Page images

How long to continue.

hand, and by the Congress of the United States on the other. Such assent having been given, the said articles shall remain in force for the period of ten years from the date at which they may come into operation; and further until the expiration of two years after either of the high contracting parties shall have given notice to the other of its wish to terminate the same; each of the high contracting parties being at liberty to give such notice to the other at the end of the said period of ten years or at any time afterward.

[ocr errors]

The decision as to

boundary line be

States and British

the Rocky Moun

tains under the first

article of the treaty

be left to the arbitra

of Germany.


Whereas it was stipulated by Article I of the treaty concluded at Washington on the 15th of June, 1846, between the United portion of the States and Her Britannic Majesty, that the line of boundary tween the United between the territories of the United States and those of Possessions west of Her Britannic Majesty, from the point on the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude up to which it had already been of June 15, 1846, to ascertained, should be continued westward along the said tion of the Emperor parallel of north latitude" to the middle of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver's Island, and thence southerly, through the middle of the said channel and of Fuca Straits, to the Pacific Ocean;" and whereas the Commissioners appointed by the two high contracting parties to determine that portion of the boundary which runs southerly through the middle of the channel aforesaid, were unable to agree upon the same; and whereas the Government of Her Britannic Majesty claims that such boundary line should, under the terms of the treaty above recited, be run through the Rosario Straits, and the Government of the United States claims that it should be run through the Canal de Haro, it is agreed that the respective claims of the Government of the United States and of the Government of Her Britannic Majesty shall be submitted to the arbitration and award of His Majesty the Emperor of Germany, who, having regard to the above-mentioned article of the said treaty, shall decide thereupon, finally and without appeal, which of those claims is most in accordance with the true interpretation of the treaty of June 15, 1846.

its form and effect,


The award of His Majesty the Emperor of Germany shall be considered Award of the Em- as absolutely final and conclusive; and full effect shall be peror of Germany; given to such award without any objection, evasion, or and how delivered. delay whatsoever. Such decision shall be given in writing and dated; it shall be in whatsoever form His Majesty may choose to adopt; it shall be delivered to the Representatives or other public Agents of the United States and of Great Britain, respectively, who may be actually at Berlin, and shall be considered as operative from the day of the date of the delivery thereof.

two parties to be

bitrator: how and


The written or printed case of each of the two parties, accompanied The case of the by the evidence offered in support of the same, shall be laid before the Ar laid before His Majesty the Emperor of Germany within six within what time. months from the date of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty, and a copy of such case and evidence shall be communicated by each party to the other, through their respective Representatives at Berlin.

The high contracting parties may include in the evidence to be con

sidered by the Arbitrator such documents, official correspondence, and other official or public statements bearing on the subject of the reference as they may consider necessary to the support of their respective cases. After the written or printed case shall have been communicated by each party to the other, each party shall have the power of drawing up and laying before the Arbitrator a second and definitive statement, if it think fit to do so, in reply to the case of the other party so communicated, which definitive statement shall be so laid before the Arbitrator, and also be mutually communicated in the same manner as aforesaid, by each party to the other, within six months from the date of laying the first statement of the case before the Arbitrator.


Papers and docu

If, in the case submitted to the Arbitrator, either party shall specify or allude to any report or document in its own exclusive possession without annexing a copy, such party shall be ments. bound, if the other party thinks proper to apply for it, to furnish that party with a copy thereof, and either party may call upon the other, through the Arbitrator, to produce the originals or certified copies of any papers adduced as evidence, giving in each instance such reasonable notice as the Arbitrator may require. And if the Arbitrator should desire further elucidation or evidence with regard to any point contained in the statements laid before him, he shall be at liberty to require it from either party, and he shall be at liberty to hear one Counsel or Agent for each party, in relation to any matter, and at such time, and in such manner, as he may think fit.


Further evidence.

Agents of each Gov


The Representatives or other public Agents of the United States and of Great Britain at Berlin, respectively, shall be considered as the Agents of their respective Governments to conduct ernment before the their cases before the Arbitrator, who shall be requested to address all his communications and give all his notices to such Representatives or other public Agents, who shall represent their respective Governments generally, in all matters connected with the arbitration.


ceed in said arbitration in person, or,

It shall be competent to the Arbitrator to proceed in the said arbitration, and all matters relating thereto, as and when he shall Arbitrator to prosee fit, either in person, or by a person or persons named by him for that purpose, either in the presence or absence of &c. either or both Agents, and either orally or by written discussion or otherwise.


