with the freedom of contract, the law, pertaining as it does only to a certain set of employes, is objectionable on that ground. New York has a similar statute in chapter 32 of the General Laws, codified from chapter 415, Laws of 1897. While it is true that upon the question of the right of legislatures to restrict the liberty of contract in lawful callings as to terms and hours of labor, the decisions of the courts of the different States are in conflict, it would seem to us that Judge Blodgett has clearly the better of the argument.

has been obliged to remain in idleness and to
suffer great pain, the duration of which is un-
certain; yet it is urged that because he was
unable to give the notice prescribed by the
charter of Port Chester, within a period of
thirty days from the date of the accident, he is
to be denied the right of a judicial determina-
tion of the amount of his damages and a
remedy for the wrong he has suffered through
the negligence of the defendant.
clearly depriving the plaintiff of his property
right in his cause of action; it is denying to
him the rights and privileges for which he, in
common with other members of the body
politic, entered into a state of society, and
which were intended to be preserved to him
by the provisions of sections I and 6 of article
I of the Constitution, already quoted."

This is

Philippine war claims against the United States arise from various causes. The greater number are from acts of the insurgents, as the burning of the city of Iloilo and also the district of Tondo, and

The second Appellate Division of this State, in the case of Charles H. Williams against the village of Port Chester, held to be unconstitutional that section of the village charter which provides that no action for damages for injuries can be maintained against such corpo- LEGAL ASPECT of filipino WAR CLAIMS. ration unless written notice of such claim shall have been presented within thirty days from the time such injuries were received. The accident to Mr. Williams occurred on January 4. 1898. He did not serve notice on the village officers until forty-three days had passed, and in his complaint he gave as a reason for his omission that he was confined to his bed and "unable to transact any business, and was by the said acts of the defendant prevented from presenting to its president or treasurer within thirty days after the said 4th day of January a notice in writing with respect to said occurrence."

Justice Woodward, who gives the opinion of the court, reviews exhaustively the constitutional provisions that bear on the subject and also goes back to Magna Charta and the colonial laws of New York. After quoting that provision of the State Constitution which says that no member of this State shall "be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law," and that no member of this State shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers," he continues: "The plaintiff in the present instance, accepting the allegation of his complaint to be true, has suffered a wrong at the hands of the defendant; he has sustained injuries which have unfitted him for the performance of labor, and

general destruction of property, as a matter of military necessity, or as probably supposed by the authors of the destruction in many instances, in furtherance of the insurrection.

The burning of Tondo may be taken as an illustra

tion of the destruction of property on a large scale by the insurgents with no apparent object in view, unless to cover an attack on the city of Manila or stir up the native population. Tondo is a district. of Manila, the most densely populated of the city. It was destroyed by fire on the 21st and 22d of February, 1899. The inhabitants were of the lower class,

The

strongly in sympathy with the insurgents.
houses were mostly dwellings of the poor, constructed
of bamboo and nepa, of but little value separately,
though the aggregate of the loss must have been
considerable, nearly the entire district having been
destroyed by the conflagration.

The Tondo fire occurred only seventeen days after

the beginning of hostilities between the insurgents and United States forces, the battle for the possession of Manila having been fought on the fourth of February. From the evidence submitted before the board was asked of the government for losses sustained of claims, in certain cases, in which compensation through the fire, it would seem that Tondo was fired by natives; perhaps, with the design of exciting a riot, and in the confusion looting the city or destroying other sections of it. Whatever may have been the design of the conspirators, the United States

would not under any principle of international law be legally responsible for the acts of insurgents or natives in setting fire to a division of the city, espe

Three men were standing at the window of a cotton factory just after dinner. The factory was situated in the barrio of Tondo, Manila; the time alluded to was at the close of the fire in Tondo, before referred to. The men were operatives in the mill, two were Englishmen, the third, the engineer, was a South American. While standing at the window, looking out, The troublesome days immediately following the three United States soldiers approached, raised American occupation of Manila were marked, as was their rifles and fired, killing two and wounding the unavoidable under the circumstances, by acts of lawthird man. Three claims were based against the lessness. Soldiers would frequently steal or obtain government upon this transaction. The Mill Company claimed compensation for the damages sustained through the loss of the services of its employes. The wounded man submitted a demand for personal injuries. The widow asked compensation for herself and orphaned children for the death of husband and father.

every location, from the petty peddler with pack on back to the wealthiest merchant of Manila, and is prominent among the petitioners to Uncle Sam for losses alleged to have been sustained through the destruction of Iloilo.

