ARTICLE XVI. The present treaty shall be ratified in due form, by the contracting parties, and the ratifications shall be exchanged in six months Ratifications. from this time, or sooner if possible. In witness whereof we, the underwritten Plenipotentiaries of the United States of America and of His Catholic Majesty, have signed, by virtue of our powers, the present treaty of amity, settlement, and limits, and have thereunto affixed our seals, respectively. Done at Washington this twenty-second day of February, one thousand eight hundred and nineteen. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. [L. S.] L. S.] Ratification* by His Catholic Majesty, on the twenty-fourth day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty. Ferdinand the Seventh, by the Grace of God and by the constitution October 24, 1820. of the Spanish monarchy, King of the Spains. Ratification, by the treaty 1819. Whereas on the twenty-second day of February, of the year one thousand eight hundred and nineteen last past, a treaty was King of Spain, of the concluded and signed in the city of Washington, between Don Luis de Onis, my Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, and John Quincy Adams, Esquire, Secretary of State of the United States of America, competently authorized by both parties, consisting of sixteen articles, which had for their object the arrangement of differences and of limits between both Governments and their respective territories, which are of the following form and literal tenor: [Here follows the above treaty, word for word.] Therefore, having seen and examined the sixteen articles aforesaid, and having first obtained the consent and authority of the General Cortes of the nation with respect to the cession mentioned and stipulated in the 2d and 3d articles, I approve and ratify all and every one of the articles referred to, and the clauses which are contained in them; and, in virtue of these presents, I approve and ratify them; promising, on the faith and word of a King, to execute and observe them, and to canse them to be executed and observed entirely as if I myself had signed them; and that the circumstance of having exceeded the term of six months, fixed for the exchange of the ratifications in the 16th article, may afford no obstacle in any manner, it is my deliberate will that the present ratification be as valid and firm, and produce the same effects, as if it had been done within the determined period. Desirous at the same time of avoiding any doubt or ambiguity concerning the meaning of the Sth article of the said treaty, in respect to the date which is pointed out in it as the period for the confirmation of the grants of lands in the Floridas, made by me, or by the competent authorities in my royal name, which point of date was fixed in the positive understanding of the three grants of land made in favor of the Duke of Alagon, the Count of Punonrostro, and Don Pedro de Vargas, being annulled by its tenor, # I think proper to declare that the said three grants have remained and do remain entirely annulled and invalid; and that neither the three individuals mentioned, nor those who may have title or interest through them, can avail themselves of the said grants at any time, or in any manner; under which explicit declaration the said 8th article is to be understood as ratified. In the faith of all which I have commanded to despatch these presents. Signed by my hand, sealed with my secret seal, and countersigned by the underwritten my Secretary of Despatch of State. Given at Madrid, the twenty-fourth of October, one thousand eight hundred and twenty. EVARISTO PEREZ DE CASTRO. FERNANDO. [Copies of the grants annulled by the foregoing treaty will be found in 8 Statutes at Large, page 267, et seq.] SPAIN, 1834. CONVENTION FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS, BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND HER CATHOLICK MAJESTY. CONCLUDED FEBRUARY 17, 1834; RATIFICATIONS EXCHANGED AT MADRID, AUGUST 14, 1834; PROCLAIMED NOVEMBER 1, 1834. The Government of the United States of America and Her Majesty the Queen Regent, Governess of Spain during the minority of her august daughter, Her Catholick Majesty Donna Ysabel the 2d, from a desire of adjusting by a definitive arrangement the claims preferred by each party against the other, and thus removing all grounds of disagreement, as also of strengthening the ties of friendship and good understanding which happily subsist between the two nations, have appointed for this purpose, as their respective Plenipotentiaries, namely: The President of the United States, Cornelius P. Van Ness, a citizen of the said States, and their Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary near Her Catholick Majesty Donna Ysabel the 2d; and Her Majesty the Queen Regent, in the name and behalf of Her Catholick Majesty Donna Ysabel the 2d, His Excellency Don José de Heredia, Knight