The Arbitrator may, if he think fit, appoint a Secretary, or Clerk, for the purposes of the proposed arbitration, at such rate of Secretary or Clerk. remuneration as he shall think proper. This, and all other

expenses of and connected with the said arbitration, shall be provided for as hereinafter stipulated.


The Arbitrator shall be requested to deliver, together with his award, an account of all the costs and expenses which he may have Costs and expenses, been put to in relation to this matter, which shall forthwith and how to be paid. be repaid by the two Governments in equal moieties.



The Arbitrator shall be requested to give his award in writing as early as convenient after the whole case on each side shall have and when and how been laid before him, and to deliver one copy thereof to each of the said Agents.

Form of award, to be delivered.


The present treaty shall be duly ratified by the President of the United States of America, by and with the advice and consent Ratifications. of the Senate thereof, and by Her Britannic Majesty; and the ratifications shall be exchanged either at Washington or at London within six months from the date hereof, or earlier if possible.

In faith whereof, we, the respective Plenipotentiaries, have signed this treaty and have hereunto affixed our seals.


Done in duplicate at Washington the eighth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one.

[L. S.]


L. S.

L. S.

L. S.

L. S.

L. S.

L. S.

L. S.

L. S.

[L. S.]











The fifth article of the treaty of peace of 1783 applies to those cases where an actual confiscation has taken place, and stipulates that in such cases the interest of all persons having a lien upon such lands shall be preserved. That clause of the treaty preserved the lien of a mortgagee of confiscated lands which at the time of the treaty remained unsold. (Higginson v. Mein, 4 Cranch, 415.)

The treaties with Great Britain of 1783 and 1794 only provide for titles existing at the time those treaties were made, and not for titles subsequently acquired. Actual possession of property is not necessary to give the party the benefit of the treaty. (Blight's Lessee v. Rochester, 7 Wheat., 535.)

Where J. D., an alien and British subject, came into the United States subsequent to the treaty of 1783, and, before the treaty of 1794 was signed, died seized of lands, it was held that the title of his heirs to the land was not protected by the treaty of 1794. (Ibid.)

Thomas Scott, a native of South Carolina, died in 1782, intestate, seized of land on James Island, having two daughters, Ann and Sarah, both born in South Carolina before the Declaration of Independence. Sarah married D. P., a citizen of South Carolina, and died in 1802 entitled to one-half of the estate. The British took possession of James Island and Charleston in February and May, 1780; and in 1781 Ann Scott married Joseph Shanks, a British officer, and at the evacuation of Charleston in 1782 she went to England with her husband, where she remained until her death in 1801. She left five children, born in England. They claimed the other moiety of the real estate of Thomas Scott, in right of their mother, under the ninth article of the treaty of peace between this country and Great Britain of the 19th of November, 1794. Held, that they were entitled to recover and hold the same. (Shanks et al.v. Dupont et al., 3 Peters, 242.)

All British-born subjects whose allegiance Great Britain has never renounced ought, upon general principles of interpretation, to be held within the intent, as they certainly are within the words, of the treaty of 1794. (Ibid., 250.)

The treaty of 1783 acted upon the state of things as it existed at that period. It took the actual state of things as its basis. All those, whether natives or otherwise,

who then adhered to the American States, were virtually absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown; all those who then adhered to the British Crown were deemed and held subjects of that Crown. The treaty of peace was a treaty operating between States and the inhabitants thereof. (Ibid., 274.)

The several States which compose this Union, so far, at least, as regarded their municipal regulations, became entitled from the time when they declared themselves independent to all the rights and powers of sovereign States, and did not derive them from concessions of the British King. The treaty of peace contains a recognition of the independence of these States, not a grant of it. The laws of the several State governments passed after the Declaration of Independence were the laws of sovereign States, and as such were obligatory upon the people of each State. (M'Ilvaine v. Coxe's Lessee, 4 Cranch, 209.)

The property of British corporations in this country is protected by the sixth 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 ninth article of the treaty of 1794, so that it could not be forfeited by any intermediate legislative act or other proceeding for the defect of alienage. (The Society for Propagating the Gospel, &c., v. New Haven, 8 Wheat., 464.)

The treaty of peace between the United States and Great Britain prevents the operation of the act of limitations of Virginia upon British debts contracted before that treaty. (Hopkirk v. Bell, 3 Cranch, 454.)

The treaty of peace of 1783 between the United States and Great Britain was a mere recognition of pre-existing rights as to territory, and no territory was thereby acquired by way of cession from Great Britain. (Harcourt et al. v. Gaillard, 12 Wheat., 523.)

