190. In 1821 the Government of the United States had not Mexican acknowledged any Mexican Republic or State at war with republic. 191. As to the powers of consuls-see 6 Wheaton, 156, note Consuls. 192. As to the form and effect of passports to neutral ves- Passports. sels-see 6 Wheaton, Appendix, note II. p. 12. Treaty between For the Convention of 1801. between Russia and Great Bri- Russia and tain-see 6 Wheaton, Appendix, 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 Great Britain, 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 necessary. Id 545. 195. The British treaty of 1794 did not enable the next of Treaty with Great Britain. kin of a British subject who acquired land in Kentucky after 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. Id. 546. 196. The commission is conclusive proof of the national Prize. character of a public ship. The Santissima Trinidad-7, Wheaton. 285-335. 1822 197. During the existence of the civil war between Spain Spanish coloand her colonies, and previous to the acknowledgment of the Dies. 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. 357. 198. Our municipal laws do not prohibit the trade in con- Contraband 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 Treaty with Expatriation. Prize. 200. The 6th article of the Spanish treaty of 1795, only provides for the restitution of Spanish ships captured within our jurisdiction? Id. 346. 201. Quere, As to the right of expatriation. Id. 347. Supposing such a right to exi-t, it cannot be exercised without a bona file 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. 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. 203. Captures made by public ships, as well as by privateers if made in violation of our neutrality, are subject to restitution. Id. 350. id. id. 204. A condemnation as prize in the court of the captor's country, will not oust the jurisdiction of the neutral tribunal which has custody of the res capta, before its condemnation in the court of the captor. Id. 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 termination 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 employed on the cruise during which the capture was made, the delictum 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 condemnation as prize. The Arrogante Barcelones-7 Wheaton, 496. 1822. 207. The 4th article of the Spanish treaty of 1795, which 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, 2×4, 1822. 208. The exemption of foreign public ships coming into our waters under an express or implied license from the local jurisdiction, does not extend to their prize ships or goods captured in violation of our neutrality. Id. ib. 209 The capacity of private individuals (British subjects,) Alien. er of corporations, created by the Crown. in this country, or in Great Britain, to hold lands or other property in this country, was not affected by the revolution. The proper courts in this country will interfere to prevent Courts. an abuse of the trusts confided to British corporations holding lands 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 Prize. of the franchises of the foreign corporation, or of its property. The lands of British corporations in this country are pro- Treaty with tected by the 6th article of the treaty of peace of 1783, in the Great Britain. same manner as those of natural persons; and their title thus Alien. 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 Treaty. of property already vested under it; nor do treaties in general become extinguished, ipso facto, by war between the two governments. Those stipulating for a permanent arrangement of territorial and other national rights, are, at most, suspended 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 Discovery. 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. Origin of land It was a right which all asserted for themselves, and to the assertion 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 dominion to be in themselves; and claimed, and exercised as a con. sequence of this ultimate dominion. a power to grant the soil, while vet in possession of the natives. These grants have been understood by all to convey a title to the grantees, subject only to the Indian right of occupancy. Johnson v. McInfosh-8 Wheaton, 578-574. 1828. Conquest. Indian title. titles. 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 1785.) 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 states have, generally, ceded those lands to the United States They were occupied by numerous, warlike, and independent 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 intrude into that country, would be considered as an aggression which would justify war. 212 The United States maintain, as all others have maintained, 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 sovereignty, as the circumstances of the people would allow them to exercise.Id. 587. 213. Conquest gives a title, which the courts of the conId. 588. queror cannot deny. 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 incorporates himself with the Indian nation. so far as respects the property purchased. The courts of the United States cannot interpose for the protection of his title. Id. 593. By the King's proclamation in 1765, the crown reserved under its own dominion and protection, for the use of the Indians, all the lands and territories Iving 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 any purchases or settlements whatever, or taking possession of the reserved lands. Id. 594. In Virginia the complete title of the crown to vacant lands was always acknowledged; and so far as respected the authority of the crown. no distinction was taken between vacant lands and lands 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 1775. cannot be recognised by the courts of the United States. Id. 543. 215. Whether a regular sentence of condemnation in a court Prize. of the captor, or his ally, the captured property having been Neutral rights. carried infra præsidia, will preclude the courts of this country from restoring it to the original owners, where the capture was made in violation of our law, treaties and neutral obligations; yet whoever claims under such a condemnation must show that he is a bonæ fidei purchaser, for a valuable consideration, 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 Boundary. the middle of a river, the waters of the whole river must, upou River. the general principles of the law of nations, be considered as common to both nations, for all purposes of navigation as a common highway, necessary for the advantageous use of its own territorial rights and possessions. The ippollon-9 W heaton, 369. 1824. laws. 217. The municipal laws of a nation do not extend, in their Municipal operation, beyond its own territory, except as regards its own citizens; nor can a seizure for a breach of the municipal laws of one nation be lawfully made within the territory of another. Id. 570. It seems, that the rights of visitation and search for enfor- Right of search cing the revenue laws of a nation may be exercised beyond the territorial jurisdiction upon the high seas on the vessels of such nation and on foreign vessels bound to its ports. Id. $71. 218. Under the 9th article of the British treaty of 1794, it Treaty with is not necessary for the Alien to show that he was in the acG. Britain. 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 legal validity as if the parties were citizens. Hughes v. Edwards-9 Wheaton, 489-496. 1824. Alien. The title of an alien mortgagee is protected by the treaty. Power of But independent of the stipulations of the treaty he has a right regulate comCongress to to come into a court of equity and have the property sold to merce. raise the money due on the mortgage. This demand is merely 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 commercial intercourse between the United States and foreign nations, and among the several states. It does not stop at the external boundary of a state. It has no limitations, but such as are prescribed in the Constitution itself. So far as it extends it |