. Some part of his crew had deserted pre-
vious to that date ; and on the 5th instant, whilst some of our merchant vessels
were about departing the port, he sent one of his lieutenants on board, with in-
structions to obtain my permission, to board and examine those vessels, with
others, for his men. I directed his officer to reply that, under no circumstances
whatever, could that permission be given, and trusted he possessed too great a
sense of propriety, for one moment, to urge the measure; and, in the event of
his doing so, I should resist every inch by force. I accordingly made the neces-
sary preparation, and he abandoned the point.
The Hon. S. L. Southard. J. D. ELLIOTT.
i59. Venezuela. Decree of General Morales.
Maracaybo, Sept. 15, 1822. Art. I. All foreigners taken or found in the ranks
—in any branch of administration of the enemy—with printing presses, or acting
as editors of newspapers, of works relative to the present war, to the scenes of ac-
tion in rebellious America, or the Roman Catholic religion, or in any manner of
fensive to the nation, its government or subjects, shall suffer death, after a short
military trial, and their properties forfeited to the public chest.
Art. 2. Foreigners who may be found, although not in the exercise or under
the circumstances aforesaid, but having introduced themselves into the country
during its occupation by the enemy, shall be doomed to serve in the public works
for three years, and their properties forfeited to the national treasury.
Art, 3. Those foreigners, who have been found in this capital and its environs,
who, by an effect of national forbearance, have been exempted from the fate they
deserved, both as regards their persons and properties, owing to their political and
religious conduct having been hitherto unknown, shall quit all Spanish territory
in the precise period of eight days, with their baggage, and other property which
may have been given over to them; and they are warned not to return again, under
pain of death, unless it be under the conditions and circumstances prescribed for
the carrying on a legitimate commerce in the ports of Venezula.
670 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Protest of
And in order that the blockade [of the Ports and Coasts of Venezula] as well
as the present decree may be made known to all, that they may have their full
effect; that they may be supported by the civil and military authorities, and that
the foreigners alluded to may not again violate the former; I hereby direct that
the same be proclaimed in this capital, and throughout the other provinces as soon
as they become pacified; and that the present decree be printed and circulated
throughout the colonies, and wherever it may be necessary. Given &c.
José Alvaro, Secretary. F. THOMAS MORALES.
160. Protest of Capt. Spence, U. S. Aſavy, against Morales’ Decree.
Sir—I have been presented with your excellency’s public decree of the 15th
Sept. last—a declaration of the most despotic and sanguinary nature, against all
foreigners, whose love of glory, commercial pursuit, and lawful occupations, may
enlist them in the service, or detain them in the territories possessed by the ene-
mies of Spain recognized by the United States as independent governments.
A manifesto so extraordinary, so hostile to the rights of nations, so dispara-
ging and prejudicial to the character of the era in which we live, cannot fail to
excite astonishment, and to attract the attention of all who wish to preserve civili-
zation from the encroachments of barbarism, or have rights to protect from milita-
ry misrule and invasion.
As commander in chief of the royal forces, ineffectually employed in Vene-
zuela, you are accountable to your king only for your proceeding against his
subjects. But, for acts of rapacity, cruelty and oppression exercised against
foreigners—for their illegal imprisonment—for their seizure and the confiscation
of their property—for their degradation under the aforesaid proclamation, you are
answerable to the world, because, by such acts of hostility, you wage an indis-
criminate war against all governments, and, by trampling on the sacred rights
of man, place at defiance nations who hold the laws and humane usuages of
civilized society as rules of action.
War, under the mildest aspect, is a calamity to be deplored; but when to
its inseparable horrors are superadded cruelties, perpetrated without necessity,
and men, pursuing peaceable avocations, are included in the most sanguinary
proscriptions, without reference or respect to the nation which owes them protec-
tion, it becomes a demoniac scourge, a hydra curse, which policy and humanity
are equally interested in arresting.
Against such a course of violence as you have proclaimed to the world, in
behalf of my countrymen, I PROTEST, and dohereby premonish your Excellency,
that to enforce the penalty, punishment and ignominy, threatened in your manifesto,
against the citizens of the United States, who are at present, or who may hereafter
be found by your Excellency in the Independent territories to which you refer,
prosecuting their commercial concerns under the guarantee of laws and usages,
which no christian soldier, fighting either for glory, his monarch, or his country,
can violate with impunity. The soldier, whose sword is stained with the blood of
unoffending men, superfluously shed, wins not the wreath of the warrior, but the
reputation of a recreant.
The blockade declared by general Morillo, to which your Excellency alludes,
exists not, neither has it, at any anterior period, been enforced in conformity to
Capt. Spence, U. S.N.] DIPLOMATIC WRITING. 671
rules prescribed by the accepted decisions of the highest authorities, rendered valid
by time and general acquiescence. It therefore, has hitherto been a mere pretext
for the interception of our lawful trade—for the seizure and detention of our pro-
perty—for the abuse and mal-treatment of our mariners—for purposes of plun-
der and outrage—all of which evils it has produced.
For spoliations committed on the commerce of the United States, under the
sanction of that paper interdiction, restitution will be required—and to the dignity
which characterizes the government of the republic, is Spain indebted for that
magnanimous forbearance from reprisal, justifiable on every principle of self-pre-
servation and defence.
The citizens of the United States, from the peaceful and neutral course pre-
scribed by their government, are justly entitled to the respect of the belligerent
parties, and if their enterprise induces them to reap the advantages of a lawful
trade within territories alternately in the occupancy of either, they are there
as citizens of a truly neutral power—a power that has at no time afforded aid, or
exercised influence of any kind, in the present unhappy contest.
Between the United States and the sovereign of Spain there exists a treaty,
recently made, and consecrated by the most formal observances, the acknowledged
basis of which is good will and a cordial spirit of conciliation. How, then, in the
face of this pledge of concord do you, sir, undertake to threaten with forfeitures
and ignominious penalties—with slavery and death—the citizens of a republic,
who have a right to expect, under this token of friendship, safety and exemption
fiom molestation.
Wrongs and injuries that may accrue to citizens of the Union from your un-
lawful decrees, whether visited on their persons or property, will be numbered
with the catalogue of outrages already sustained, and for which Spain must be
answerable. Against all snch wrongs and injuries I PROTEST, and do hereby
solemnly call upon your Excellency to abstain from the adoption of measures fraught
with most evil consequences—measures coercing a spirit of retaliation and reac-
tion, the end and issue of which may be conceived, foreseen and prevented by your
Excellency. And I invite your Excellency, as a lover of the character and
honor of Spain, of the amity and good faith so happily preserved between her and
the republic, to annul all such restrictions as lead to a violation of the laws of na-
tions—as infringe the just rights of citizens of the United States—as deprive them
of the benefits of peace, and tend to augment to an alarming amount the account
which hereafter must inevitably be balanced between the two nations.
I have the honor to be, &c. . RoBERT TREAT SPENCE,
Nov. 15, 1822. Senior naval officer of the United States in the West Indies.
161. Mr Clay to Mr Raguet. Eatract.
I)ifficulties of the United States’ Charge d’Affaires with Brazil.
Department of State, Washington, 20th January, 1827. Sir, Your despatches,
from No. 14 to 19, inclusive, have been received, and submitted to the President.
He regrets the personal difficulties in which you have been placed, in respect to
the exemption to which you are entitled, in virtue of your public character, from
the payment of duties on objects intended for your own consumption, and in regard
to the house which you had hired for your residence.
From the long residence of the President abroad, he is fully sensible, from
his own experience and observation, of these personal inconveniences, and justly
appreciates the feelings which their occurrence naturally excites. In the general,
it is best to avoid, as much as possible, a written correspondence with the govern-
672 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Mr Raguet's Case,
ment, where a Minister is placed, on these topics. This remark, indeed, may be
applied to many of the minor public duties of a minister. It is often much easier
to effect an object by a personal interview, and oral explanations, conducted with
courtesy and kindness, than by an exchange of notes. The perusal of other parts
of your despatches has occasioned the President the most lively regret. He sees
that there has unfortunately arisen a state of relation between yourself and the
Brazilian government, which may possibly affect the publick interests committed
to your charge. Our commerce and navigation have, undoubtedly, during the
present war respecting the Banda Oriental, been sometimes subject to aggravating
perplexities, especially on the part of the Brazilian Squadrons and Cruizers.
Redress for these injuries, and others of a similar character, which we may expe-
rience in the future progress of the war ought to be sought by you in a language
firm and decisive, but, at the same time, temperate and respectful. No cause is
ever benefitted by the manifestation of passion, or by the use of harsh and uncour-
teous language. If the remonstrances and reclamations which you have been called
on, during your mission, to present, have not always been attended with immediate
success, several of them appear to have accomplished their purpose, although the
measure of redress may some times have fallen short of just expectations. It is
the fate of all maritime nations, neutral in maritime wars, to find their commerce
and navigation often exposed to serious vexations. The existing Brazilian war
forms no exception to their general character. But the United States do not ap-
pear to be the only injured power: on the contrary, the commerce and navigation
of England, France, and Spain, have all suffered; and some of them to a greater
extent than ours. War is the ultimate and last resort; and much ought to be borne,
before a nation, one especially whose interests, generally, are so obviously on the
side of peace, as are those of the United States, should appeal to arms. If we had
declared war upon the occasion of causes of complaint of no greater amount than
those which we have had against the South American Belligerents, (and there is
no disposition to underrate them) the United States would have enjoyed scarcely
a year of repose since the establishment of their present constitution.
The degree of service which a Foreign minister is able to render his country,
depends much upon the respect and deference which he observes in his intercourse
with the ministers and government where he is accredited; and this is more espe-
cially, the case in governments, constituted and administered like that of the
Brazils. The President makes great allowances for the feelings which you naturally
entertained as a free citizen of the United States, and as a friend of liberal institu-
tions, as well as on account of the strong character of some of those injuries sus-
tained by our commerce and countrymen, for which it has been your official duty
to demand redress. But he would have been better satisfied if you had never
allowed yourself to employ, in your intercourse and correspondence with the Bra-
zilian government, provoking or irritating expressions. These, he thinks, ought
always to be avoided. The effect produced on that government by the character
of your correspondence, is noticed in your Despatch No. 17 ; and you appear to
have anticipated, as a possible consequence of it, that the Brazilian government
might decline all further intercourse with you. The President hopes that such
will not be the termination of your mission; and he is desirous that you should,
in future, whilst you assert, with dignity, decision, and promptitude, all our
rights, carefully avoid giving any just dissatisfaction in the particular which it
has been my painful duty to call to your attention. I am, &c.
Condy Raguet, Chargé d'Affaires to Brazil. H. CLAY.
673 *
APPEN DIX.
162. Hayti.-Extract from a Report laid before the British Parliament,
on the Civil and Political Condition of Hayti; by Charles JHackenzie,
British Consul General, at Hayti.
Port-au-Prince, September 9, 1826.
The government that is now established at Hayti, professes to be purely
republican, according to the Constitution of Dec 27, 1806, but in practice it may
be said to be essentially military.
The whole island is divided into departments, arrondissements, and com-
munes. These are all under the command of military men, subject only to the
control of the president; and to them is entrusted, exclusively, the execution of all
the laws, whether affecting police, agriculture, or finance. There is not, as far as
I can learn, a single civilian charged with an extensive authority.
It would be a very difficult matter to give an authentic account of the present
state of the finances of this country; for, although the value of the imports and
exports were accurately obtained; and we know that 5-46 of the whole of the public
income are derived from the duties imposed on these, which might be supposed
sufficient to establish the basis of a correct calculation; yet the frauds practised in
collection are so very numerous, that it would be impossible to estimate the actual
receipts with even an approximation to the truth.
The receipts of 1818, the first year of Boyer's presidency, (according to the
government statement), amounted to 2,646,017 dollars, 16 cents, and his expendi-
ture to 2,144,291 dollars 99 cents. From that time until 1821, both continued to
decline; in 1821, the former was augmented to 3,570,091 doilars, but the expendi-
ture did not exceed it, being 3,461,993 dollars; and this year was the first in which
any revenue was derived by the republic from Christophe's dominions, which had
been annexed to it the preceding year. In 1822, in spite of the acquisition of the
Spanish part of the island, the income fell 733,844 dollars, being only 2,620,012
dollars, while the expenditure was 2,728,149 dollars, exceeding the income 108,-
137 dollars. The following year, 1823, a small increase in income and decrease
in expenditure took place; but in 1824, the last year of which I can get any account,
the revenue amounted to 3,101,716 dollars, while the expenditure amounted to
3,105,115 dollars, leaving a deficit of 3,499 dollars. As far as I have been able
to ascertain, the expenditure has not been lessened either during the last or the
current year, though the revenue has sensibly decreased. Notwithstanding the
apparent excess of income above the expenditure during several of the years inter-
mediate between 1817 and 1824, the public chest may be considered empty, as
largo arrears of pay are due to the troops and to nearly all the public officers; and
the amount remitted to France on account of the indemnity (about $1,250,000) is
not equal to the surplus stated to have been derived from extraordinaries since 1818.
It is further certain that trade has, for the last two years, gradually fallen off;
and it is well known, as I have already stated, how much of the annual revenue is
derived from the duties on imports and exports. It is supposed by some that trade
has decreased nearly one-half, by others one-third. As I have no data, just now,
for forming any estinate, I shall not venture on one; but this much I consider cer-
tain, that the current expenditure has been rather augmented than diminished during
that period; without taking into calculation the interest on the 30,000,000 francs
raised last year in France; and the provision to be made for the next four instal-
ments of 30,000,000 each, with the annually accruing interest on the payments
actually made, if effected by loan.
Latterly an attempt has been made to systematize the laws of Hayti, and
three codes have been published: Code de Procedure, Code Civil, and Code Rural.
85
674 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. | Hayti-
Two others are now printing, and when finished, will comprise the entire Code of
the republic.
The most important of these is the Code Rural; the chief character of which
is the enforcing of labor. It is in fact a modification of the old French regulations,
sanctioned by the Code Noir, with additional restrictions.
The provisions are as despotic as those of any slave system that ean be con-
ceived. The laborer may almost be considered as “adscriptus glebae;” he is
deemed a vagabond and liable to punishment, if he ventures to move from his
dwelling or farm without license; he is prohibited from keeping a shop; no person
can build a house in the country, unconnected with a farm. Deviations of the law
are punished by fine and imprisonment.
The Code determines the mode of managing landed property; of forming con-
tracts for cultivation between proprietor and farmer, and farmer and laborer; of
regulating grazing establishments; the rural police, or the inspection of the culti-
vation and cultivators; of repressing vagrancy; and of the repair and maintenance
of the public roads. Lastly, it affixes the penalty of fine in some cases, and in
others of indefinite imprisonment, at the option of the judge of the peace.
