eral instructions given to Commodore John H. Aulick" was handed him, which he was to consider as "in full force, and applicable to his command." He succeeded in concluding a Treaty on the 31st of March, 1854. The interesting negotiations which preceded it are detailed in the document above referred to. An account of the expedition, from the journals of Commodore Perry and officers under his command, was compiled by the Rev. Francis L. Hawks, D. D., and printed in quarto form by order of the House.2

The rights of Americans in Japan were further extended by a Convention concluded at Simoda on the 17th of June, 1857; and in the following year a more extensive Treaty was concluded, in which it was provided that all the provisions of the Convention of 1857, and so much of the Treaty of 1854 as were in conflict with the new Treaty, were revoked.

In 1859 it was determined to send a Japanese embassy to the United States; and this was done in 1860. In 1864 a convention was concluded for the payment to the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands, of an aggregate sum of three millions of dollars, "this sum to include all claims, of whatever nature, for past aggressions on the part of Nagato, whether indemnities, ransom for Simonoseki, or expenses entailed by the operations of the allied squadrons." The circumstances which led to the conclusion of this Treaty were thus stated by Mr. Fish in a report to the President: "The Japanese indemnity fund comes from payments made by the Japanese government under the convention of October 22, 1864,5 of which a copy is herewith inclosed. It appears that Prince Choshu, the ruler over the provinces of Sueoo and Nagato, having possession of the Japanese fortifications which command the Straits of Simonoseki, and also having with him the person of the Mikado, refused to recognize the validity of the treaties concluded by the Tycoon with the foreign powers, and closed the passage to the inland sea. At the request of the Tycoon's government the forces of the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands, in those waters, jointly proceeded to open the straits by force. On the 4th, 6th, 7th, and 8th days of September, 1864, they destroyed the batteries commanding the straits, blew up the magazines, threw the shot and shell into the sea, carried away seventy cannon, and obtained an unconditional surrender from Prince Choshu, with an agreement to pay the expenses of the expedition. The ratification of the treaties by the Mikado, and the firm establishment of the foreign policy of the Tycoon also, speedily followed. The government of the Tycoon, preferring to assume the expenses of the expedition, which the rebellious prince had agreed to pay, entered into the convention of October 22, 1864, stipulating to pay the four powers three millions of dollars, 'this sum to include all claims,

1 S. E. Doc. 34, 2d Sess. 33d Cong.

H E. Doc. 97, 2d Sess. 33d Cong. 3S. E. Doc. 25, 1st Sess. 36th Cong. Ante, 526. 514 St. at L., 665,

4

of whatever nature, for past aggressions on the part of Nagato, whether indemnity, ransom for Simonoseki, or expenses entailed by the operation of the allied squadrons,' 'the whole sum to be payable quarterly,' in installments of half a million of dollars.' One million and a half of dollars have been paid under this convention, and one million and a half of dollars remain unpaid. The Japanese government have asked to have the payment of the unpaid balance deferred till May 15, 1872, on terms set forth in the inclosed correspondence, and this government has consented as to its portion, (one-fourth,) on condition that the other powers also consent. Of the amounts already paid, one-fourth came to the possession of the United States, which appears to have yielded to its credit with Baring Brothers, in London, the sum of eighty-eight thousand eight hundred and eighty-one pounds eighteen shillings and tenpence sterling, (£88,881 188. 10d.) This, transferred to New York, pro duced in currency the sum of five hundred and eighty-six thousand one hundred and twenty-five dollars and eighty-seven cents, ($586,125 87,) which was invested in ten-forty bonds of the United States at par. The interest on the bonds, as accruing, has been invested in the same class of bonds. The disbursing clerk of the Department of State now holds, as belonging to this fund, such registered bonds to the amount of seven hundred and five thousand dollars, ($705,000,) at par. The Secretary of State is not aware of any claims against this fund."

