country wherein they resided, "pursuant to the ordinary laws governing the same." It was advised that under this stipulation Spaniards residing in Cuba were as aliens entitled to the benefit of article 44 of the alien law of that country, under which the consul of an intestate alien was entitled to intervene and administer the estate. Griggs, At. Gen., April 26, 1900, 23 Op. 93. Article IX. of the treaty with Spain of December 10, 1898, was intended to secure to Congress, so far as it could constitutionally be done, a free hand in dealing with the territory ceded by the treaty. Dorr v. United States (1904), 195 U. S. 138. Article XI. By Article XI. of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain, signed at Paris December 10, 1898, it was provided that Spaniards residing in the territories over which Spain ceded or relinquished her sovereignty should be subject in matters civil as well as criminal to the jurisdiction of the courts "pursuant to the ordinary laws governing the same," and that they should have the right " to appear before such courts and to pursue the same course as citizens of the country." Held, that these stipulations, while they secured to Spaniards the right to appear and proceed like citizens, did not make it unlawful. to give them additional privileges, and that they were entitled, in respect of the settlement of their estates, to the benefits of the alien law of 1870, this being among the ordinary laws governing the courts. Griggs, At. Gen., April 26, 1900, 23 Op. 93; For. Rel. 1901, 226. See, also, Magoon's Reports, 473, 478; Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Duke of Article XII. of the treaty provided for the finality of judicial judgments in the territories ceded or relinquished where no right of review existed under Spanish law. Magoon's Reports 486, 487, 507, 514. Article XII. As to appeals pending in Madrid, see id. 646. See Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Duke of Arcos, No. 55, Nov. 29, 1899, MS. Article XIII. By Article XIII. of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain of December 10, 1898, it was provided that Spanish scientific, literary, and artistic works, not subversive of public order in the territories ceded to the United States, should continue to be admitted free of duty into such territories for ten years from the date of the exchange of ratifications. It was ad vised that under this stipulation the works in question were entitled to continued admission into the Philippines free of import duty, as well as of duties imposed by the Philippine tariff for harbor and commercial improvements. Griggs, At. Gen., May 8, 1900, 23 Op. 115. See Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Sec. of War, March 28, 1900, 244 MS. Dom. "Referring to your note of May 25 last, relative to duties alleged to have been illegally collected on Spanish literary, scientific, and artistic works imported into the Philippine Islands, I have the honor to quote for your information the following from a report made by the military governor to the Secretary of War: "No duties have been collected, since American occupation, upon Spanish scientific, literary and artistic works not subversive of public order, except such as were collected prior to such occupation by the Spanish customs officials, and no duties have been collected upon any such articles since American occupation, except such as accord with the construction placed upon article 13 of the treaty of peace with Spain by the opinion of the Honorable the Attorney-General of the United States. "No application for a refund of duty on goods of this class has ever been made and none is now pending.' Mr. Hill, Act. Sec. of State, to Duke of Arcos, Span. min., No. 112, September 10, 1900, MS. Notes to Span. Leg. XI. 516. "Referring to your note of February 1 last, complaining of an abatement of twenty per cent of the pilotage dues Article XV. at Havana granted to Cuban and American steamers, in violation of Article XV. of the treaty of peace, I have the honor to quote for your information a report from the military governor of Cuba to the Secretary of War, from which it appears that the discrimination has been removed: "On October 27, 1899, the then military governor granted a reduction of twenty per cent in pilotage fees to vessels of Cuban and American lines connecting with the port of Havana, for the reason that they carry the Cuban mails, and during the summer and sickly season are not permitted to carry any passengers, except immunes, and only a small quantity of freight, but are obliged to keep up their regular schedules. "On December 26th, on account of a complaint of discrimination, the captain of the port of Havana was directed to continue the tariff of pilotage as to Cuban coasters only at eighty per cent, but that all other shipping in the island, whether from the United States or other countries, must be placed on the same footing, and further directed that the pilotage charge be fixed for each port, and not left to the discretion of each captain of the port. "These instructions have been carried out, and there is absolutely no discrimination now, except as to Cuban coasters, who still have the twenty per cent reduction." " Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Duke of Arcos, Span. min., No. 83, March 21, 1900, MS. Notes to Spanish Leg. XI. 488. 6. CAROLINE ISLANDS. § 888. President Cleveland, in his annual message of December 8, 1885, referred to the dispute that had arisen between Germany and Spain relative to dominion over the Caroline Islands. He stated that extensive interests of American citizens had grown up in those parts during the preceding thirty years, and that, while the United States. held aloof from the proprietary issues raised between the powers in question, it expected that nothing in the contention between them should unfavorably affect American citizens carrying on a peaceful commerce or domiciled there, and that he had so informed the Governments of Spain and Germany. The dispute between Germany and Spain was adjusted under the mediation of the Pope by a protocol signed at Rome December 17, 1885. The sovereignty of Spain over the islands was conceded, while various privileges were granted to Germany. The Spanish government gave the most ample assurances that the interests of American citizens should not