That cultivation would not go on, beyond that which daily necessities might
require, is I think perfectly true; but it seems problematical whether the mode
taken to correct the evils of sloth and inactivity be that best calculated to arrive
at the object in view.
The laws have already begun to operate, and the officers commanding in the
different arrondissements are said to report favorably of their progress.
But, trained as every man has been to the idleness of a Haytian military life,
it will be difficult to induce them by gentle means to labor; and when the harsher
provisions of the law are brought into play, it seems highly probable that they
will discover, what they formerly did, that their toil produces no more profit to
themselves, while it is more irksome and arduous than their previous idle mode
of life; and that the benefit accrues to a new set of masters, having merely a differ-
ent denomination from those who preceded them.
The amount of the population of the whole island at present, is very differ-
ently estimated by different persons. It is consequently impossible to do more
than attain an approximation to the truth.
By the official statements furnished by the government, it is raised to 930,000
souls; by some it is estimated at nearly 700,000; while others assert with confi-
dence that the entire population amounts only to 423,042 persons of all ages and
classes. Of these, the best informed people calculate one tenth to be white and
colored people. Of the entire population, 351,819 are in French St. Domingo,
and 71,223 in Spanish St. Domingo.
It is stated that at the commencement of the revolution in Hayti, the popula-
amounted to about 534,500 souls in the French, and about 108,500 in the Spanish
part of the island, making a total of 643,000. The decrease, according to this
statement, in thirty-three years, has been very nearly one-third of the whole popu-
lation in 1793.
The composition of this population is perhaps the most anomalous and extra-
ordinary that has ever existed on the Globe.
The great mass of the community consists either of ignorant men recently
liberated from slavery, or their immediate descendants, equally ignorant with
themselves.
The remainder is composed of some white people, chiefly Catalans or their
descendants, who are to be found in the Spanish part of the island; a very few
Frenchmen, having been here at the declaration of independence, have adopted
Hayti as their country, and have been fortunate enough to escape the sanguinary
schemes of Dessalines; and of all the various castes resulting from the intercourse
of the white with the black.
The great and distinctive classes then are, in the order of their numerical im-
portance, the blacks, the colored people or mulattoes, the European and Creole
whites; of these the white are the best informed and best educated; next in the
scale of improvement stand the mulattoes, and last of all the negroes.
British Parl. Rep.] APPENDIX. tº: 675
The two first of these great classes are again divided into as many subdivi-
sions as there are slave establishments in the West Indies or America, and shades
of complexion as can be produced by the intercourse of the European with the
African. This arises from the 44th article of the constitution, by which every
black, Indian, or their descendants, may become citizens of Hayti after 12 months’
residence in the state. There is thus, independently of the native, a considerable
foreign population, composed of most discordant elements,-English, American,
Spanish, French, Danish, Dutch and Swedish; each having brought with it all the
prejudices of the country to which it belonged, and having only one common point
of sympathy with their adopted brethren.
One of the results of the lead taken by the coloured part of the population
is, that, although small properties are in the hands of individuals belonging to all
classes, a very large proportion of the great landed estates is in the hands of col-
oured proprietors. To this end one of the regulations introduced at the com-
mencement of the Revolution very essentially contributed : I mean that which
transferred the property of the old French colonists to their coloured children,
whether legitimate or illegitimate.
From these causes, very few of the large estates are in the possession of
blacks, except perhaps in the northern part of the Island, formerly subject to
Christophe, who bestowed properties indiscriminately on all, without reference to
complexion, who could bring forward the quantity of produce which he fixed as
the return which ought to be made.
The form of government, as well as the constitution of society in Hayti, ren-
der the country in no slight degree liable to civil convulsions.
In addition to these circumstances, there are other co-existent and actively
operating causes that tend very essentially to lessen confidence in any form of
government that may be established in Hayti. Among these may be ranked,
1st, the absence of any well-defined ecclesiastical establishment, and 2d, the
want of good education.
It is true that the Roman Catholic religion is declared by the Constitution of
1806 to be that of the State, but the difficulty of obtaining a national priesthood
is the only reasonable defence that can be offered for the neglect of this most im-
portant topic by the Haytian government.
The immediate consequence of the above difficulty is to limit the number of
the clergy, which consists generally of Spanish or Spanish-American priests,
who are entirely dependent for subsistence on the government. They consist of,
I Archbishop, 4 Vicars-general, 31 parish priests, besides the Chapter of the Ca-
thedral of Santo Domingo, which does not exceed 6 canons.
The government having appropriated all the church property to its own use,
the clergy rely wholly on their fees, two-thirds of which they are obliged to pay
into the Treasury, retaining only one-third for their own support. This naturally
calls forth hostile feelings, most particularly so in the Spanish part of the Island.
There being no national clergy, and no inducement to respectable foreign
priests to establish themselves in Hayti, the country parishes are very ill supplied
with pastors. I have been told of one priest who has the charge of 14 parishes
in the South. -
It will not be deemed extraordinary, after the preceding account of the con-
dition of the Haytian church, that education should be at a very low ebb ; it is in
point of fact almost entirely neglected. n
There is indeed a military school, called the Lycée, formed on the model of
the establishment of the same name at Paris, with all the apparatus of Director-
general and professors, which has been founded for several years, but the number
of pupils is exceedingly limited, not exceeding 40.
Some schools on Lancaster’s plan, as well as three private schools, one for
girls and two for boys, have also been established in this Capital, but even in
these the number of pupils is very small.
There is, besides these schools, what is called an university in the city of
Santo Domingo, of which, however, I can give no other account than that it is
said to have seven professors, to teach ethics, canon law, civil law, philosophy,
medicine, latin, and drawing.
676 DíPH,(3.jA TiC W EHT İNG. [Ingress and
Attempts have been made to establish Lancasterian schools in different parts
of the Republic, but I am informed that they have almost completely failed. In
some of the principal towns the Schools do exist, but in most of the country
places it has been found necessary to abandon them.
In the deplorable absence of religious instruction and of education, it is not
a subject of surprise that morality should be in its lowest stage in Hayti.
The firmest ſoundation of society, marriage, is scarcely thought of, and all
the ties consequent on it have not even the shadow of existence.
In July, 1825, Baron Mackau arrived here with the Ordonnance of the King of
France of the 17th April, 1825, recognizing the Independence of this country up-
on two conditions : viz. that the ports of Hayti should be open to all nations,
by all of which equal duties on importation and exportation should be paid, with
the exception of the French, in favor of whom a reduction of one half should
take place ; and the payment, in five annual instalments, of 150,000,000 of francs,
by the present inhabitants of the French part of the island, to commence from
the 31st December, 1825.
The Ordonnance was accepted by the Senate on the 11th July.
The President then appointed three commissioners to accompany Baron Mack-
au on his return to France, for the purpose of negotiating a treaty with the French
Government on the basis contained in the Ordonnance, and also to raise a loan
for the payment of the first instalment. They sailed from this on the 20th july,
and a Convention was concluded at Paris on the 31st October following.
On the return of the Commissioners to Hayti, the President refused to ratify
the Treaty; and, on the 26th June, 1826, two Commissioners sailed from this for
France, for the purpose of effecting a final arrangement with the French Govern-
Thent.
In considering the recent and present state of Hayti, it appears to me two
very different sets of conclusions may be deduced—the first favourable, the se-
cond unfavourable, to Hayti. It is true that 22 years have elapsed since the Hay-
tians, by a public act, first declared their independence, and then determined to with-
draw all allegiance from the mother country ; that after various struggles, one, in-
stead of five distinct Governments, has been established, and this one possesses
all the external characters of organization; that the whole Island is in military
possession of the present authorities; that the cºuntry is peculiarly ſaverable for
defence against European troops ; that the abolition of the slave trade is a funda.
mental law of the State ; and lastly, that its Independence has been formally re-
cognized by the parent State.
On the other hand, it will be seen, that the very constitution of society in
Hayti is ill assorted; that jealousies and disunion prevail among its component
parts; that there is no fixed principle of action ſounded on religion and educaſion;
that the expenditure has increased, while the population, industry and revenue,
have fallen off; and that the army and police, on which the Government depend,
are ill calculated to repress disorder.
The Rt. Hon. Geo. Canning. CHARLES MACKENZIE.
163. Importation and Ingress of Persons of Colour.
Opinion of AirWirt, Attorney-General. Office of the Attorney-General of the U.S. May 8, 1824.
Sir, The third section of the Legislative Act of South-Carolina, entitled, “An
Act for the better regulation and government of free negroes and persons of colour,
and for other purposes,” which you submit for my opinion, is in the following
words:
“..And be it further enacted by the anthorify aforesaid, That if any Vessel shall
come into any Port or Harbour of this State, from any other State or Foreign Port,
having on board any free negroes or persons of colour, as cook, Stewards, marin-
ers, or in any other employment on board said Wessel, such free negroes or per-
sons of colour shall be liable to be seized and confined in gaol until said Wessel
shall clear out and depart from this State; and that when said Wessel is ready to
sail the Captain of said Vessel shall be bound to carry away the said free negro
Egress of Negroes...} APPENI) {X. 677
or person of colour, and pay the expences of his detention; and in case of his neg-
lect or refusal so to do, he shall be liable to be indicted, and on conviction there-
of, shall be fined in a sum not less than 1000 dollars, and imprisoned not less than
two months; and such free negroes or persons of colour, shall be deemed and taken
as absolute slaves, and sold in conformity to the provisions of the Act passed on
the 20th day of December, 1820, aforesaid.”
The question which you propound for my opinion on this section, is, “wheth-
er it is compatible with the rights of Nations in amity with 'The United States,
or with the National Constitution.”
By the National Constitution, the power of regulating commerce with Foreign
Nations, and among the States, is given to Congress; and this power is from its
nature, exclusive. This power of regulating commerce is the power of prescribing
the terms on which the intercourse between Foreign Nations and The United
States, and between the several States of the Union, shall be carried on. Congress
has exercised this power; and among these terms there is no requisition that the
Vessels which are permitted to enter the Ports of the several States shall be nav-
igated wholly by white men. All Foreign and Domestic Vessels, complying with
the requisitions prescribed by Congress, have a right to enter any Port of The
United States, and a right to remain there unmolested in vessel and crew for the
peaceful purposes of commerce. No State can interdict a Wessel which is about
to enter her Ports, in conformity with the Laws of The United States, nor impose
any restraint or embarrassment on such Wessel, in consequence of her having en-
tered in conformity with those Laws.-For the regulation of Congress on this sub-
ject being both supreme and exclusive, no State can add to them, vary them, ob-
struct them, or touch the subject in any shape whatever, without the concurrence
and the sanction of Congress. By the regulations of Congress, Vessels naviga-
ted by black, or coloured men, may enter any Port of the Union for the purposes
of commerce, without any molestation or restraint in consequence of having so en-
tered; but the Section of the Law of South-Carolina which we are considering, de-
clares, that if any Vessel shall enter one of her Ports, navigated in whole, or in
part, by negroes or persons of colour, the crew, so far as they are negroes or per-
sons of colour, shall be immediately seized and imprisoned at the expense of the
captain, with various other contingent and severe penaltics both on the captain and
his imprisoned crew. Here is a regulation of commerce, of a highly penal char-
acter, by a State, superadding new restrictions to those which have been imposed
by Congress; and declaring, in effect, that what Congress has ordained may be
freely and safely done, shall not be done but under heavy penalties. It seem very
clear to me, that this section of the law of South-Carolina is incompatible with the
National Constitution, and the Laws passed under it, and is therefore void. All
nations in amity with the United States, have a right to enter the ports of the
union, for the purpose of commerce, so long as by the laws of the union, commerce
is permitted, and so far as it is permitted; and inasmuch as this section of the law of
South Carolina is a restriction upon this commerce, it is incompatible with the
rights of all nations, which are in amity with the United States.
There is another view of this subject. By the national constitution, the
power of making treaties with foreign nations is given to the general government,
and the same constitution declares that the treaties so made shall constitute a part
of the supreme law of the land. The national government has exercised this power
also, of making treaties. We have treaties subsisting with various nations, by
which the commerce of such nations with the United States, is expressly author-
ized, without any restriction as to the colour of the crews, by which it shall be
carried on. We have such a treaty with Great Britain, as to which nation this
question has arisen. This act of South Carolina forbids, or what is the same thing,
punishes what this treaty authorizes.
I am of opinion, that the section of the law under consideration, is void, for
being against the constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States, and incom-
patible with the rights of all nations, in amity with the United States.
I have the honor to be, &c. WILLIAM WIRT.
The Hon. John Quincy Adams.
678 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. | Fugitive Slaves.
164. Proposition for Mutual Surrender of Fugitive Slaves and Deserters.
In Mr Clay's instructions to Mr Gallatin on this proposition of the 19th June,
1826, he says—
If it be urged that Great Britain would make, in agreeing to the proposed
stipulation, a concession without an equivalent, there being no corresponding class
of persons in her North American Continental Dominions, you will reply:
1st. That there is a similar class in the British West Indies, and although
the instances are not numerous, some have occurred, of their escape, or being
brought, contrary to law, into the United States.
2dly. That Great Britain would probably obtain an advantage over us, in the
reciprocal restoration of military and maritime deserters, which would compensate
any that we might secure over her in the practical operation of an article for the
mutual delivery of fugitives from labor.”
165. Mr Barbour to Air Clay. Eatract.
London, 2d. October, 1828. In this conference, I opened the subject of slaves
taking refuge in the British North American Possessions, by representing that
our conterminous Possessions had been attended with the usual border inconve-
niences, alluding to the cases of refugees from justice, deserters and persons held
to service; in other words, runaway slaves. When I mentioned the border incon-
veniences, he instantly, before I explained my object, and with apparent interest,
spoke of our difficulties in the north-east. I at once undeceived him, by stating
that I had received no communication from my Government on that head, (owing
I suppose, to the delays of navigation,) and proceeded to state what I had in view.
I endeavored to impress on him the importance of the subject, stating that one
member of the confederacy, and the House of Representatives of the United States,
had urged upon the Executive the necessity of making some arrangement, by
which facilities should be given to the losers of slaves, in regaining them. That
the mischief was by no means, confined to the number that escaped, but acted on,
and much impaired, the value of those who remained; the successful attempts at
elopement constituting a strong allurement with all to abscond. Lord Aberdeen
remarked, that similar complaints had been preferred by other Powers having West
India Possessions: that, whilst he would be happy to grant the most substantial
remedy, yet, in the present state of public feeling on this subject, which, he said,
might properly be called a mania, the application of the remedy was an affair of
some delicacy and difficulty: that the law of Parliament gave freedom to every
slave who effected his landing on British ground. I remarked to his lordship,
that he was laboring, I thought, under a mistake; as this was the result of a judi-
cial decision, rather than of parliamentary enactment. He insisted that there was
a statutory provision to the effect spoken of; but added, that Sir George Murray,
the head of the Colonial Department, intended to bring the subject before Parlia-
ment, when he hoped the evil complained of would be obviated, as he could not
conceive that any people would wish to see their numbers increased by such
subjects. JAMES BARBOUR.