It so happened that there was no vessel in the naval service of the United States that was in a condition to take part in this expedition. The Ta-Kiang was therefore chartered for the service, and was manned with a crew of eighteen persons from the Jamestown, which, with her own crew of forty, made a crew of fifty-eight in all. The Ta-Kiang had three guns, and received one thirty-pound Parrot gun from the Jamestown. The actual cost of the expedition to the United States was $9,500 for the charter,5 and $1,848.00 for the coal consumed.6

In 1867 it became necessary to make "arrangements for the establishment of a Japanese municipal office for the foreign settlement of Yokohama." By this arrangement, which "was adopted and agreed to by the foreign representatives and the Japanese Government," "the principle of exterritoriality was carefully preserved," as to the Treaty Powers." In a recent discussion between the Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Peruvian Envoy, the former thus speaks of this agree ment, and its relations to citizens of non-Treaty Powers: "It was a temporary arrangement, thought essential, say the foreign ministers who recommended it, under present circumstances, to secure the maintenance of order and health within the foreign settlement.' It did not fix any time within which it should remain in force. It is therefore either binding forever, or it might be abrogated at the pleasure of this govern

1 S. E. Doc. 58, 2d Sess. 41st Cong., 2; see, also, 3 D. C., 1864. 2 Ib., 579. Ib., 584. 4 Ib., 553, 584. Ib., 579. 6 Ib., 581; see, also, H. M. Doc. 151, 2d Sess. 42d Cong., as to this fund. 72 D. C., 1867, 73.

ment. Peru was then and is now a non-treaty Power. Your Excellency would be astonished and indignant if you were told by the officer whom His Majesty the Tenno may authorize to negotiate with you a Treaty of amity and commerce, that while perfectly free on all other points, we cannot relieve the citizens of Peru from being subject to coercive jurisdiction exercised by the majority of a Board of Foreign Consuls. You would ask, I think, by what right the Ministers of Great Britain, France, the United States, Germany, and Holland undertook to stipulate in what manner the citizens of Peru should be tried. * If the pretensions of some of the consuls were admissible, that they had a right not only to give advice, but that their advice, or that of a majority of them, should be controlling, so that the governor of Kanagawa would be only a mouth piece to utter their decision, then the extraordinary result would follow that this government might be made responsible to a foreign nation for an erroneous decision, which it had no power to prevent or reverse."

LAND GRANTS.

British Titles.

All British grants are invalid which were made after the declaration of independence, and purported to give title to land within the territories of the United States as defined by the Treaty of 1783.2

French Titles.

All French grants of land in Louisiana, made between the 3d of November, 1762, the date of the cession to Spain, and the 1st of October, 1800, the date of the recession to France, are invalid.3

Spanish Titles.

Louisiana.-Spanish grants in Louisiana were valid, if made according to law, between November 3, 1762, and Oct. 1, 1800. The require ments of law are considered in the following cases, as collected in Brightly's Digest: Strother vs. Lucas, 12 Peters, 411; United States rs. Delespine, 15 Peters, 319; Le Bois vs. Bramell, 4 How., 449; Bissell ag'st Penrose, 8 How., 317; Lecompte ag'st U. S., 11 How., 115; United States ag'st Power's Heirs, Ibid., 570; U. S. ag'st Moore, 12 How., 209; U. S. ag'st Simon, Ibid., 433.1

Florida. The titles to lands which had been granted by the King of Spain were confirmed by the force of the Treaty of 1819 for the cession

1 Mr. Oyeno Kagenori to Mr. Garcia. (Enclosure to No. 429, June 19, 1873, from U.S minister to Japan.) MS. Dept. of State. 2 Harcourt v. Gaillard, 12 Wheat., 523. 3 U. S. v. D'Auterine, 10 How., 609; Montault v. U. S., 12 How., 47. +1 Brightly's Federal Digest, 532; see also S. D. 56, 2d Session 23d Congress.

of Florida. If the title was granted upon condition, the concession became absolute on the performance of the condition, but if the condition was not performed and no good excuse shown for the non-perform ance, then the grant was invalid.3 Brightly's Digest (p. 534) enumerates the cases in which concessions of law by the governors of East Florida have been confirmed.

Mexican Titles.