be interfered with or injured. Difficulties, however, subsequently arose at Ponape, and the American missionaries were expelled from the islands. The United States demanded an idemnity, and at length obtained the sum of $17,500; but in accepting it the American minister at Madrid. was instructed to make it clear that the United States did not waive its demand for the return of the American missionaries. In 1899 the islands were ceded by Spain to Germany. See President Harrison, annual messages, Dec. 9, 1891, and Dec. 6, 1892; See, also, For. Rel. 1894, 590-598; Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to Mr. Taylor, The assurance of Spain as to the protection of the interests of American In 1886 the German government renounced its right, under Art. V. of the protocol, to establish a naval station in the islands. (For. Rel. 1887, 1023.) In instruction No. 381, Aug. 3, 1885, to Mr. Foster, then American minister at Madrid, Mr. Bayard, Secretary of State, referring to a complaint that an American trader had committed crimes against natives in his employ in the Island of Yap, suggested that if, as was reported, orders had been issued at Madrid to establish the effective jurisdiction of Spain over the Caroline Islands, the Spanish authorities, if it should be determined that they had jurisdiction, might cause the offender to be arrested and brought to the nearest court competent to try the case. (MS. Inst. Spain, XX. 79.) A copy of this instruction was enclosed by Mr. Bayard, Sept. 7, 1885, to Mr. Pendleton, then American minister at Berlin. (MS. Inst. Germany, XVI. 547.) XXXVIII. SWEDEN AND NORWAY. § 889. "Sweden is the only power in Europe, that, voluntarily, offered its friendship to the United States. Without being solicited, proposals were made for a treaty before the independence of the colonies was even recognized by Great Britain. A general authority was given to the commissioners abroad, Franklin, Adams, Jay and Laurens to conclude treaties of amity and commerce, but in the early part of the Revolution war, Congress did not direct applications specially to be made to any of the northern powers. And most of the other courts, to whom agents were sent, either refused to receive them, or contrived, under some pretext or other, to avoid all appearance of giving aid or countenance to the American Confederacy. This caution or indifference can not be matter of censure or surprise. Few European courts probably thought, at the commencement of the Revolution, that the colonies could prevail; few chose to take the risk of involving themselves in a maritime war with England. With the name of colonies, weakness and subjection were then naturally associated. "The conduct of Sweden was marked with frankness, and with a very friendly character. America could not expect much aid from that country, or suppose that her example could have a great deal of influence on other nations. But it was highly gratifying that a State renowned as Sweden always has been, for the bravery and love of independence of her people, should manifest a sympathy in the arduous struggles for liberty of a distant country. The proposal for a treaty was entirely unsought for on the part of Congress. The only account, we possess of the transaction, is in one of the letters of Dr. Franklin. The Swedish minister at Paris, the Count de Creutz, called on him towards the end of June 1782, by the direction of his Sovereign, Gustavus II., to enquire if he was furnished with the necessary powers to conclude a treaty with Sweden. In the course of the conversation he remarked, '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 voluntarily offered its friendship to the United States without being solicited.' Dr. Franklin communicated the application of the Swedish envoy to Congress, and instructions were shortly after sent him to agree on a treaty. The treaty was concluded at Paris on the 3d April 1783, by Dr. Franklin with the Count Gustavus Philip de Creutz, and in its provisions it resembles others made, with the powers of Europe at that time. This is the only treaty we have with that country till 1816, but the most friendly relations have, however, been always maintained." 1 Lyman's Diplomacy of the United States, 447 et seq. It was held by the Attorney-General in 1819 that Article VI. of the treaty between the United States and Sweden of April 3, 1873, in relation to rights of inheritance, applied to personal property only and not to real estate. His opinion was formally transmitted to the Swedish government, and is not known ever to have been questioned. Wirt, At. Gen., July 30, 1819, 1 Op. 275; Mr. Wharton, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Stark, May 13, 1891, 181 MS. Dom. Let. 682. Article VI. of the treaty of 1783 was revived by Article XII. of the treaty of September 4, 1819, and again by Article XVII. of the treaty of July 4, 1827. (Mr. Wharton, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Stark, May 13, 1891, 181 MS. Dom. Let. 682.) It was also advised by Attorney-General Wirt, in the opinion above cited, that there was no power in the General Government to alter by treaty the laws of the several States with regard to the inheritance of real property, but this view has not been sustained by the courts. (Ibid.) President J. Q. Adams's message of February 6, 1828, communicating to the Senate a treaty of commerce and navigation between the United States and His Majesty the King of Sweden and Norway, concluded at Stockholm on July 4, 1827, and the ratifications of which were exchanged on January 18, 1828, is given in 6 Am. State Papers For. Rel. 829. As to the most-favored-nation clauses in this treaty, see supra, § 766. As to the transportation of the remains of Capt. John Ericsson to Sweden, his native country, see For. Rel. 1890, 706, 707, 708, 714-720. XXXIX. SWITZERLAND. $ 890. Article I. of the treaty of 1850, providing that citizens of the United States shall be at liberty to prosecute and defend their rights before courts of justice in Switzerland in the same manner as native citizens, gives the right to maintain an action against the government as such right is given to citizens of Switzerland. Lobsiger's Case, 5 C. Cls. 687. As to the right to take title to real estate under this treaty, see Hauenstein . Lynham, 100 U. S. 483, 488; and supra, § 738. H. Doc. 551-vol 5-55 |