166. Proclimation of the King of the Sandwich Islands, respecting the
Treatment of Foreigners within his Territories.
Oahu, 7th October, 1829. These are the names of the King of the Islands,
and the Chiefs in Council :—
Kauikeaouli, the King, Gov. Boki,
Kaahumanu, Gov. Adams Kuakini,
Manuia, Kekuanaoa, Hinau, Aikanaka, Paki, Kinau, John Ii, James Kahuhu.
This is my decision for you; we assent to the request of the English residents;
we grant the protection of the laws; that is the sum of your petition.
* For suggestions for the preparation of an article, (on the mutual surrender of deserters
from the military, naval, and merchant service, persons naturalized to be excepted,) the
secretary refers to article VI. of the convention between the United States and France, of
June 24, 1822, See pages 128, and 129, in Vol. I. of this work.
Sandwich Islands.] APPENDIX. 679
This, therefore, is my Proclamation, which I make known to you all, people
from foreign countries:—The laws of my country prohibit murder, theft, adultery,
fornication, retailing ardent spirits at houses for selling spirits, amusements on the
sabbath day, gambling and betting on the sabbath day, and at all times.
If any man shall transgress any of these laws, he is liable to the penalty, the
same for every foreigner and for the people of these islands: whoever shall violate
these laws shall be punished.
This also I make known:—The law of the Great God of Heaven, that is, the
great thing by which we shall promote peace; let all men who remain here obey it.
Christian Marriage is proper for men and women; but if a woman regard her
man as her only husband, and the man regard his woman as his only wife, they
are legally husband and wife; but if the parties are not married, nor regard them-
selves as husband and wife, let them be forth with entirely separate.
II. This is also our decision, which I now declare to you. We have seen
your wickedness heretofore. You did not warm us that your door yards and enclos-
ed plantations were tabu before the time when our animals went into your enclos-
ures; you unhesitatingly killed our animals. But we warned you of the tabu of
our plantations, before the time when the animals came into them, even yours, and
when it was told again, to you that have cattle; but for some days past we have
known your cattle to come in to eat up what we had planted; on that account
some of your cattle are dead.
This then is the way to obtain justice; if you judge the man guilty, you are
not forthwith to punish him; wait till we have a consultation first: then, had we
judged him guilty, we would have given you damages; but no, you rashly and
suddenly injured the man; that is one of the crimes of two of you. And we state
to you all, that the wounding of a beast is by no means equal to the wounding of
a man, inasmuch as man is lord over all the beasts.
This is our communication to you all, ye parents from the countries whence
originate the winds; have compassion on a nation of little children, very small and
young, who are yet in mental darkness; and help us to do right and follow with us,
that which will be for the best good of this our country.
III. As to the recent death of the cow, she died for breaking a tabu, for the
protection of the plantation. The place was defended also by a fence, built by the
owner of the plantation. Having secured his field by a fence, what remained to
be done was the duty of the owners of cattle, who were told by him who had
charge of the plantation, to bring home their cattle at evening; he did tell them
so, but they did not regard it, and in the night they came in, but not by day. On
that account the owner of the plantation hoped to recover damage; for many were
the cattle that were taken up before, but no damage was recovered for the crop
they had devoured; the owners plead them off without paying damage; therefore,
he to whom belonged the crop, determined that one of the cattle should die, for
destroying the crop; for it had been said that if any of the cattle should come into
the enclosure devouring the crop, such cattle would be forfeited and become the
property of the owner of the crop. Many have been seized, but they were begged
off, and given up again; this has been done many times. Why then are you so
quick to be angry! For within the enclosure was the place where the cow was
wounded, after which she made her way out. What then means your declaration
that the cow was wantonly shot in the common! The cow would not have been
killed for simply grazing in the common pasture; her feeding upon the cultivated
crop was well known by those who had the care of the plantation.
KAUIKEAOULI.
167. The Secretary of the U. S. Navy to the King of the Sandwich Islands.
Washington City, 20th January, 1829. By the approbation and direction of
the President of the United States, I address you this letter, and send it by the
hands of Captain William Bolton Finch, an officer in our navy commanding the
ship of war Vincennes.
Captain Finch also bears to you, from the president, certain small tokens of
regard, for yourself and the chiefs who are near to you, and is commanded to
680 DIPLOMATIC writing. [Declarations of Indepee.
express to you in his name, the anxious desire which he feels for your advance-
ment in prosperity and in the arts of civilized life, and for the cultivation of harmo-
ny and good-will between your nation and the people of the United States. He
has heard with admiration and interest of the rapid progress which has been made,
by your people in acquiring a l; nowledge of letters and of the true religion—the
religion of the Christian's Bible. These are the best and the only means, by which
the prosperity and happiness of nations can be advanced and continued, and the
president and all men every where, who wish well to yourself and your people,
earnestly hope that you will continue to cultivate them, and to protect and encour-
age those by whom they are brought to you.
The president also anxiously hopes that peace, and kindness and justice, will
prevail between your people and those citizens of the United States who visit your
islands, and that the regulations of your government will be such as to enforce
them upon all.
Our citizens who violate your laws, or interfere with your regulations, violate
at the same time their duty to their own government and country, and merit censure
and punishment. We have heard with pain that this has sometimes been the
case, and we have sought to know and to punish those who are guilty. Captain
Finch is commanded diligently to enquire into the conduct of our citizens, whom
he may find at the islands, and, as far as he has the authority, to ensure proper
conduct and deportment from them.
The president hopes, however, that there are very few who so act as to deserve
censure or punishment, and for all others he solicits the kindness and protection of
your government, that their interests may be promoted, and every facility given to
them in the transaction of their business. Among others he bespeaks your favor
to those who have taken up their residence with you to promote the cause of reli-
gion and learning in your islands. . He does not doubt that their motives are pure
and their objects most friendly to the happiness of your people, and that they will
so conduct themselves as to merit the protecting kindness of your government.
One of their number, the Rev. Charles S. Stewart, who resided for a long time
with you, has received the favor of his government, in an appointment to an office
of religion in our navy, and will visit you in company with Captain Finch.
The president salutes you with respect, and wishes you peace, happiness and
prosperity. SAMUEL L. SOUTHARD.
To Tamehameha III., King of the Sandwich Islands.
DECLARATIONS OF INF) EPENDENCE OF THE NEW NATIONS
OF SOUTH AMERICA AND MEXICO.
168. Venezuela.
In the Name of the Most High:
We, the representatives of the federal provinces of Caracas, Cumana, Barinas,
Margarita, Barcelona, Merida, and Truxillio constituting the confederation of
Venezuela, on the southern continent of America, in Congress assembled; consid-
ering, that we have been in the full and entire possession of our natural rights
since the 19th of April, 1810, which we reassumed in consequence of the transac-
tions at Bayonne, the abdication of the Spanish throne, by the conquest of Spain,
and the accession of a new dynasty, established without our consent. While we
avail ourselves of the rights of men, which have been withheld from us by force for
more than three centuries, and to which we are restored by the political revolutions
in human affairs, we think it becoming to state to the world the reasons by which
we are called to the free exercise of the sovereign authority.
We deem it unnecessary to insist upon the unquestionable right which every
conquered country holds to restore itself to liberty and independence; we pass over
in a general silence, the long series of afflictions, oppressions, and privations,
which the fatal law of conquest has indiscriminately involved the discoverers, con-
querors; and settlers of these countries; whose condition has been made wretched
Venezuela.] APPENDIX. 681
by the very means which should have promoted their felicity: throwing a veil over
three Centuries of Spanish dominion in America, we shall confine ourselves to the
narration of recent and well known facts, which prove how much we have been
afflicted; and that we should not be involved in the commotions, disorders, and
conquests, which have divided Spain. a' -
The disorders of Europe had increased the evils under which we before
suffered; by obstructing complaints and frustrating the means of redress: by author.
ising the governors placed over us by Spain, to insult and oppress us with impun-
ity, leaving us without the protection of the support of the laws.
It is contrary to the order of nature, impracticable in relation to the government
of Spain, and has been more afflicting to America, that territories so much more
extensive, and a population incomparably more numerous, should be subjected and
dependent on a peninsular eorner of the European continent. -
The cession and abdication made at Bayonne, the transactions at the Escurial,
and at Aranjuez; and the orders issued by the imperial lieutenant the marshal'
duke of Berg to America, authorized the exercise of those rights, which till that
period the Americans had sacrificed to the preservation and integrity of the Span-
ish nation. •
The people of Venezuela, were the first who generally acknowledged, and who
preferred that integrity, never forsaking the interests of their European brethren
while there remained the least prospect of salvation.
America has acquired a new existence; she was able and was bound to take
charge of her own safety and prosperity; she was at liberty to acknowledge or to
reject the authority of a king who was so little deserving of that power as to regard
his personal safety more than that of the nation over which he had been placed.
As our glory consists in establishing principles consistent with human happi-
ness, and not erecting a partial felicity on the misfortunes of our fellow mortals,
we hereby proclaim and declare, that we shall regard as friends and companions
in our destiny, and participators of our happiness, all those, who united by the rela-
tions of blood, language, and religion, have suffered oppression under the ancient
establishments and who shall assert their independence thereof, and of any foreign
power whatsoever, engaging that all who shall co-operate with us shall partake
in life, fortune, and opinion, declaring and recognizing not only these, but those
of every nation, in war enemies; in peace, friends, brethren and fellow citizens.
In consideration therefore, of the solid, public and incontestible motives, which
force upon us the necessity of re-assuming our natural rights, thus restored to us
by the revolution of human affairs, and in virtue of the imprescriptable rights of
every people, to dissolve every agreement, convention.or social compact, which
doth establish the purposes for which alone all governments are instituted, we are
convinced that we cannot and ought not any longer to endure the chains to which
we were connected with the government of Spain, and we do declare, like every
other independent people, that we are free and determined to hold no dependenee
on any potentate, power, or government, than we ourselves establish; and that we
now take among the sovereign nations of the earth the rank which the Supreme
Being and Nature have assigned to us, and to which we have been called by the
succession of human events and by a regard for our own happiness. º
Although we foresee the difficulties which may attend our new situation, and
the obligations which we contract by the rank which we are about to occupy in
the political order of the world; and above all, the powerful influence of ancient
forms and habits by which (to our regret) we have hitherto affected—yet we also
know, that a shameful submission to them, when it is in our power to shake them
off, would prove more ignominious to ourselves, and more fatal to posterity, than
our long and painful servitude. It therefore becomes our indispensible duty to
provide for our'security, liberty, and happiness, by an entire and essential subver-
sion and reform of our ancient establishment. n - * º º
Wherefore, believing, for all these reasons, that we have complied with the
respect which we owe to the opinions of mankind, and to the dignity of other
nations, with whom we are about to rank, and of whose friendly intercourse we
assure ourselves: w
682. DIPLOMATIC writing. [Buenos Ayres.
We, the representatives of the confederated provinces of Venezuela, invoking
the Most High, to witness the justice of our cause, and the rectitude of our inten-
tions, imploring his divine assistance to ratify, at the epoch of our political birth,
the dignity to which his Providence has restored us, the ardent desire to live and
die free, and in the belief, and the defence of the holy Catholic and apostolic re-
ligion of Jesus Christ, as the first of our duties—
We, therefore, in the name, by the will and under the authority which we hold
for the virtuous inhabitants of Venezuela; do solemnly declare to the world, that
these united provinces are and ought to be, from this day forth, in fact, and of right
free, sovereign and independent States—that they are absolved from all allegiance to
the crown of Spain, and of those who now call, or may hereafter call, themselves
as representatives or agents; and that as free, sovereign and independent States, we
hold ful] power to adopt whatever form of government may be deemed suitable to
the general will of its inhabitants; to declare war, make peace, form alliances,
make commercial alliances, establish commercial treaties, define boundaries and
regulate navigation; and to propose and execute all other acts, usually made and
executed by free and independent nations: and for the due fulfilment, validity, and
stability of this, our solemn declaration, we mutually and reciprocally pledge and
bind the provinces to each other, our lives, fortunes, and the honor of the nation.
Done at the Federal Palace of the Carneas, signed with our hands, and se led with the
Great Seal of the provincial Confederation, and countersigned by the Secretary to the Congress
assembled, on the 5th day of July, in the year 1811, and in the first of our independence.
J. ANT. RODRIGUEZ, rep. and president of Obispos, in province of Barinas.
LUIS IGNACIA MENDO, representative, Vice-President of Nutrias, in pro-
vince of Barinas.
..Signed, by the Representatives assembled, of the provinces of Caricas, Cumana, Barcelona,
Barinas, Magarita, Merida, Truxillo, and Viila of Aragua and province of Barcelona.
A true copy, (L. s.) Fit ANCISCO 12NARD1, Secretary.
169. Buenos Ayres.
St. del Tucuman, July 9, 1816.
The congress of the United Provinces resumed its discussions, on the great
and august subject of the independence of the people which compose them. The
voice of the whole territory was universally constant and decisive for solemn erm-
ancipation from the despotic power of the king of Spain. Notwithstanding that
their representatives devoted to so arduous a task all the energy of their talents,the
uprightness of their intentions, and the interest which the sanction of their
fate require from the representatives of the people and their posterity; and
at the closing of their sessions, they were asked if they wished that the pro-
vinces of the union might be a free nation, and independent of the kings of Spain
and their metropolis, they immediately cried out, full of the holy ardor of jus-
tice, and one after another repeated, successively, their unanimous and spontane-
ous decision for the independence of the country, in virtue of which they decreed
the following Declaration :
We, the representatives of the United Provinces of South America, in gen-
eral congress assembled, invoking that Eternal Power who presides over the
universe, in the name and by the authority of the people whom we represent, pro-
testing to Heaven, to all nations, and to all men, the justice which rules our deci-
sions, solemnly declare, in the face of the whole world, that it is the unanimous
and unquestionable will of these provinces to break the burdensome chains which
ºte them to the king of Spain, to resume the rights of which they have been
dispossessed, and invest themselves with the high character of a free na-
tion, and independent of king Ferdinand the seventh, his successors, and metropo-
lis; to remain consequently, in truth of right, with an ample and full power to
give to themselves the form of government which justice dictates, and the in-
$ºse of their actual circumstances demand; thus, all and each of them, publish,
declare, and confirm, obliging themselves, through us, to the fulfilment and main-
. of this their will, pledging, as security and guarantee, their lives, fortunes,
Il OF8,
Chili–Peru.] APPENDIX. 683
. The present Declaration shall be communicated to all whom it may concern,
for its publication ; and in virtue of the respect due to all nations, let them ex-
Plain by a manifesto the great motives which have given place to this solemn
Declaration.