The Iloilo claimants allege various causes of complaint against the United States as reasons for their recovery, the most prominent being delay in the occu

across from Manila, about ten miles distant. This town was the location of a Spanish navy yard; in its immediate vicinity was fought the battle of Manila Bay; around it may yet be seen the wrecks of the Spanish fleet, several arising from the water where they sunk on the first of May; two or three have been raised to float under the American flag. The day following the battle crowds paraded the streets of the town, crying "Viva Americana." Not satis-pation of the city after the arrival of the troops, and fied with manifesting their appreciation of the defeat of the enemy, they entered and plundered private houses, appropriating property for which in several cases compensation has been asked from the United States, for which losses, however, if proven, we think the government is in no way legally responsible.

delay in the sailing of the occupying forces from Manila, and the fact that the attack was commenced on the city by the navy before the expiration of the notice served upon the foreign residents to remove their persons and property from the city before an assault should be made, great reliance being placed One claimant, a native woman, states that during upon this last-named cause of complaint. Most the excitement following the naval battle, while the of the circumstances relied upon by the Iloilo crowd were filling the streets, her house or store claimants as the basis of their claim against the was entered and silver taken to the amount of eleven United States are found in General Otis' first hundred dollars. She alleges that the money was in annual report. The inception of the movea basket, which, for security, she had placed under ment against Iloilo was a suggestion from a chair on which she sat and covered the basket with the Spanish commandant of that city, General Rios, her skirts for concealment. Her precautions, how- who, in December, dispatched intelligence to the miliever, proved unavailing; two men entered and ran- tary governor at Manila that he was ready to sursacked the house, discovering the basket containing render the city to him, and suggested that he disthe treasure, and taking it away, silver and all. Sev- patch sufficient force to take and retain possession of eral losses of this nature were reported from Cavite, the place; this overture of the Spanish commander occurring, as alleged, shortly following the first of was repeated two or three times, the general in his May, while personal property was undoubtedly law- last communication urging acceptance of his proposal, lessly taken. The amounts, as claimed in individual as he was pressed by the insurgents and had no object cases, may admit of serious doubt, and in case of the in longer holding the city. During the month of government's legal liability, or inclination to pay as December the bankers and business men of Iloilo a matter of bounty, should be carefully scrutinized. also sent a petition to Manila asking American proThe Cavite claimants allege the United States is tection. The proposition of General Rios was not liable for the reason that, after expelling the Spanish | acted upon until December twenty-sixth, on which forces, a sufficient number of United States troops date an expedition under General Miller sailed for were not stationed in the town to maintain order, and the government is liable for the loss of private property resulting from mob violence committed under the American flag.

That a government is not legally liable for the unauthorized acts of its soldiers has been well established as the law of the United States, and is, I think, the universal rule among the nations of the civilized world. Among the Filipino war claims, those presenting the most intricate and interesting questions of international law are those arising from the attack on and capture of the city of Iloilo. Iloilo was taken by the United States troops on the 11th of February, 1899. The insurgents occupying the city evacuated and set it on fire, not waiting the landing of the United States troops. Fully one-half the city was destroyed by this action of the insurgents and probably much more than half in value, the property destroyed belonging largely to foreign residents, in whose hands was the greater part of the business of the city, the principal foreign nations represented being Spain, England, Germany, Switzerland, and the always present trader from China. The Chinese in the Philippines are found everywhere and wherever found are the most industrious of people and generally engaged in trade. The Chinese trader is in

Iloilo.

The expedition, which sailed the day after Christmas, arrived before the city on the morning of the twenty-eighth, remaining in the harbor till the eleventh of February before making any attempt to forcibly occupy the city, the intervening forty-five days being spent in what proved to be fruitless negotiations for its peaceable surrender to the beleaguering forces.