These titles were recognized by the Treaty of 1848, and by the Treaty of 1853.

The authority and jurisdiction of Mexican officers to make grants of lands which were recognized by the Treaty of 1848 expired on the 7th of July, 1846, and if any condition was annexed to a grant which was inconsistent with the public policy of the United States, it was annulled by the conquest.5

Brightly's Digest, vol. 1, page 538, contains references to some of the cases in which the Supreme Court of the United States has decided what are and what are not valid Mexican Titles.

While Commodore Perry was at Lew Chew in 1854, one of the sailors in his squadron, in a state of intoxication, entered the house of a native and violated a woman. The people were enraged at this crime, and stoned the criminal to death. Commodore Perry caused an inquiry to be made into the circumstances, and concluded with the authorities an agreement for the treatment of Americans and their punishment for future offenses.6

MADAGASCAR.

The conclusion of a Treaty with Madagascar in 1867, conferring exterritorial jurisdiction upon the Consul of the United States, made it necessary to extend to Madagascar the provisions of the Act of 1860 entitled "An act to carry into effect provisions of the Treaties between the United States, China, Japan, Siam, Persia, and other countries, giving certain judicial powers to Ministers and Consuls and other functionaries of the United States in those countries, and for other purposes."

1 United States v. Percheman, 7 Peters, 51; U. S. v. Clarke, 9 Peters, 168; Mitchell v. U. S., Ib., 711, and other cases cited in Brightly's Digest, 533. 2 U. S. v. Clarke, 9 Peters, 168. 3 U. S. v. Mill's Heirs, 12 Peters, 215. 4 U. S. v. Yerba, 1 Wallace, 412. U. S. v. Vaca, 18 How., 556; Fuentes v U. S., 22 How., 443. 6 S. E. Doc. 34, 2d Sess. 33d Cong., 174. 716 St. at L., 183.

MEXICO.

In a communication to the Secretary of State, printed in the Folio Edition of the Foreign Relations, it is stated that "before the insurrection of the year 1810 the Kingdom [of New Spain] contained six millions of inhabitants, and * may be said to have been at its acme of prosperity; the royal revenue exceeding $20,000,000."

The course of the revolution from 1810 to 1821 is reviewed in that communication. It is stated that before 1816 "the impossibility of reestablishing peace and quietness in the Kingdom by the force of arms was fully ascertained," and the military events between 1816 and 1821 are rapidly reviewed.

In 1821 Spain made an effort to save her rebellious American colonies. Deputies from Mexico were received by the Cortes at Madrid, and "availed themselves of this occasion to show to the Cortes and Executive the impracticability of the provinces of America being governed as those of the Peninsula. * They then moved that the Government should be requested to direct without delay the Viceroy of Mexico to inform Iturbide that the Cortes were occupied in projecting a plan of Government for America, and to propose a suspension of hostilities until the resolution should be finally made by the Cortes and Executive."3

The opposition of the King defeated this move, and the American Deputies then proposed that there should be three divisions made of America; in each a Cortes; in each division a delegate ap

pointed by the King, who shall exercise in the name of the King the executive power, * the commerce between the Peninsula and America to be considered as from one province to another, and the inhabitants of the latter to have equal eligibility with those of the forme to all public employments."4

While these propositions were under consideration, Iturbide had gained a position in Mexico which enabled him to make proposals that New Spain should be independent of Old Spain; and that it should be a monarchy, of which a member of the royal family of Spain should be the Emperor, with sundry other provisions conceived for the purpose of securing these results.

The Cortes showed a reluctance to take the matter into serious consideration, upon which the American Deputies submitted a plan to the Cortes. No compromise of ideas so radically different was found prac ticable.

Iturbide continued military operations until, on the 24th of August, 1821, he concluded a treaty in Cordova with Señor O'Donojú, Lieut.General of the Armies of Spain, by which the Independence of New Spain was declared to be recognized. As a result of this, supreme

6

14 F R. F., 836. Ib., 837. 34 F. R. F., 828. Ib. Ib., 830, B. Ib., 831, C. Ib., 841.