Passed in the Hall of Sessions—signed with our hands, and sealed with
ex
the seal of Congress, and certified by our Secretary.
[Here follow the names of the deputies of the different States and Provinces.]
170. Chºl.
Force has been the supreme reason, which, during upwards of three hun-
dred years, has maintained the new world under the necessity of reverencing, as a
dogma, the usurpation of its rights and seeking therein the origin of its most im-
Pºrtant duties. It was evident that a day would come, when this enforced sub-
mission would cease; but in the mean time it was impossible to anticipate it: the
resistance of the inferior against the superior, stamps with a sacrilegious charac-
ter, his pretensions and serves only to discredit the justice, upon which they are
founded. For the 19th century was reserved the spectacle of hearing innocent
America claim her rights, and show, that the period of her sufferings could con-
tinue no longer than that of her debility. The revolution of the 18th Septem-
ber of 1819, was the first effort Chili made towards accomplishing these high des-
tºnies, to which she was called by time and nature. Her inhabitants have given
since proofs of the energy and firmness of her will, scorning all the vicissitudes
of war.
But the actual circumstances of the war, not permitting the convocation of a
national Congress to sanction the public votes, we have ordered that a register
should be opened, in which all the citizens of the state might declare for them-
selves, free and spontaneously, their votes for the urgent necessity of the govern-
inent proclaiming immediately the independence or for delaying it, or for the ne-
gative; and having found, that the generality of the citizens have irrevocably
decided by the affirmative this proposition, we have thought proper, in the exer-
cise of the extraordinary power, with which we have been vested by the people
for this particular case, to declare solemnly in their names, in the presence of the fll-
mighty, ſo make known to the great confederation of mankind, that the continental ter.
ritory of Chili and her adjacent islands form, in fact and right, a free, independent
and sovereign state, and are forever separated from the monarchy of Spain, and fully
qualified to adopt the form of government most convenient to their interest.
Given at the I)irectorial Palace of Conception on the 1st January, 1818, signed with my
hand and countersigned by our ministers and secretaries of state for the department of state,
treasurv and war. BE R N Al{DO O’HIG GINS,
Miguel Zañartu, Hipolito De Villegas, Jose Ignacio Zenteno.
171. Peru.
In the royal city of Lima, 15th July, 1821. The señors, who compose it, have
ing yesterday assembled in the most excellent Senate with the most excellent and
mºst illustrious Señor, the archbishop of this holy Metropolitan church, the pre-
lates of the religious convents, titulars of Castile and various neighbours of this
capital, for the purpose of fulfilling, what had been provided in the official letter of
the most excellent Señor, the general in chief of the liberator army of Peru, D.
José de San Martin, the contents of which were read; and persuaded of the sound-
ness of the same containing what persons of known probity, learning and patriot-
ism, who inhabit this capital, would express, if the general opinion for indepen
dence had been resolved on, which vote will serve as a guide to the said General
for proceeding to take the oath; all the Señors agreeing for themselves and satis-
fied of the opinion of the inhabitants of the capital, said, that the general will was
decided for the independence of Peru, of the Spanish dominion and of any foreign
dominion whatever, and that they would proceed to sanction the same by means
of a solemn oath.
68% }
DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Mexico—Brazil.
172. JMearico. Eactract.
After the long night of three ages, in which America hailain plungº
darkness, the aurora of her felicity at last burst forth ; that day dawned for which
she has sighed and which she desires may be perpetual: This consummation
would never have been obtained, if it had not been founded in justice, nor if jus-
ice herself were motto be the base of the government which is to consolidate it; Buſ
the junta has the satisfaction to announce that both considerations are combined
in the emancipation which we have accomplished. - -
Nature has marked out the territories of nations by rivers, mountains and
other boundaries, which establish their limits. How many states are divided by
the Po and the Rhine, as the Alps and the Pyrenees divides France frºm Italy and
from Spain. From this last, immense seas and a vast distance divide America;
aſſistances which not only make them different as kingdoms, but establish thºm as
belonging to two different worlds. Policy must necessari y conform to the or-
der of nature, and as it would be monstrous to put in the same space the “ontra-
ry elements of fire and water, it is equally so to unite in one province, people who
are distinct and distant; especially if that difference and distance, extend tº the
extremity of the two worlds, since then it embraces all the contrarieties which
climate can originate. The two vast globes, and opposite movements, cannot re-
volve without embarrassment upon one axis, but each requires its own ; in the
same manner, two empires of distinct and opposite qualities require two gºvern-
ments, without being susceptible of being united in one, which is never sufficient
to govern both well.
If occasionally, the order of nature is violated, in departing from the bounda-
ries she fixes, it must happen as with fire inclosed in the mines, that an explosion
will finally take place. The two Spains, Old and New, or, which is the same
thing, Castile and Mexico, which have hitherto borne those names, belong to dis-
tinct regions of the earth, to different portions of the globe, to opposite zones of
the sphere ; differences which at once evince the justice of their separation. If
they have been united, as Esau and Jacob in the womb of Rebecca, and have
1ong remained so; this alone, giving to the latter her growth, has rendered it ne-
cessary that they should separate, as these twins did, first in the maternal bosom,
and afterwards in their descendants. This idea is further enforced by illustrations
drawn from animal nature, wherein the offspring, when capable of providing for
itself, leaves its dam, the young bird its nest; and New Spain having arrived at
the vigor of manhood, is bound by all analogy, it is said, to separate and shift for
itself. This it is which justifies the independence of America. She has burst
her chains, in order to acquire liberty, and to withdraw herself from the yoke
which embarrassed her prosperity, by limiting her labour, her industry, her com-
merce, by the sole interest or pleasure of the mother country.
[It is then generally stated, that until a meeting of the cortez, the laws and
constitution of Spain, as far as they are applicable, will be the law of the land.
The Declaration concludes with a general expression of the desire of the Mexi-
cans to cultivate amicable relations with all other nations—reserving, however,
their choicest favor and highest privileges to the Spanish nation, from which they
sprung.] Signed at Mexico, October 13, 1821.
ANTONIO, bishop of Puebla, as President.
- 173. Brazil.
This kingdom, since it acknowledged me their perpetual defender, required
of me, immediately, to adopt the most energetic measures for the preservation of
their honor and prosperity.
Had I hesitated in my determination, I would at once have violated my sacred
promise, on the one hand; and, on the other, would have given rise to all the evils
&f anarchy, the dismemberment of the provinces, and all the fury of a democracy.
What wrestling would there not have been amidst such sanguinary parties, between
a thousand successive and opposing factions! Who would have retained posses-
'sion of the gold and diamonds of her mines!—of those formidable rivers which are
Brazil.] APPEN DHX. 635
the strength of our state!—of that astonishing fertility, the inexaustible fund of so
much riches and prosperity! Who could have appeased, allayed the fury of so
many conflicting parties!—who could have civilized our distant provinces, divided
by, so many rivers? Who would have penetrated into the wildness of the intermin-
able forests, to offer aid to our poor deserted Indian!—who could have ascended
their lofty and inaccessible mountians! Most assuredly, Brazilians: Brazil would
have been ruined, this precious jewel of all beautiful nature, which is at once the
envy and admiration of the whole world.
I should have been answerable for all these evils—for all the blood shed—for
the unfortunate victims which, unquestionably, would have been sacrificed to the
particular views and interests of such contending factions, had I not adopted the
measures so earnestly solicited by the people: I, therefore, immediately directed
that an assembly of Brazilians should be called for the cement of the political
independence of this kingdom, at the same time not intending to break the bonds
9f the Portuguese fraternity; to tranquilize, on principles of justice, the united
kingdoms of Portugal, Brazil and Algarves, and to preserve, under the same chief,
two families, separated by a wide ocean, who can only live united by the equality
of rights, and the reciprocation of their interests.
Brazilians! it is not necessary for you to recollect all the evils to which you
Were subject, or what induced you to make the representation transmitted to me
by the chamber of representatives and the people, on the 23d of May, and which
gave rise to my royal decree of the 3d of June, of the present year; but a deference
for the opinions of mankind requires us to declare the reasons which dictated this
course—the history of the acts of the congress of Lisbon, with regard to Brazil, is
a history of continual injustice and deceit—all having in direct object to destroy
the prosperity of Brazil, and so effectually to paralize all its energies, as to make
it entirely dependent on the mother country; that the world may have been witness
to the justice of our cause, we appeal to the following facts:
The congress of Lisbon gave laws to Brazil without waiting for its represent-
ation, thus destroying the sovereignty of the majesty of the nation.
They denied us a delegation of executive power, so necessary to the proper
developement of our physical means. Knowing, at the same time, the great dis-
tance which separated us, leaving us without laws appropriate to our climate, our
Wants, and our local situation: . -
They gave us a government without stability, and without unity, formed in
insubordination, rivalship and contradictions—thus depriving us of the rank which
she enjoys, and weakening the foundation of our future grandeur and prosperity,
and driving us into all the horrors of anarchy and confusion:
They excluded the Brazilians from all participation in the emoluments arising
from offices of honor or profit, and filled your cities with European bayonets, com:
manded by cruel, rapacious and foreign chiefs:
They received with enthusiasm, and loaded with benefits, all those monsters
who attempted to destroy the best affections of the heart, and who triumphed in
the idea of extinguishing the last ray of hope among the people: º
They cast usurping hands upon the resources of the bank of Brazil, overloaded
with an enormous national debt, which the congress never used; at a time when
the credit of the bank was united with the public credit of Brazil, and with its own
prosperity: -
They negociated with foreign nations the alienation of portions of your terri-
tory, to weaken and enslave you: -
They disarmed your fortresses, stripped your navy yards, left in a defenceless
state your harbors, calling to Portugal all your navy—they exhausted your treas-
ures with repeated demands to support the troops which camewithout your permission
to shed your blood; and, at the same time, they prohibited the introduction of arms
and ammunition with which you could arm yourselves and support your liberty:
They showed a project of commercial relations, which, under the false appear-
ance of imaginary reciprocity and equality, monopolized your riches, and offered
your ports to foreigners; thus destroying your agriculture and industry, and again
reducing the inhabitants of Brazil to the state of fatherless and unsettled plauters:
686 D! PLOY; A TiC W E ITING. [Brazil.
They have trantel, from the beginning, with contempt and scorn, the repro-
sentatives of Brazil, when they had the valor to proclaim their right; and even
(but who can dare mention it!) threatened you with setting free all the slaves,
that they might rise in opposition against their own masters:
To finish, then, this long narration of horrid injustice, when, for the first time
that congress listened to the expressions of your just indignation, they doubled
their opposition, and endeavored to take advantage of the goodness and confidence
reposed in them.
The delegation of the exceutive power, which was rejected as unconstitutional
by the congress, is now offered to us by a commission from that congress, without
the necessary modification to make it acceptable to the people. Its acknowledg-
ment would be the signal of your destruction, and would tend to arm province
against province, and brother against brother—thus realizing the views of those
who formed it, for the purpose of prostrating your liberties,
Remember, then, gamerous inhabitants of this vast and powerful empire, that
you now enjoy the independence and happiness which have been predicted at so
many different periods by the politicians of Europe, You are now a sovereign
people, you have now entered into the great society of independent nations, to
which you had every claim. Honor, national dignity, and the voice of nature, all
corn:manded the colonies not to be colonies any longer, since they have arrived at
maturity; and, although treated like colonies, they are capable of forming and
maintaining a government independent of any foreign dominations. The same
"right which Portugal has to destroy its ancient institutions, and to establish new,
you possess in an extended degree; you inhabit a vast and a spacious country,
with a province, although disseminated, already greater than that of Portugal, and
which promises to grow in power with unexampled rapidity. If Portugal denies
to you this right, it renounces itself the right which it may claim, for the acknowl-
edgment of its new constitution, from other nations.
Brazilians ! Nothing further is to be done than to unite yourselves with in-
est love, and hopes;–to command the august assembly of Brazil to manage the
helm of state, with justice and prudence, that we may avoid the rocks which the
seas of revolutions unfortunately present to France, Spain, and even to Portugal.
Brazilians ! Do not fear foreign nations: Europe which acknowledged the
Independence of the United States of America, and which kept itself in a per-
fect state of neutrality towards the Spanish colonies, cannot fail to acknowledge
Brazil, which, with so much justice, means and resources, also strives to enter
into the great family of nations. We shall never interfere with their particular
affairs, and consequently they will not obstruct the peaceful and free commerce
which we shall offer to them, secured by a representative government which we
shall establish.
Let no other shout be issued from your lips, but UNION ; let no other word bo
reiterated, from the Amazons to the Platte, but INDEPENDENCE. Let all our pro-
vinces be strongly chained into unanizaity, not to be broken by any force. Let all
ancient prejudices be banished at once, substituting in their place the love of the
public good. Let moan blasphemers, oh Brazilians, declaim with injuries and
slanders against you, against me, and against our liberal system ; for if they
praise us, Brazil might be ruined. Let them say that we act against Portugal,
against our mother country, against our benefactors; we, supporting our rights,
punishing by our justice, and consolidating our liberty, wish to free Portugal
from a new class of tyrants.
Brazilians, in general Friends, let us unite ourselves; I am your companion,
I am your defender; let us obtain, as the only reward of our toils, the honor, glory
and prosperity of Brazil; for the accomplishment of which, I shall always be at
your front, in the most dangerous places. Permit me to convince you that your
felicity depends on mine. It is my glory to rule an upright, valiant and free
people. Give me the example of your virtues, and of your union, and be assured
that I shall be worthy of you. In the Palace of the Rio Janeiro, on the first day of
August, 1822. Signed DON PEDRO, Prince Regent.