The act of the legislature of Virginia of 1799, entitled "An act concerning escheats and forfeitures from British subjects," and under which a debtor to a subject of Great Britain had, in conformity to the provisions of that law, during the war paid into the loan-office of the State a portion of the debt due by him, did not operate to protect the debtor from a suit for such debt after the treaty of peace in 1783. The statute of Virginia, if it was valid and the legislature could pass such a law, was annulled by the fourth article of the treaty; and, under this article, suits for the recovery of debts so due might be maintained, the provisions of the Virginia law to the contrary notwithstanding. (Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall., 199.)

Debts due in the United States to British subjects before the war of the Revolution, though sequestered or paid into the State treasuries, revived by the treaty of peace of 1783, and the creditors are entitled to recover them from the original debtors." (Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 Dall., 1.)

G. C., born in the colony of New York, went to England in 1738, where he resided until his decease; and being seized of lands in New York, he, on the 30th of November, 1776, in England, devised the same to the defendant and E. C. as tenants in common, and died so seized on the 10th of December, 1776. The defendant and E. C. having entered and becoming possessed, E. C., on the 3d December, 1791, bargained and sold to the defendant all his interest. The defendant and E. C. were both born in England long before the Revolution. On the 22d March, 1791, the legislature of New York passed an act to enable the defendant to purchase lands and to hold all other lands which he might then be entitled to within the State, by purchase or descent, in fee simple, and to sell and dispose of the same, in the same manner as any natural-born citizen might do. The treaty between the United States and Great Britain of 1794 contains the following provision: "Article IX. It is agreed that British subjects who now hold lands in the territories of the United States, and American citizens who now hold lands in the dominions of His Majesty, shall continue to hold them according to the nature and tenure of their respective estates and titles therein, and may grant, sell or devise the same to whom they please, in like manner as if they were natives; and that neither they nor their heirs or assigns shall, so far as respects the said lands and the legal remedies incident thereto, be considered as aliens." The defendant, at the time of the action brought, still continued to be a British subject. Held, that he was entitled to hold the lands so devised to him by G. C. and transferred to him by E. C. (New York v. Clarke, 3 Wheat., 1.)

By the treaty of 1783 the United States succeeded to all the rights that existed in the King of France in that part of Canada which now forms the State of Michigan prior to its conquest by Great Britain in 1750, and among them that of dealing with seigniorial estates for a forfeiture for non-fulfilment of the conditions of the fief. (United States v. Repentigny, 5 Wallace, 211.)

Lands granted by the acts of March 3, 1807, in fulfilment of the second article of the treaty of 1794, were not donations. (Forsyth v. Reynolds, 15 Howard, 358.)

The reciprocity treaty of 1854 did not release a forfeiture previously incurred. (Pine Lumber, 4 Blatchford's Circuit Court Reports.)

There is nothing in the treaties with Great Britain which gives a British merchant resident in a port of the seceded States during the war an immunity from the general principles of public law applicable to resident neutral merchants. (The Sarah Starr, Blatchford's Prize Cases, 69.)


GREECE, 1837.



Desire to maintain

The United States of America and His Majesty the King of Greece, equally animated with the sincere desire of maintaining the good understanding, relations of good understanding which have hitherto so happily subsisted between their respective States; of extending, also, and consolidating the commercial intercourse between them; and convinced that this object cannot better be accomplished than by adopting the system of an entire freedom of navigation, and a perfect reciprocity, based upon principles of equity, equally beneficial to both countries; have, in consequence, agreed to enter into negotiations for the conclusion of a treaty of commerce and navigation, and for that purpose have appointed Plenipotentiaries:

The President of the United States of America, Andrew Stevenson, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the Negotiators. United States near the court of Her Britannic Majesty; and His Majesty the King of Greece, Spiridion Tricoupi, Councillor of State on Special Service, his Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary near the same court, Grand Commander of the Royal Order of the Saviour, Grand Cross of the American Order of Isabella the Catholic;

Who, after having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon the following articles:

wide in the teritories of the other.


The citizens and subjects of each of the two high contracting parties Citizens of each may, with all security for their persons, vessels, and cargoes, party at liberty to re- freely enter the ports, places, and rivers of the territories of the other, wherever foreign commerce is permitted. They shall be at liberty to sojourn and reside in all parts whatsoever of said territories; to rent and occupy houses and warehouses for their commerce; and they shall enjoy, generally, the most entire security and protection in their mercantile transactions, on conditions of their submitting to the laws and ordinances of the respective countries.


Greek vessels arriving, either laden or in ballast, into the ports of the United States of America, from whatever place they may Tonnage duties, &c. come, shall be treated, on their entrance, during their stay, and at their departure, upon the same footing as national vessels coming

« PreviousContinue »