Grand Cross of the Royal American Order of Ysabel the Catholick, one of Her Majesty's Supreme Council of Finance, ex-Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, and President of the Royal Junta of Appeals of Credits against France; Who, after having exchanged their respective full powers, have agreed upon the following articles: ARTICLE I. Her Majesty the Queen Regent and Governess, in the name and in behalf of Her Catholick Majesty Donna Ysabel the 2d, engages Agreement to into pay to the United States, as the balance on account of demnity United the claims aforesaid, the sum of twelve millions of rials vellon, States. in one or several inscriptions, as preferred by the Government of the United States, of perpetual rents, on the great book of the consolidated debt of Spain, bearing an interest of five per cent. per annum. Said inscription or inscriptions shall be issued in conformity with the model or form annexed to this convention, and shall be delivered in Madrid to such person or persons as may be authorized by the Government of the United States to receive them, within four months after the exchange of the ratifications. And said inscriptions, or the proceeds thereof, shall be distributed by the Government of the United States among the claimants entitled thereto, in such manner as it may deem just and equitable. Interest to be paid ARTICLE II. The interest of the aforesaid inscription or inscriptions shall be paid in Paris every six months, and the first half-yearly payment in Paris hall-yearly. is to be made six months after the exchange of the ratifications of this convention. Claims prior to ARTICLE III. The high contracting parties, in virtue of the stipulations contained in article first, reciprocally renounce, release, and cancel all date of convention. claims which either may have upon the other, of whatever class, denomination, or origin they may be, from the twenty-second of February, one thousand eight hundred and nineteen, untill the time of signing this convention. ARTICLE IV. On the request of the Minister Plenipotentiary of Her Catholick Majesty at Washington, the Government of the United States List of claims. will deliver to him, in six months after the exchange of the ratifications of this convention, a note or list of the claims of American citizens against the Government of Spain, specifying their amounts respectively, and three years afterwards, or sooner if possible, authentic copies of all the documents upon which they may have been founded. ARTICLE V. This convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged, in Madrid, in six months from this time, or sooner Ratifications. if possible. In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed these articles, and affixed thereto their seals. Done in triplicate at Madrid, this seventeenth day of February, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-four. The following is the form, or model, of the inscription: francos, El portador de la presente tiene derecho á una Consiguiente al mismo real decreto se destina cada de de El Secretario de Estado y del Despacho de Hacienda. In witness whereof we, the undersigned Plenipotentiaries of H. Catholic M. the Queen of Spain and of the United States of America, have signed this model, and have affixed thereunto our seals. Done at Madrid, this day of JOSÉ DE HEREDIA. [L. S.] [L. S.] [Under the Spanish treaty of 1795, stipulating that free ships shall make free goods, the want of such a sea-letter or passport, or such certificates as are described in the seventeenth 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. But if, upon the original evidence, the cause appears extremely doubtful and suspicious, and further proof is necessary, the grant or denial of it rests on the same general rules which govern the discretion of prize courts in other cases. (The Pizarro, 2 Wheat., 227.) The term "subjects," in the fifteenth article of the treaty, when applied to persons owing allegiance to Spain, must be construed in the same sense as the term "citizens," or "inhabitants," when applied to persons owing allegiance to the United States, and extends to all persons domiciled in the Spanish dominions. (Ibid.) The Spanish character of the ship being ascertained, the proprietary interest of 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 engaged in trade with the enemy is not protected by the treaty. (Ibid.) The seventeenth article of the 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. (The Amiable Isabella, 6 Wheat., 1; The Amistad, 15 Peters, 521.) By the treaty of 1795, free ships make free goods, but the form of the passport, by which the freedom of the ship was to have been conclusively established, never having been duly annexed to the treaty, the proprietary interest of the ship is to be proved according to the ordinary rules of the prize court, and if thus shown to be Spanish, will protect the cargo on