Central ſºmerica.] APPEN i yi X. 687
174. The United Provinces of Central America.
Whereas the National Constituent Assembly of the said Provinces has de-
creed as follows:
Having discussed the subject, and received the Reports of the different
Commissions which have laboured to collect and present to this Assembly all
Possible information on the above Points; considering all that may be necessary to
the establishment of a New State; and also considering:—
First—That Independence of the Spanish Government has been and is neces-
sary in the situation of that Nation, and that of all the Nations of America; that
it was and is just in itself, and essentially consonant to the sacred rights of nature;
that it was imperiously demanded by the lights of the Age, the necessities of the
New World, and all the dearest interests of the People who inhabit it:
That Nature itself resists the dependence of this part of the Globe, separated
by an immense Ocean from that which was its Metropolis, and with which it is
impossible to maintain the immediate and frequent communication indispensable
between the People of the same State:
That the experience of more than three hundred Years has convinced Ame-
rica that Her felicity was altogether incompatible with the nullity to which She
was reduced by the sad condition of a Colony to a small part of Europe:
- That the arbitrary manner in which She was governed by the Spanish Nation,
and the conduct always pursued by it since the Conquest, excited in the Pecple
the most ardent desire to re-comauer their usurped rights:
That, impelled by these just sentiments, all the Provinces of America threw
off the yoke which had oppressed them for the space of three Centuries: That those
of the ancient Kingdom of Guatemala gloriously proclaimed their Independence
towards the close of 1821; and that the determination to preserve and maintain it
is the general and uniform resºlve of all its Inhabitants.
Secondly—Considering also, that the incorporation of these Provinces with
the extinguished Mexican Empire, was effected, only de facto, at the end of 1821
and the beginning of 1822, and was a hasty decision extorted by vicious and illegal
means: 'That it was neither granted nor pronounced, by legitimate organs or means:
That in consequence the National Representatives of the Mexican State never
expressly accepted it, nor could of right accept it; and that the orders dictated
and expedited by Don Augustin Iturbide, respecting this Union are null:
That the said Union was, and is, contrary to the interests and sacred rights
of the People we represent, and opposed to their will, and that the concurrence of
circumstances so powerful and irresistible, requires that the Provinces of the an-
cient Kingdom of Guatemala should be constituted of themselves and separately
from the Mexican State.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the said Provinces, in their names, with
their authority, and conformably to their wishes, solemnly declare: , “1. That
the said Provinces, represented in this Assembly, are Free and Independent of
Old Spain, of Mexico,and of every other power, whether in the old or the new world,
and that they are not, and ought not to be, the patrimony of any person or family.
“2. That in consequence they are, and form, a sovereign nation, with the
right freely to exercise and enjoy such acts, contracts, and functions, as are exer-
cised and enjoyed by the other free people of the earth. e
“ 3. That the abovenamed provinces represented in this assembly, and the
others of those forming the ancient kingdom of Guatemala, which shall spontane-
ously unite themselves, shall, henceforth, without prejudice, to the constitution
about to be formed, be called, The United 'rovinces of Central America: .
“And we command, that this declaration, and the act of our installation; shall
be published with due solemnity in this town of Guatemala, and in all, and each
of the towns represented in this assembly; and that they be printed and circulated;
that they be communicated to the provinces of Leon, Granada, Costarrica, and
Chiapas; and that they be communicated to the governments of Spain and Mexico,
and to the other independent states of both Americas, in the form and manner which
may be determined upon. [Here follow the signatures of forty-three deputies.]
By the supreme executive authority: PEDRO MOLINA, President.
National Palace of Guatemala, July 11, 1823.
688 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [Treaty—Col’a & Mea'o.
175. Treaty of Perpetual Union, League, and, Confederation, between Colom.
bia and Mearico, published on the 20th of September, 1825.
The Government of the Republic of Colombia, on the one part, and that of Mex-
ico. on the other, sincerely desirous of terminating the evils of the present war, into
which they have been forced by the King of Spain, and having determined to employ
their whole naval and land forces in defence of their liberty ; and anxious, also, that
this league should be general among all the States of Spanish America, that they
may contribute their united strength and resources to maintain the common cause of
their independence, have appointed Plenipotentiaries, who have concluded the follow-
ing treaty of union, league, and confederation:
Art. 1. The Republics of Colombia and Mexico unite, league, and confederate,
forever, in peace and war, to maintain, with their naval and land forces, as far as cir-
cumstances may permit, their independence of Spain and all other foreign dominion;
and, after the recognition of their independence, to assure their mutual prosperity,
harmony, and good intelligence, both among their people and citizens, and the States
with which they may institute relations.
Art. 2. The Republics of Colombia and Mexico, therefore, enter into and mutual-
ly form, a perpetual compact of alliance, and firm and constant friendship, for their
common defence, obliging themselves to aid each other, and mutually repel any attack
or invasion that may, in any manner, menace the security of their independence and
liberty, affect their interests, or disturb their peace: Provided, that, in the last case,
requisition be made by one or other of two Goveraments legally established.
Art. 3. To effect the objects of the preceding article, the contracting parties promise
to aid each other with the amount of land forces that may be fixed upon by special con-
ventions, as the circumstances may demand, and during the continuance of the occasion.
Art. 4, ... The military navy of both contracting parties shall also be in fulfilment
of the preceding convention.
Art. 5. In cases where aid is suddenly required, each party shall operate against
the enemy with all the disposable forces within the territories of the other, if time be
not allowed for concert between both governments. But the party thus operating shall
observe the laws and ordinances of the State, as far as circumstances may permit, and
shall respect and obey its Government. The expenses thus incurred, shall be fixed
by separate conventions, and paid one year after the conclusion of the present war.
Art. 6. The contracting parties oblige themselves to furnish whatever assistance
they may be able, to the military and mercantile vessels arriving at the ports of each
other, from distress or other cause ; and they shall have power to repair, refit, provi-
sion, arm, and increase their armament and crews, so as to be able to continue their
voyages or cruises, at the expense of the State or individuals to whom they may be-
long.
* Art. 7. To avoid abuses, by armed privateers, of the commerce of the State, and
that of neutrals, the contracting parties agree to extend the jurisdiction of the mari-
time courts of each other, to their privateers and prizes, indifferently, when they can-
not readily ascertain their port of departure, and abuses shall be suspected of the
commerce of neutral nations.
Art. 8. The contracting parties mutually guaranty to each other the integrity of
their respective territories, as they existed before the present war, recognizing, also,
as part of this territory, what was not included in the Vice-royalties of Mexico and
New Granada, but is now a component part of it.
Art. 9. The component parts of the territory of both parties shall be defined and
recognized. - -
Art. 10. If internal quiet should unfortunately be disturbed, in the territory of
either party, by disorderly men and enemies of legal government, the contracting par-
ties engage to make common cause against them, until order and the empire of law be
re-established.—Their forces shall be furnished as provided by Articles 2 and 3.
Art II. All persons taking arms against either Government, legally established,
and fleeing from justice, if found within the territory of either contracting party, shall
be delivered up, to be tried by the Government against which the offence has been
committed. Deserters from the army and navy are included in this article.
Treaty–Peru & Equator] APPENDIX. 689
Art. 12. To strengthen the bonds of future union between the two states, and to
prevent every interruption of their friendship and good intelligence, a congress shall
be formed, to which each party shall send two plenipotentiaries, commissioned in the
same form and manner as aré observed towards ministers of equal grade to foreign
nation S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . . . . . . - & s
Art, 13. Both parties oblige themselves to solicit the other ci-devant Spanish
States of America to enter into this compact of perpetual union, league and confederation.
Art. 14. As soon as this important purpose shall have been obtained, a general
congress of the American States shall assemble, composed of their plenipotentiaries.
its object will be to confirm and establish intimate relations between the whole and
each one of the States: it will serve as a council on great occasions; a point of union in
common danger; a faithful interpreter of public treaties in cases of misunderstanding;
and as an arbitrator and conciliator of disputes and differences. . . . . . . •
Art. 15. The Isthmus of Panama being an integral part of. Colombia, and the
most suitable point for the meeting of the Congress, this republic promises to furnish
to plenipotentiaries of the Congress all the facilities demanded by hospitality among
a kindred people, and by the sacred character of ambassadors. - - -
Art. 16. Mexico agrees to the same obligation, if ever, by the accidents of war, or
the consent of a majority of the states, the congress should meet within her jurisdiction."
Art. 17. This compact of perpetual union, league, and confederation, shall not, in
anywise, affect the exercise of the national sovereignty of either contracting party; in
regard to its laws and form of government, or its foreign relations. But the parties
bind themselves, positively, not to accede to any demand of indemnity, tribute, or
impost from Spain, for the loss of her former supremacy over these countries, or from
any other nation in her naine. They also agree not to enter into any treaty with Spain,
or any other nation, to the prejudice of their independence; but to maintain, at all
times, their mutual interests, with the dignity and energy proper to free, independênt,
friendly, and confederate states. -
Art. 18. Provides, for the time of ratification of this treaty.
The foregoing treaty has been duly ratified. GAUDALOUPE VICTORIA:
By the Pres’t. Lucas Alaman. - - . . . . . . . . . . . .
176. Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Peru and Equator. Eatract.
[Lima, 27th Dec. 1832 Independence 13th.] ; : - , , .
Art. 1. Citizens of Peru shall pay in Equator the same duties and enjoy the same
commercial privileges and exemptions as if they were Equatorians—and citizens of
Equator shall pay in Peru the same duties and enjoy the same commercial privileges
and exemptions as if they were Peruvians. . . . . . . . - * . . . . -
Art. 2. All laws of prohibition and monopoly, which impede the free commerce
of the fruits and productions of Peru and Equator, shall be abolished in each state.
Art. 3. The productions of the soil and industry of Equator, can only be introduced
into the ports of Peru in Peruvian or Equatorian vessels; and the productions of the
soil and industry of Peru, can only enter the ports of Equator, in vessels of one or the
other nations. - - - * * * * > . * * * ~ * * * * ~ * . . .
Art. 4. All articles imported from either country into the other according to the
terms of the foregoing article, shall pay no other duty than that of eight per cent. on
their valuation at the place of entry, which duty shall include that known under the
title of duty of Consulado. . -- - - • . t * *
Art. 5. Shall be excepted however from the regulation established in the preced-
ing article—all brandy and sugar imported into Equator from Peru, the duties on which
shall viz: twelve per cent. on the value of the sugar at the place of importation, and
twelve reals on each arroba of brandy.* - * * * * *
Art. 6. In order that a vessel should be considered Peruvian or Equatorian, her
master or mate, and at least one third of her crew must be natives of the Republic
whose flag she bears, and she must moreover carry a certificate of her having been duly
registered in her own country. r * . . . .
Art. 7... The minor ports (those which are not ports of entry) of each country,
f
shall be open to Peruvian or Equatorian vessels, carrying the productions of their res.
*The arroba measures 981 cubic inches, o 4 galls, and one quart English wine measure,
&
690 fiPLOMATIC WRITING. [Za Platte & Chili.
pective countries, and foreign articles which have already paid duties in the ports of
éntry; but no foreign goods taken on board during the voyage, or on which duties have
fiot been paid, can be landed in any minor port. &
Art. 8. Equatorian vessels shall, however, be required to touch at some Peruvian
port of entry, and there to pay duties on their cargoes according to invoice. before they
ean proceed to any of the minor ports of Peru for which they may be bound. They may
however sail directly for a minor port, for the purpose of there taking in a cargo of
Peruvian productions.
Art. 9. Peruvian vessels bound for any of the minor ports of Equator, shall touch
first either at Guayaquil or Monte Cristi, which Jatter shall be jammediately declared a
port of entry. They may however enter ſteely into any port, for the purpose of taking
a cargo of Equatorian productions. - -
Art. 10. Foreign goods warehoused in either State, cammot be withdrawn for ex-
portation, in foreign vessels, to any port in Peru or Equator, unless said goods previous
to their being warehoused, shall have formed a part of the cargo of the same vessel, in
which they are to be exported.
Art. 11. A foreign vesseſ withdrawing warehoused goods, by virtue of the latter
part of the tenth Article, must take a certified list of the same. Whenever a foreign
vessel does not discharge the whole of its cargo at any port in Peru or Equator. a list
of the remainder, specifying the number, marks and contents of the packages, as by the
manifest, shall be made at the custom-house, and delivered sealed to the Captain, which
hist he must present before he can be allowed to unload, at any port of entry in the
other country.
Art. 12. Equatorian vessels are to be considered Peruvian in Peru, and Peruvian
vessels Equatorian in Equator, neither shall in the ports of the other pay any higher
duties, of tonnage, anchorage, or any description whatever, than are paid by the vessels
of the country in which the port is situated.
Art. 13. Vessels of either nation may be repaired and equipped in the ports of
the other, in perfect security, receiving the same protection, and subject to no other
duties, or liabilities than those of the country. This arrangement extends to ships of
war, whose commanders, however, are to agree with the local authorities as the pericó.
of their stay.
Art. 14. No vessel can Ioad, or unload, unless she arrives and departs furnished
with the proper documents from the respective custom-houses. The custom-houses of
each State shall correspond with those of the other, in order to communicate informa-
tion as to the documents thus furnished; and they shall require from the Captains of
vessels, certificates of their having complied with the proper forms, in the ports from
which they came.
Art. I5. All officers of either eountry, guilty of having furnished false papers to
yessels, shall on complaint being made by the government which suffered injury there-
from, be punished according to the law of their own nation, in the same manner as if
the crime had been committed against itself. w
Art. 16. All productions of either eountry, entering the other by land, shall be
entirely exempt from all duty whatsoever.
Art. 17. Foreign goods introduced from the Province of Piura (Peru) into that of
Loja (Equator) shall pay a duty of four per cent., upon their value.
Art. 18. The Governments of the contracting parties, may establish consuls where-
ever they may think necessary, for the reciprocal proteetion of commerce, who shall en-
Joy all the immunities customary among European nations.
Art. 19. The regulations of the post between the two countries, shall remain as at
present established.
Done at Lima, this 27th of December, in the year of our Hord 1832, and of the In-
dependence of Peru the 13th. AU GUSTEN GAMARRA.
MANUEL DEL RIO, Secretary of State for Foreign Relations.
177. Æefracts from a Treaty of Friendship, Aliance, Commerce, and A'avi.
gation, between the United Provinces of the Rio de la Platte and Chili.
Art. 2. The Representatives, &c. contract a perpetual alliance, for the maintel-
ance of their Independence, against all foreign dominion whatever,
Col’a Dip. Corps.] APPENDIX. 69 |
Art. 3. The Contracting Representatives bind themselves to guarantee the integ-
rity of their Territories, and to co-operate against whatever foreign Power should at-
tempt to alter, by force, their respective boundaries, as recognized before their emanci-
pation, or subsequently in virtue of special treaties.
Art, 4. The Contracting Parties engage not to conclude treaties of peace, neu-
trality, or commerce, with the Spanish Government, unless preceded by a recognition
on the part of that Government, of the Independence of all the States of America,
formerly Spanish. -
Art. 5. In respect of the alliance, their co-operation shall be regulated, conform-
ably to the respective circumstances and resources of the contracting parties; arti-
cles not of the produce of either party, to pay ten per cent. duty.
Art. 6. The relations of amity, commerce, and navigation, between the two Re-
publics, to be founded on a perfect reciprocity, &c.
Art: 9. All articles of produce or manufactures of the two Republics, to be in-
troduced, by land, free of duties, &c.
Art. 18. Each of the Contracting Parties to name Consuls for the protection of
£OIYll)] (21°Ce.
In Santiago de Chili, November 20, 1826; the 17th of liberty of both States.
IGNAC iO ALV AREZ.
MANUEL J. GAUDARILLAS.
‘ºmºsºmºnºe
178. Compensation of the Diplomatic Corps ºf Colombia.
Decree of the Colombian Government regulati...g. the Appointment of Diplomatic
Characters and Coasuls in Foreign Countries:
F. De Pauline Santander, Gen. Vice President. &c.
Art. 1. Ministers ſºlenipotentiaries ſtom the ſtepublic of Colombia, to the Courts
of Europe, shall receive, indiscriminately, $ 10,000 annually.
Art. 2. Minister's Pienipotentiaries to the American States, shall receive, indi-
scriminately, $8,000 annually.
Art. 3. C largé d'Affairés to the Governments of Europe and America, shall re-
ceive one half the salary allotted to Ministers Plenipotentiaries by the two foregoing
articles.
Art. 4. Secretaries of Legation shall receive yearly one quarter of the sum re-
ceived by the Ministers Plenipotentiaries under whom they serve.
Art. 5. Each secretaryship of Legation established in Europe or America shall
have two assistants attached to it. The chief assistant shall receive in Europe $ 1,800
annually, and in America $ 1.500.
Art. 6. There shall be likewise six supernumerary assistants attached to each
Secretary of Legation in Europe and America. These situations shall be filled by
youth of good property, of upwards of 17 years of age, whose parents may design
them for a diplomatic line. in order to advance their education under the Ministers
Plenipotentiaries with whom they serve, $600 shall be granted out of the National
Treasury to those in Eurcpe, and $300 to those in America.
Art. 7. Consuls-General of the Republic shall receive in Europe $3000, and in
America $2,500. -
Art. 8. Special Consuls or Commercial Agents, in any foreign part, shall receive
for their services merely the amount of emoluments delived from their fees, agreeably
to established usage and custom until a new scale of fees beintroduced.
Art. 9. The salaries of Diplomatists shall commence from the day on which they
leave the ports of the Republic for their destination.
Art. 10. The expenses to be incurred by Diplomatists in their voyage, or jour-
neys to and from the countries to which they are appointed, shall be defrayed separate-
ly out of the National Treasury, for which purpose an account and examination of
the said expenses must be made. -
Art. 11. The salaries and income of the Diplomatists shall be paid entire and
without deduciion.
Given, &c. on the 7th of August, 1823; 13 of Independence.
By His Ex.: Pedro Gual. F. de P. SANTANDER.
692 Diplomatic writing. [Austria & Switz'
The following is a list of Treaties, based on their respective models, inserted
elsewhere in this work : completing, it is believed, the entire body of Conventional
Law of the New Nations of America. - -
179. BUENOS AYRES.—Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with Chili. Bue-
nos Ayres, January, 1819.
[1..] CHILI.—Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with the United Provinces of
the Rio de la Plata. Buenos Ayres, January, 1819. 4.
[2.] Treaty of Perpetual Union, League, and Confederation, with Colombia.
Santiago de Chili, October 21, 1822.
[3.] COLOMBIA.—Treaty of Perpetual Union, League, and Confederation
with Peru. Lima, July 6, 1822. • *
I4.] Ditto, additional do. -
[5.] Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with Buenos Ayres. B. Ayres, Mar. 8, 1823.
[6.] Treaty of Perpetual Union, League, and Confederation with the United
Provinces of Central America. Bogota, March 15, 1825.
[7.] Treaty of Friendship, Navigation, and Commerce with the Netherlands.
London, May 1, 1829. - -
[8.] GUATEMALA.—Treaty of Perpetual Union, League, and Confederation
with Colombia. Bogota, March 15, 1825.
[9.] PORTUGAL-Treaty with Brazil, concerning the recognition of the In-
dependence of Brazil. Rio de Janeiro, August 29, 1825.
[10.] BOLIVIA.—Treaty of Federation with Peru. Chequisaca, Nov. 15, 1826.
11..] MEXICO.-Convention of Commerce and Navigation with France. Lon-
don, June 20, 1827. * * . . . -
[12.] BRAZIL.-Treaty of Commerce and Navigation with Austria. Vienna,
June 16, 1827. . . . . tº i ! : -
iſ 13.] Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation with Prussia. Rio de
Janeiro, July 9, 1827.
[14.] Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation with the Netherlands.
Rio de Janeiro, December 20, 1828.
180. Treaſy between flustria and Switzerland, for the mutual Surrender of
Criminals.—Signed at Turich, 14th July, 1828. Ettract.
Art. 1. The mutual surrender of Criminals to be established by the present con-
vention shall only take place on account of serious offences. By serious offences shall
be understood, high treason and rebellion, murder committed deliberately, and with
premeditation; theft in open bleaching grounds, stealing of houses or of cattle from open
meadows, highway robbery, abstraction or peculation of public money, forgery of State
credit paper, which either passes as money, or is issued as bonds from a public chest,
forgery of private bonds and bills of exchange, coinage, and fraudulent bankruptcies.
Art. 2. Austrian subjects, who shall have committed a serious crime in the
Austrian States, or shall have have been guilty, in Switzerland, of the crime of high
treason, rebellion, or the forgery of State credit paper, or money which has reference to
the Austrian States, and shall have fled to Switzerland, shall be given up to Austria.
Pºrsºns belonging to Switzerland, who shall have committed a serious crime in
Switzerland, or shall have been guilty in the Austrian States of the crime of high trea-
son, rebellion, or the forgery of State credit paper, money which has reference to the
Confederation, or the several Cantons, and shall have fled to the Austrian States, shall
be given up to Switzerland. - . . .
Art. 4. When a delinquent claimed by one of the contracting States shall have
committed a greater, or, as great a crime, in the dominion of the other State, in such
case the surrender shall not take place until after trial and the execution of the sentence
in the latter State.
Art. 5. Should it be necessary for the investigation of an offence or of the circum-
stances connected with it, that Austrian subjects, or persons belonging to Switzerland,
should be interrogated on oath as witnesses, they shall after a formal application, give
oral evidence before a Judge of their own country, according to the usual form. The
personal attendance of the witnesses may, moreover, be required by the Government
Belgium.] - APPEN DIX. 693
authorities, in extraordinary cases; viz: when it is necessary to establish the identity of a
delinquent, or the facts of the case; and, whenever a mere voluntary deposition of a
Witness is intended to be taken, the oral evidence cannot be dispensed with. Should
such, depositions, however be intended to go beyond a voluntary evidence, or to the
implication of the witness with the criminal, this intention must be expressed in the
application. It will then depend on the National Judge of the witness so summoned,
Whether his personal appearance shall be permitted, or the proper measures be taken by
himself as regards the witness. R • * , . . .
6. If an Austrian subject, or a person belonging to Switzerland, be brought up
for examination, within the State to which he belongs, and be found guilty of a serious
crime which he may have committed within the dominion of the other contracting
party, notice shall be given thereof to the proper authorities of that State, and they
shall be particularly informed of whatever, in the process may be of moment, in order
to the discovery of all and each of the accomplices who may be resident in the last men-
tioned State; so that those persons may be brought to justice. . . . . . . . . .
Art. 7. In cases where the surrender of a crimitial is demanded, neither the con-
fession nor the conviction of the offender is required for that purpose; it is sufficient that
proof be shown, by the State which desires the surrender, that a process has been insti-
tuted against the individual, on account of one of the crimes mentioned in Article 1.,
and that the proofs or important facts be stated, upon which the accusation is founded.
Art. 8. The surrender must be applied for in a diplomatic manner, whether the
capture be to be effected at the instance of the examining authorities, or of the magistracy
of the place. The Austrian tribunals shall, therefore, apply directly to the government
of the Cantons, and they, on the other hand, shall apply directly to the Austrian govern-
ment. The completion of the surrender, however, shall not take place until the identity
of the criminal be proved and the forms prescribed in Article 7, shall have been com-
plied with.
Art. 11. All things which the criminal may have brought with him, as the produce
of his crime, into one country, and which crime shall be proved against him in the
other, shall be returned gratis. The delivery of these things, as well as of those be-
longing to the criminal himself shall take place, on every occasion, at the nearest judicial
or police station of the claiming party.
Art. 12. Should any of the Articles of this Treaty hereafter require explanation,
a good understanding shall be entered into thereupon, by diplomatic proceedings.
Done at Turich, 14th July, 1828. --
VINCENT RUTTIMAN, A. WON STEIGER.
EUROPE.—DE CLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
- - - 181. Iłelgium.
PROCLAMATION du Congrès National, sur l'Indépendance du Peuple Belge.
*. - g .#w.mom du Peuple Belge : , *
Le Congrès National de la Belgique, proclame l'Indépendance du Peuple Belge,
sauf les relations du Luxembourg avec la Confédération Germanique. -
Bruxelles, le 18 Novembre, 1830.
. Le Président du Congrès National, SURLET DE CHOKIER.
Les Secrétaires, Membres du Congrès National ; NOTHQMB. -
• , 4 LEID'I'S.
- 4 . . . r I,e Vicomte VII, AIN XIV.
! . . . . . . . . FORGEUR. -
182. Treaty acknowledging Belgian Independence by the Five Great Powers. Ext.
Art. 1. Le territoire-Belge se compose des provinces de : -
"Brabant méridiónal ; Liége; 'Namurº; Hainaut; Flandre oceidentale ; Flandre
orientale; Anverset';Limbourg; telles qu’elles ont fait, partie du royaume-uni des
Pays-Bas, constitué en 1815, a l’exception des districts de la province de Limbourg,
désignés dans l'article 4.
Le territoire Belge comprendra en outre la partie du Grand-Duché de Luxem-
bourg, indiquée dans l'article 2.
69l DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Belgium.
Art. 2. S. M. le roi des Pays-Bas, Grand-Duc de Luxembourg, consent à ce que
dans le Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, les limites du territoire Belge soient telles
qu'elles vont être décrites ci-dessous:
A partir de la frontière de France entre Rodange, qui restera au Grand-Duché de
Luxembourg, et Athus qui appartiendra à la Belgique, il sera tiré, d'aprés la carte ci-
jointe, une ligne qui, laissant à la Belgique la route d'Arlon à Longwy, la ville d'Ar-
lon avec sa banlieue et la route d'Arlon à Bastogne, passera entre Messancy, qui sera
sur le territoire Belge, et Clemency qui restera au Grand-Duché de Luxembourg pour
aboutir à Steinfort, lequel endroit restera également au Grand-Duché; de Steinfort
cette ligne sera prolongée dans la direction d' Eischen, de Hecbus, Guirsch, Oberpa-
len, Grende, Nothomb, Pareth et Perlé jusqu'à Martelange; Hecbus, Guirsch, Grende,
Nothomb et Pareth devant appertetir à la Belgique, et Eischen, Oberpalen, Perlé et
Martelange au Graud-Duché. De Martelange, ladite ligne descendra le cours de la
Sure dont le Thalweg servira de limite entre les deux états jusque vis-à-vis Tintange,
d'ou elle sera prolongée ausi directement que possible vers la frontière actuelle de l'ar-
rondisement de Diekirch et passera entre Surret. Harlange, Tarchamps qu'elle lais-
sera au Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, et Honville, Livarchamp et Loutermange qui
feront partie du territoire Belge ; atteignant ensuite aux environs de Doncols et de
Sonlez qui resteront au Grand-Duché, la frontière actuelle de l'arrondissement de
Diekirch, la ligne en question suivra ladite frontière jusqu à celle du territoire Prus-
sien. Tous les territoires, villes, places et lieux situés à l' ouest de cette ligne appar-
tiendront à la Belgique, et tous les territoires. villes, places et lieux situés à l'est de
cette même ligne continueront d'appartenir au Grand-Duché de Luxembourg.
Il est entendu qu'en tragant cette ligne et en se conſormant autant que possible à
la description qui en a éte faite ci-dessus, ainsi qu'aux indications de la carte jointe
pour plus de clarté au présent article, les ccmmissaires démarcateurs dont il est fait
mention dans l'art. 5, auront égard aux localités, ainsi qu'aux convenances qui pour-
ront en résulter mutellement.
Art. 3. S. M. le rci des Pays-Bas, Grand-Duc de Luxembcurg. recevra pour les
cessions faites dans l'article précédent une indemnité territoriale dans la province du
Limbourg.
Art. 4. En exécution de la patrie de l'art. 1er relative à la province du Limbourg,
et par suite de cessions que S. M. le roi des Pays-Bas fair dans l'art 2, sadite majesté
possédera, soit en sa qualité de Grand-Duc de Luxembourg, soit pour être réunies à la
Hollande, les territoires dont les limites sont indiquées ci-dessous:
1 o Sur la rive droite dc la Meuse :
Aux anciennes enclaves Hollandaises, sur ladite rive, dans la province du Lim-
bourg, seront joints les districts de cette mème province, sur cette même rive qui n'ap-
partenait pas aux états-généraux en 1790, de fagon que la partie de la province actuelle
du Limbourg, située sur la rive droite de la Meuse et comprise entre ce fleuve à l'ouest,
la froniière du territoire Prussien à l'est, la frontière actuelle de la province de Liége
au midi, et la Gueldre Hollandaise au nord, appartiendra désormais tout entière à S. M.
le roi des Pays-Bas, soit en sa qualité de Grand-Duc de Luxembourg, soit pour être
réunis á la Hollande.
2o Sur la rive gauche de la Meuse : à partir du point le plus méridional de la pro-
vince Hollandaise du Brabant septentrional, il sera tiré, d'après la carte ci-jointe, une
ligne qui aboutira à la Meuse au-dessus de Wessem entre cet endroit et Stevenweert au
point od se touchent sur la rive gauche les frontières des arrondissemens actuels de
Ruremonde et de Maestricht, de manière que Ber ,erot, Stamproy, Neer-ltteren, Itter-
wood et Thorn, avec leurs banlieues, ainsi que tous les autres endroite situés au nord de
cette ' gne, feront partie du territoire Hollandais.
Les anciennes enclaves Hollandaises dans la province de Limbourg, sur la rive
gauche de la Meuse, appartiendront à la Belgique, à l'exception de la ville de Maes-
tricht, laquelle, avec un rayon de territoire de 1200 toises, à partir du glacis extérieur
de la place sur ledite rive de ce fleuve, continuera d'être possédée en toute souveraineté
et propriété par S. M. le roi des Pays-Bas.