board, to whomsoever the latter may belong. (Ibid.) The treaty with Spain of 1795 does not contain, express or implied, a stipulation that enemy's ships shall make enemy's goods. (The Nereide, Bennet, Master, 9 Cranch, 388.) That treaty prohibits an American citizen from taking a commission to cruise against Spanish vessels in a privateer, but not in a public armed vessel of a belligerent nation. (The Santissima Trinidad, 7 Wheaton, 283.) To entitle a Spanish owner, under the treaty with that power, to entire restitution free of salvage, of his property captured as prize of war, by a professed enemy, and rescued, it is incumbent on the party to produce prima-facie proof that the captors were pirates and robbers. (Le Tigre, 3 Washington's Circuit Court Reports, 567. See The Maria Josepha, 2 Wheeler's Criminal Cases, 600.) It the capture were made by a neutral, it would be prima facie piratical, unless she were shown to have been regularly commissioned; if the captor were, in fact, an enemy, the capture would be legal whether she were commissioned or not. (Ibid.) The eighth article of the treaty of 1818 did not, proprio vigore, confirm Spanish grants; it was reserved for Congress to execute its provisions. (Foster vs. Neilson, 2 Peters, 253. See Garcia vs. Lee, 12 Peters, 511; Keene vs. Whitaker, 14 Peters, 170; Chouteau vs. Eckhart, 2 Howard, 344; United States vs. King, 3 Howard, 773; United States vs. Reynes, 9 Howard, 127; United States vs. Philadelphia, 11 Howard, 609; United States vs. Turner, Ibid., 663.) By the treaty of 1819, land heretofore completely granted by the King were excepted out of the grant to the United States. (United States vs. Arredondo, 6 Peters, 691; United States vs. Percheman, 7 Peters, 51; Garcia vs. Lee, 12 Peters, 511; Keene vs. Whitaker, 14 Peters, 170; United States vs. Reynes, 9 Howard, 127; United States vs. Philadelphia, 11 Howard, 609.) The words of that treaty do not require actual occupancy; they are satisfied by that constructive possession which is attributed by the law to legal ownership. (Ibid.) A condition to settle two hundred families on the land granted, was held to be a condition subsequent, and performance excused in equity, by circumstances and change of jurisdiction. (Ibid.) An inquisition having been taken under the Spanish authorities, by which it was found that the Indians had previously abandoned the lands granted, this was held to be res judicata. (Ibid.) The title to land which had been granted by the King of Spain, was confirmed by force of the instrument itself. (United States vs. Percheman, 7 Peters, 51; United States vs. Clarke, 9 Peters, 168; Mitchell vs. United States, Ibid., 711; Smith vs. United States, 10 Peters, 326; Garcia vs. Lee, 12 Peters, 511.) The commissioners appointed under the treaty of 1819, had power to decide conclusively upon the amount and validity of claims, but not upon the conflicting right of parties to the sums awarded. (Comegys vs. Vasse, 1 Peters, 193; S. C., 4 Washington's Circuit Court Reports, 570.) By the treaty ceding Florida to the United States, the inhabitants became entitled to all the privileges, rights, and immunities of citizens of the United States. (American Insurance Company vs. Canter, 1 Peters, 511.) By the treaty of cession, the United States obtained no rights to lands, except such as were then vested in the King of Spain. (Strother vs. Lucas, 12 Peters, 411; United States vs. Kingsley, Ibid., 476.) The obligation of perfecting titles under Spanish concessions, assumed by the United States in the Louisiana treaty, was a political obligation, to be carried out by the legislative department. (Chouteau vs. Eckhart, 2 Howard, 344.) Congress, in confirming or rejecting claims, acted as the successor of the intendant general; and both exercised in this respect a portion of sovereign power. (Ibid.) Under the ninth article of the treaty of 1819, providing for the restoration of property rescued from pirates and robbers on the high seas, it is necessary to show 1. That what is claimed falls within the description of vessels or merchandise. 2. That it has been rescued on the high seas from pirates and robbers. 3. That the asserted proprietors are the true proprietors, and have established their title by competent proof. (United States vs. The Amistad, 15 Peters, 518; S. C., 1 Hazard's U. S. Register, 177, 244.) Native Africans, unlawfully kidnapped and imported into a Spanish colony, contrary to the laws of Spain, are not merchandise; nor cau any person show that he is entitled to them as their proprietor; nor are they pirates or robbers if they rise and kill the master and take possession of the vessel to regain their liberty. (Ibid.) Native Africans unlawfully detained on board a Spanish vessel, are not bound by a treaty between the United States and Spain, but may, as foreigners to both countries, assert their rights to their liberty before our courts. (Ibid.)] |