Art. 5. S. M. le roi des Pays-Bas, Grand-Duc de Luxembourg, s'entendra avec la
confédération Germanique et les agnats de la maison de Nassau, sur l'application des
stipulations renfermées dans les articles 3 et 4, ainsi que sur tous les arrangemens que
Colony at Liberia.] APPENDIX. 695
t_f
~
lesdits articles pourraient rendre nécesaires, soit avec les agnats ci-dessus nommés de
la maison de Nassau, soit avec la confédération Germanique.
Art. 6. Moyennant les arrangemens territoriaux ci-dessus, chacune des deux par-
ties renonce réciproduement pour jamais, a toute prétention sur les territoires, villes,
places et lieux situés dans les limites des possessious de l'autre partie, telles qu’elles
Se trouvent décrites dans les articles 1, 2 et 4.
Lesdites limites seront tracées conformément à ces mêmes articles par des com-
missaires-démarcateurs Belges et Hollandais qui se réunivont le plus tot possible en
la ville de Maestricht.
Art. 7. La Belgique dans les limites indiquées aux articles 1, 2 et 4 formera un état
indépendant et perpétuellement neutle. Elle sera tenue d'observer cette même neu-
tralité envers tous les autres états.
Art. 8. L'écoulement des caux des Flandres sera réglé entre la Hollande et Ja
Delgique d'après les stipulations arrêtées à cet égard dans l’art. 6 du traité définitif
conclu entre S M. l'empereur d’Allemagne et les Etats-Généraux, le 8 novembre, 1785,
et conformément audit article, des commissaires nommés de part et d'autre s'enten-
dront sur l’an plication des dispositions qu’il consacre.
Art. 26. A la suite des stipulations du présent traité il y aura paix et amitié entre S.M.
le roi des Belges d’une part, et'eurs majestés l'empereur d’Autiſche. We roi des Français,
le roi du royaume-uni de le Grando-Bretagne et d'Irlande, le roi de Prusse et l'empe-
reur de toutes les Russies de l'autre part, leurs håritiers et successeurs, leurs états et
sujets respectifs, a perpátuité.
Art. 27. Le présent traité sera ratifié et les ratiſcations en seront échangées à
Londres, daos le terme de deux mois, ou plus tét si faire se peut.
En foi de quoi les plenipotentiares respectifs l'ont signé et y on', apposé le cachet
de leurs armes. -
Fait à Lond res. le quinze de novembre, l'an de grace mil huit cent trente et un.
S. WAN DE WEYER, ESTERHAZY, WESSENBERG, TALLEYRAND,
PALMERSTON, BULO W, Lſ EVEN, MATUSZEWIC.
183. Agency for recaptured ºfficans, and the Colony at Liberia.
The Act of Congress of March 3, 1819, entitled “An Act in addition to the acts,
prohibiting the slave trade,’ (3d vol. Story’s edit. U. S. p. 1752.) after empowering the
President to employ the armed vessels of the United States to enforce former acts
prohibiting the slave trade, and providing for the disposition of vessels offending
against them, and of the negroes, &c. found on board, enacts, in the second section :
Sec. 2. That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized to
make such regulations and arrangements as he may deem expedient, for the safe keep-
ing, support, and removal beyond the limits of the United States, of all such negroes,
mulattoes, or persons of color, as may be so delivered and brought within their juris-
diction ; and appoint a proper person or persons, residing upon the coast of Africa, as
agent of agents for receiving the negroes, mulattoes, or persons of color, delivered
from on board vessels, seized in the prosecution of the slave trade, by commanders
of the United States’ armed vessels.
[When this law was passed, and for several years before, the American Colomi-
zation Society, had an agent residing in their colony at Liberia. This officer has since
the passage of the law been charged by the Government of the United States with
the duties specified in the last clause of the section just cited ; for the performance of
which he receives an annual salary of sixteen hundred dollars, payable out of the
Treasury of the United States.]
184, Opinion of the Attorney-General of the United States, as to the Powers
of the Agency on the Coast ºf Africa, addressed to the Secretary of the Navy.
Sir : In reply to your communication of Saturday, I have to state, that I am not
aware of the existence of any act of Congress which authorizes the agent of the U.
States, residing at Liberia, on the coast of Africa, to purchase arms for the defence of
the negroes, &c. &c. received by him, in pursuance of the act of 3d. March, 1819,
nor do I think that purchases can be justified, by any fair construction of that act.
I do not enter into the consideration of the very grave and interesting question
656 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [China–Laws & Procla.
which might arise ſtom the exercise of such a power, but confine my view to the pro-
visions of the act. It has two objects:
First, To provide for the safe-keeping and support, within the United States, and
for the removal beyond its limits of all negroes, &c, brought within its jurisdiction,
$nder the provisions of the act. - - , , ; * ,
Second, To authorize the appointment of an agent to receive the negroes, &c. &c.
who may be delivered from on board vessels Geized in the prosecution of the slave
trade,. &c. &c. - - - .
No provision is made for the support and keeping of these negroes beyond the
limits of the United States, except by necessary implication, during their transit there-
from, and up to the time of their delivery to the agent of the United States, and of
such of them as may be taken from on board vessels seized, &c. &c. -
When that delivery takes place, the purpose of the law is accomplished. The
agent is functus officio, and his authority, so far as it may rest upon this law, is at an
end. I am, &c. JN: MACPHERSON BERRIEN.
Washington, 21 September, 1829.
185. China—Criminal Laws; and Proclamation, concerning the Visit of
the United States’ Ship Vincennes,
.# Translation of Extracts from the Chinese Code of Laws:
Transmitted to the president of the select committee, by the viceroy of Canton, in April, 1800.
1. A man who kills another on the suspicion of theft, shall be strangled according to the law
against homicide committed in an affray. r - - -
2. A man who fires at another with a musket, and kills him thereby, shall be beheaded, as in
case of wilful murder: if the sufferer is wounded, but not mortally, the offender shall be sent into
exile. - *
3 A man who puts to death a criminal who had been apprehended and made no resistance, shall
be strangled according to the law against homicide committed in an affray. *
4. A man who falsely accuses an immecent person of theft, in cases of greatest criminality, is guilty
of a capital offence; in all other eases, the offenders, whether principals or accessories, shall be
sent into exile. -
5. A man who wounds another unintentionally, shall be tried according to the law respecting
blows given in an affeay, and the punishment rendered more or less severe, according to the degree
of injury sustained,
6. A man who, intoxicated with liquor, commits outrage against the laws, shall be exiled to a
desert country, there to remain in a state of servitude.
The foregoing are articles of the laws of the empire of China, according to which judgment is
passed on persons offending against them, without allowing of any compromise or extenuation.
> . . Government Edict, concerning the United States’ Ship Vincemes:
Rwo—acting Keun-Min Foo, &c. hereby strictly prohibits compradors from clandestinely carry-
ing provisions. . . - - - -
The pilots have reported that on the 9th day of the 12th month of the present year, Peen-che-
Finch’s Almerſtan cruizer, having met with strong and adverse winds, anchored in the offing at
the Nine Islands, waiting for a fair wind to enable her to set sail, and go away, etc.
At that time I made a general report according to the facts, and sent despatches to civil and mil-
itary officers, to guard and keep a strict watch, and to urge her to make haste and set sail, not per-
mitting her to linger about and create disturbances. This is on record. - -
It appears that when the said nation’s cruizers came to Canton, not being for the purpose of
giving convoy to their merchant ships, heretofore the officers of government have not permitted
them to have compradors. . . . r - r . . . . . * “.
Being really apprehensive that traitorous and designing natives will clandestinely afford supplies,
and that Whampoa compradors, making a pretext of having licenses, and aiming at gain, will pre-
tend to carry provisions to English, American, and ships of other foreign natiºns, and secretly de-
liver them to the cruizer, or that fishing and tanka boats, carrying provision.s and other things, will
go, alongside and keep up their supplies, by which a heavy offence will be incurred; it is proper
to issue a strictly prohibitory proclamation: " . - * * *
I, therefore, proclaim to the military and the people, to the fishermen, and those in tanka boats,
as well as to the Whampoa compradors,etc. for their full information, that if any designing datives,
coveting gain, clandestinely carry provisions to the American nation’s cruizer, or make a false
pretext of loading provisions for delivery to the ships of other nations, and go to the American to
keep up her supplies, immediately on apprehension, they will decidedly be severely punished.
I will maintain the laws immoveable as a mountain... Positively no indulgence will be shewn-
Let every one implicitly obey. Do not oppose. A special proclamation. . . . ."
9th year, 12th month, 16th day (10th January, 1830.) : " ' ' TAOU KWANG,
s - t * . . * ,
- > ---------~~~~ r
----------------------alt-º-º:*-** - ==~~~~ -e-.
Gr. Britain—France..] FOREIGN RELATIONS. 697
186. To complete the view of our Foreign Relations to the present time, the
subjoined passages, from the Annual Executive Message to Congress, of
the 3d of December, 1833, form an official Eaposé of the state of our Affairs
with Foreign Nations:
GREAT BRITAIN.—“The interesting question of our Northeastern boundary (1)
remains still undecided. A negotiation, however, upon that subject, has been renew-
ed since the close of the last Congress, and a proposition has been submitted to the
British Government, with the view of establishing, in conformity with the resolution
of the Senate, the line designated by the treaty of 1783. Though no definitive answer
has been received, it may be daily looked for, and I entertain a hope that the over-
ture may ultimately lead to a satisfactory adjustment of this important matter.
“I have the satisfaction to inform you that a negotiation which, by desire of the
House of Representatives, was opened, some years ago, with the British Govern-
ment for the erection of light-houses on the Bahamas, has been successful. Those
works, when completed, together with those which the United States have construc-
ted on the western side of the Gulf of Florida, will contribute essentially to the safety
of navigation in that sea. This joint participation in establishments, interesting to
humanity, and beneficial to commerce, is worthy of two enlightened nations, and
indicates feelings which cannot fail to have a happy influence upon their political
relations. It is gratifying to the friends of both, to perceive that the intercourse be-
tween the two people is becoming daily more extensive, and that sentiments of mu-
tual good, will have grown up, befitting their common origin, justifying the hope,
that, by wise counsels on each side, not only unsettled questions may be satisfac-
torily terminated, but new causes of misunderstanding prevented. t
FRANCE.-‘‘Notwithstanding that I continue to receive most amicable assur-
ances from the Government of France, and that in all other respects the most friendly
relations exist between the United States and that Government, it is to be regretted
that the stipulations of the convention concluded on the 4th of July, 1831, (2) remain, in
some important parts, unfulfilled.
“By the second article of that convention, it was stipulated that the sum payable
to the United States should be paid at Paris, in six annual instalments, into the hands
of such person or persons as should be authorized by the Government of the United
States to receive it; and by the same article, the first instalment was payable on the
second day of February, 1833. By the act of Congress, of the 13th July, 1832,
it was made the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to cause the several instal-
ments, with the interest thereon, to be received from the French Government, and
transferred to the United States, in such manner as he may deem best; and by the
same act of Congress, the stipulations on the part of the United States, in the con-
vention, were, in all respects, fulfilled. Not doubting, that a treaty thus made and
ratified by the two Governments, and faithfully executed by the United States, would
be promptly complied with by the other party, and desiring to avoid the risk and ex-
pense of intermediate agencies, the Secretary of the Treasury deemed it advisable to
receive and transfer the first instalment by means of a draft upon the French Minis.
(1) See Vol. 2, page 573.
(2) See Vol. 1, page 524, and Vol. 2, page 133, and head 125, French Claims, p. 595.
88
698 DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [France.
ter of Finance. A draft for this purpose was accordingly drawn in favor of the Cash-
ier of the Bank of the United States, for the amount accruing to the United States
out of the first instalment, and the interest payable with it. This bill was not drawn
at Washington until five days after the instalment was payable at Paris, and was
accompanied by a special authority from the President, authorising the Cashier, or
his assigns, to receive the amount. The mode thus adopted of receiving the instal-
ment, was officially made known to the French Government by the American Chargé
d’Affaires at Paris, pursuant to instructions from the Department of State. The bill,
however, though not presented for payment, until the 23d day of March, was not
paid, and for the reason assigned by the French Minister of Finance, that no appro-
priation had been made by the French Chambers. It is not known to me that, up to
that period, any appropriation had been required of the Chambers; and although a
communication was subsequently made to the Chambers by direction of the King,
recommending that the necessary provision should be made for carrying the conven-
tion into effect, it was at an advanced period of the session, and the subject was final-
ly postponed until the next meeting of the Chambers.
“ Notwithstanding it has been supposed by the French ministry that the finan-
cial stipulations of the treaty cannot be carried into effect without an appropriation
by the Chambers, it appears to me to be not only consistent with the character of
France, but due to the character of both governments, as well as to the rights of our
citizens, to treat the convention, made and ratified in proper form, as pledging the
good faith of the French Government for its execution, and as imposing upon each
department an obligation to fulfil it; and I have received assurances through our
Chargé d'Affaires at Paris, and the French Minister Plenipotentiary at Washington,
and more recently through the minister of the United States at Paris, that the delay
has not proceeded from any indisposition on the part of the King and his ministers
to fulfil the treaty, and that measures will be presented at the next meeting of the
Chambers, and with a reasonable hope of success, to obtain the necessary appropria-
tion.
“It is necessary to state, however, that the documents, except certain lists of
vessels captured, condemned, or burnt at sea, proper to facilitate the examination
and liquidation of the reclamations comprised in the stipulations of the convention,
and which, by the sixth article, France engaged to communicate to the United States
by the intermediary of the Legation, though repeatedly applied for by the American
Chargé d'Affaires, under instructions from this Government, have not yet been com-
municated; and this delay, it is apprehended, will necessarily prevent the comple-
tion of the duties assigned to the commissioners within the time at present prescrib-
ed by law.
“The reasons for delaying to communicate these documents have not been ex-
plicitly stated, and this is the more to be regretted, as it is not understood that the
interposition of the Chambers is in any manner required for the delivery of those Pa-
pers.
“ Under these circumstances, in a case so important to the interests of our citi-
zens and to the character of our country, and under disappointments so unexpected,
I deem it my duty, however I might respect the general assurances to which I have
adverted, no longer to delay the appointment of a Minister Plenipotentiary to Paris,
but to despatch him in season to communicate the result of his application to the
frussia—Spain.] FOREIGN RELATIONS. 699
French Government at an early period of your session. I accordingly appointed a
distinguished citizen for this purpose, who proceeded on his mission in August last,
and was presented to the King early in the month of October. He is particularly
instructed as to all matters connected with the present posture of affairs; and I in-
dulge the hope that, with the representations he is instructed to make, and from the
disposition manifested by the King and his ministers, in their recent assurances to
our minister at Paris, the subject will be early considered and satisfactorily disposed
of at the next meeting of the Chambers.
“As this subject involves important interests, and has attracted a considerable
share of the public attention, I have deemed it proper to make this explicit statement
of its actual condition; and should I be disappointed in the hope now entertained,
the subject will be again brought to the notice of Congress in such a manner as the
occasion may require.
RUSSIA.—“The friendly relations which have always been manifested between
the United States and Russia, have been further extended and strengthened by the
treaty of navigation and commerce, concluded on the 6th of December last, (3) and
sanctioned by the Senate before the close of its last session. The ratifications hav-
ing been since exchanged, the liberal provisions of the treaty are now in full force;
and, under the encouragement which they have received, a flourishing and increasing
commerce, yielding its benefits to the enterprise of both nations, affords to each the
just recompense of wise measures, and adds new motives for that mutual friendship
which the two countries have hitherto cherished towards each other.
SPAIN.—“It affords me peculiar satisfaction to state that the Government of
Spain has at length yielded to the justice of the claims which have been so long urged
in behalf of our citizens, and has expressed a willingness to provide an indemnification
as soon as the proper amount can be agreed upon. Upon this latter point, it is prob-
able an understanding had taken place between the minister of the United States and
the Spanish Government before the decease of the late King of Spain; and, unless that
event may have delayed its completion, there is reason to hope that it may be in my
power to announce to you, early in your present session, the conclusion of a conven-
tion upon terms not less favorable than those entered into for similar objects with
other nations. That act of justice would well accord with the character of Spain,
and is due to the United States from their ancient friend. It could not fail to strength-
en the sentiments of amity and good will between the two nations which it is so
much the wish of the United States to cherish, and so truly the interest of both to
maintain. -
“By the first section of an act of Congress passed on the 13th July, 1832,
the tonnage duty on Spanish ships arriving from the ports of Spain, (4) was lim-
ited to the duty payable on American vessels in the ports of Spain, previous to
the 20th October, 1817, being five cents per ton. That act was intended to give effect,
on our side, to an arrangement made with the Spanish Government, by which dis-
criminating duties of tonnage were to be abolished in the ports of the United States
and Spain, on the vessels of the two nations. Pursuant to that arrangement, which
was carried into effect on the part of Spain, on the 20th of May, 1832, by a royal or-
der dated the 29th April, 1832, American vessels in the ports of Spain have paid five
§ See Vol. 1, page 537.
(4) See Vol. 1, page 139, and Supplement, Vol. 2, page 132.
700 - DIPLOMATIC WRITING. [Portugal.
cents per ton, which rate of duty is also paid in those ports by Spanish ships; but, as
American vessels pay no tonnage duty in the ports of the United States, the duty of
five cents payable in our ports by Spanish vessels, under the act above mentioned,
is really a discriminating duty, operating to the disadvantage of Spain. Though no
complaint has yet been made on the part of Spain, we are not the less bound by the
obligations of good faith to remove the discrimination; and I recommend that the act
be amended accordingly. As the royal order, above alluded to, includes the ports of
the Balearic and Canary Islands, as well as those of Spain, it would seem that the
provisions of the act of Congress should be equally extensive; and that, for the re-
payment of such duties as may have been improperly received, an addition should be
made to the sum appropriated at the last session of Congress for refunding discrimi-
nating duties.
“As the arrangement referred to, however, did not embrace the Islands of Cuba
and Porto Rico, discriminating duties, to the prejudice of American shipping, continue
to be levied there. From the extent of the commerce carried on between the United
States and those Islands, particularly the former, this discrimination causes serious
injury to one of those great national interests which it has been considered an essen-
tial part of our policy to cherish, and has given rise to complaints on the part of our
merchants. Under instructions given to our minister at Madrid, earnest representa-
tions have been made by him to the Spanish government upon this subject, and there
is reason to expect, from the friendly disposition which is entertained towards this
country, that a beneficial change will be produced. The disadvantage, however, to
which our shipping is subjected by the operation of these discriminating duties, re-
quires that they be met by suitable countervailing duties during your present session,
power being at the same time vested in the President to modify or discontinue them
as the discriminating duties on American vessels or their cargoes may be modified
or discontinued at those Islands. Intimations have been given to the Spanish Go-
vernment that the United States may be obliged to resort to such measures as are of
necessity for self-defence; and there is no reason to apprehend that it would be un-
favorably received. The proposed proceedings, if adopted, would not be permitted,
however, in any degree to induce a relaxation in the efforts of our minister to effect
a repeal of this irregularity, by friendly negotiation; and it might serve to give force
to his representations, by showing the dangers to which that valuable trade is expos-
ed by the obstructions and burdens which a system of discriminating and counter-
vailing duties necessarily produces.
“The selection and preparation of the Florida archives, for the purpose of being
delivered over to the United States, in conformity with the royal order, as mentioned
in my last annual message, though in progress, has not yet been completed. This
delay has been produced partiy by causes which were unavoidable, particularly the
prevalence of cholera at Havana; but measures have been taken which it is believed
will expedite the delivery of those important records.
PORTUGAL.-4: Congress were informed, at the opening of the last session, that,
‘owing, as was alleged, to embarrassments in the finances of Portugal, consequent
upon the cival war in which that nation was engaged,’ payment had been made of only
one instalment of the amount which the Portuguese Government had stipulated to pay
for indemnifying our citizens for property illegally captured in the blockade of Ter-
ceira. Since that time, a postponement for two years, with interest, of the two re-
Denmark—Sicily—Belgia] FOREIGN RELATIONS. 701
maining instalments, was requestcd by the Portuguese Government; and, as a con-
sideration, it offered to stipulate, that rice of the United States should be admitted
into Portugal at the same duties as Brazilian rice. Being satisfied that no better
arrangement could be made, my consent was given; and a royal order of the King
of Portugal was accordingly issued on the 4th of February last for the reduction of
the duty on rice of the United States. It would give me great pleasure if, in speak-
ing of that country, in whose prosperity the United States are so much interested,
and with whom a long subsisting, extensive, and mutually advantageous commercial
intercourse has strengthened the relations of friendship, I could announce to you the
restoration of its internal tranquillity.
DENMARK.—“Subsequently to the commencement of the last session of Con-
gress, the final instalment payable by Denmark, (5) under the convention of the 28th day
of March, 1830, was received. The commissioners for examining the claims have
since terminated their labors, and their awards have been paid at the Treasury as
they have been called for. The justice rendered to our citizens by that Government
is thus completed, and a pledge is thereby afforded for the maintenance of that
friendly intercourse becoming the relations that the two nations mutually bear to
each other.
“It is satisfactory to inform you that the Danish Government have recently is-
sued an ordinance by which the commerce with the Island of St. Croix is placed on
a more liberal footing than heretofore. This change cannot fail to prove beneficial
to the trade between the United States and that colony; and the advantages likely
to flow from it may lead to greater relaxations in the colonial systems of other
nations.
THE TWO SICILIES.–“ The ratifications of the convention with the King of
the Two Sicilies (6) have been duly exchanged, and the commissioners appointed for
examining the claims under it have entered upon the duties assigned to them by
law. The friendship that the interests of the two nations require of them being now
established, it may be hoped that each will enjoy the benefits which a liberal com-
merce should yield to both.
BELGIA.—“A treaty of amity and commerce between the United States and
Belgium was concluded, during the last winter, and received the sanction of the
Senate; but the exchange of the ratifications have been hitherto delayed, in conse-
quence, in the first instance, of some delay in the reception of the treaty at Brus-
sels, and, subsequently, of the absence of the Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs,
at the important conferences in which his Government is engaged at London. That
treaty does but embody those enlarged principles of friendly policy which, it is
sincerely hoped, will always regulate the conduct of the two nations, having such
strong motives to maintain amicable relations towards each other, and so sincerely
desirous to cherish them. (7)
TURKEY.—“ With all the other European Powers with whom the United
States have formed diplomatic relations, and with the Sublime Porte (8) the best
understanding prevails. From all, I continue to receive a granges of good will
& ºt
*.*, *.
tº ,
(5) See page 453, Vol. 1.
(6) See page 550, Vol. 1. (,":
(7) See from pages 693 to 695 on Belgian Independence, &c. Vol. 2.
§ See page 521, Vol. 1.
702 DIPLOMATIC WRITING.. [So...America—Col.–C..fm.
towards the United States—assurances which it gives me no less pleasure to recip-
rocate than to receive. With all, the engagements which have been entered into,
are fulfilled with good faith on both sides. Measures have also been taken to en-
large our friendly relations and extend our commercial intercourse with other
States. The system we have pursued of aiming at no exclusive advantages, of
dealing with all on terms of fair and equal reciprocity, and of adhering scrupulously
to all our engagements, is well calculated to give success to efforts intended to be
mutually beneficial.
SOUTH AMERICA.—“The wars, of which the Southern part of this continent
was so long the theatre, and which were carried on, either by the mother country
against the States which had formerly been her colonies, or by the States against
each other, having terminated, and their civil dissensions having so far subsided,
as, with few exceptions, no longer to disturb the public tranquillity, it is earnestly
hoped those States will be able to employ themselves without interruption in per-
fecting their institutions, cultivating the arts of peace, and promoting, by wise coun-
sels and able exertions, the public and private prosperity which their patriotic strug-
gles so well entitle them to enjoy.
COLOMBIA.—“With those States our relations have undergone but little change
during the present year. No reunion having yet taken place between the States
which composed the Republic of Colombia, (9) our Chargé d'Affaires at Bogota has
been accredited to the Government of New Grenada, and we have therefore no diplo-
matic relations with Venezuela and Equator, except as they may be included in those
heretofore formed with the Colombian Republic. It is understood that representa-
tives from the three States were about to assemble at Bogota, to confer on the sub-
ject of their mutual interests, particularly that of their union; and if the result
should render it necessary, measures will be taken on our part to preserve with each
that friendship and those liberal commercial connexions which it has been the con-
stant desire of the United States to cultivate with their sister republics of this hemis-
phere. Until the important questions of reunion shall be settled, however, the differ-
ent matters which have been under discussion between the United States and the
Republic of Colombia, or either of the States which composed it, are not likely to
be brought to a satisfactory issue.
CENTRAL AMERICA.—“In consequence of the illness of the Chargé
d’Affaires appointed to Central America (10) at the last session of Congress, he was
prevented from proceeding on his mission until the month of October. It is hoped,
however, that he is by this time at his post, and that the official intercourse, unfor-
tunately so long interrupted, has been thus renewed on the part of the two nations,
so amicably and advantageously connected by engagements founded on the most
enlarged principles of commercial reciprocity.
“It is gratifying to state that, since my last annual message, some of the most
important claims of our fellow-citizens upon the Government of Brazil have been
satisfactorily adjusted, and a reliance is placed on the friendly dispositions mani-
fested by it that justice will also be done in others. No new causes of complaint
have arisen; and the trade between the two countries flourishes under the encour-
agement secured to it by the liberal provisions of the treaty.
(9) See page, Vol. 2, and 139.
(10) See vol. 2, page 44.
JMexico—B. Ayres—Peru & Bolivia] FOREIGN RELATIONS. 703
MEXICO.-‘‘It is cause of regret, that, owing probably to the civil dissensions
which have occupied the attention of the Mexican Government (11) the time fixed by
the treaty of limits which the United States for the meeting of the commissioners
to define the boundaries between the two nations, has been suffered to expire with-
out the appointment of any commissioners on the part of that Government. While
the true boundary remains in doubt by either party, it is difficult to give effect to
those measures which are necessary to the protection and quiet of our numerous
citizens residing near that frontier. The subject is one of great solicitude to the Uni-
ted States, and will not fail to receive my earnest attention.
“The treaty concluded with Chili, and approved by the Senate at its last ses-
sion, was also ratified by the Chilian Govcrnment, but with certain additional and
explanatory articles of a nature to have required it to be again submitted to the
Senate. The time limited for the exchange of the ratifications, however, having
'since expired, the action of both Governments on the treaty will again become
necessary.
BUENOS AYRES.—“The negotiations commenced with the Argentine Repub-
lic, relative to the outrages committed on our vessels engaged in the fisheries at the
Falkland Islands, by persons acting under the color of its authority, as well as the
other matters in controversy between the two Governments, have been suspended
by the departure of the Chargé d'Affaires of the United States from Buenos Ayres.
It is understood, however, that a minister was subsequently appointed by that Go-
vernment to renew the negotiation in the United States, but, though daily expected,
he has not yet arrived in this country.
PERU and BOLIVIA.—“With Peru no treaty has yet been formed, and with
Bolivia no diplomatic intercourse has yet been established. It will be my endeavor
to encourage those sentiments of amity and that liberal commerce which belong to
the relations in which all the independent States of this continent stand towards
each other.”
(11) See vol. 2, page 81"
B 346620
DUPL

§§jſºț¢
ſae;
I
|
|
0273
ITY OF MICHI
•==~~~===
UNIVERS










→ : ** * · ·ș
Źr & ~、。、。§§§
§§§§§§§§§§~-- «…--~~~~§§§§§§§§§
šš， šš,·'，~§§§
¿&:…， ¿º ?（§§§§:ſſä，¿¿.*··“;&&&&* Ģ;§§§§§§- *-§§§§§
ſae!ſººſ§§©®°.'.*¿¿.*?-¿·* ..…..** ·*ĒĢģĶĒ
Ķſ、~-··¿- …«*·*… … ：*-§§
¿--33， ·~~~~）^*，… --º-º-…，，.：.,，，， ， ， -§§§§），·× ≤
¿s, ryšwº ...，~·:：:::#' ！$8; -;） （iº- ·
¿¿.
¿
ș**
sº
}
&
# º:
！ºſſ
·>j ≡ ***·¿
¿§. ?*）}...3）; *（.* * *§§§'}}, …º.º...?;?），ź$£§§
·§§+·<- . ::-·-·-- -·** --ſaeſ,ș.ae” ș33
·、|-·----|-
¿;...º.ſ. ý čŕ:--· ·¿
§§§
¿
¿
º
§§
#:
º:
***¿
¿§§
¿:
¿?
§§
º
º
;
rº, + 4:
...'
Žiš
r ; -
§
§
§§
§§
:
§
šķ
¿¿.
¿
**$.3 : 33
* * *
！
¿¿?
¿¿
§§§§§
; į***¿
** {:
º
*...*
$:
º:
#:
§
*
$
;$$$$$$$$
¿
¿?