The day before the attack on the city a notice was communicated to the foreign vice-consuls by General Miller as follows: "In view of anticipated hostilities, notice is hereby given you to cause all persons who are under your protection to seek a place of safety before 5 A. M. Sunday, the twelfth inst. Hostilities may commence any time after that time and date." The attack on the city was begun by one of the gunboats belonging to the expedition, which opened fire on the trenches before the city at about 9.30 in the morning of the eleventh. The attack, thus prematurely begun, deprived the business men, as they allege, of all opportunity to remove their property from their warehouses, which were destroyed by fire, set by the insurgents, as they retired from the city on the approach of the United States forces.

The Iloilo claimants place peculiar reliance upon the archipelago. The United States military governthe delay in attacking the city after the arrival of ment at Manila were making every effort to prevent the United States troops in the bay. As before a union with the Malolas government, and with stated, the assault was not made until the eleventh this object in view, abstained from any attempt of February, forty-five days after the arrival of the to take forcible possession of the Visayan metropolis, expedition before the city, the intervening time being and spent a month and a half in fruitless negotiation spent in negotiation and watching the course of for its voluntary surrender by the inhabitants. Conevents in Manila. The military situation at this ciliatory action was pursued in accordance with injuncture was critical. The relations between Aguin- structions from Washington. "Be conciliatory, but aldo and the military authorities of the United States firm," was the instruction from the president to Genwere becoming more and more strained. The friendly eral Otis. The officers, from General Miller down, intercourse between the Americans and Filipinos at fretted and fumed over their prolonged inaction in the commencement was short lived. The insurgent Iloilo bay. The Iowa regiment was sent to Manila, leaders very soon became suspicious of the intentions that the troops might be landed for sanitary reasons, of the United States, which suspicion rapidly the regiment having been on shipboard since leaving ripened into dislike, dislike into aversion and aversion culminated into open war.

It is interesting to follow the course of events subsequent to the first of May. Previous to that memorable date, and after the beginning of hostilities with Spain, the United States consuls at Manila and Hong Kong were loud in their praises of the insurgents and their leader.

San Francisco, and were replaced by Tennessee troops, who arrived just previous to the attack on the city. The wearisome waiting continued, however, in pursuance of the policy of conciliation, until after the outbreak at Manila, the final order to occupy the city not being issued until February eighth, four days after the commencement of the Tagal war.

It subsequently appeared that the native negotiators employed by General Otis were in the secret service of Aguinaldo, having received instructions from him before setting out on the expedition, and

Their dispatches are brimming over with praises of their conduct as compared with that of the Spaniards, and dwell upon the inclination of the insurgent leaders to become incorporated with the United States; this enthusiasm culminated with Dewey's probably earnestly desirous to plunge the Visayans victory; whether the enthusiasm of the consuls somewhat colored their narrative of current events, or whether at the first it was well founded, I will not undertake to state, but the enthusiastic welcome tendered to the American liberator was in a few months changed to the volleys of musketry during the first battle for the possession of the capital of the archipelago.

The city of Iloilo, the metropolis of the Visayans, was the second city of importance in the islands. While its occupation by the United States was greatly to be desired, it was also very essential, at that time, that its occupation be secured by peaceable means, as a conflict with the Visayans was, if possi-' ble, to be averted. At this critical period such a consummation was by no means impossible, as the Visayans were naturally jealous of and hostile to the Tagals. The great tribe occupying the group of islands between the Island of Luzon and Mindanao are the most numerous of any of the families of the Philippine archipelago, numbering some two millions of people, occupying perhaps the richest portion of the country. At the time the expedition against Iloilo set out from Manila, and down to the fourth of February, the Tagalogs, under Aguinaldo, confronted the United States troops in the vicinity of Manila, the hostility increasing until it culminated in the first conflict between our forces and the insurgents for the possession of that city.

into war with the United States, thwarting every move of General Miller, while trusted by him to bring affairs to a peaceful conclusion, which action, however, would be regarded by the Filipino as a triumph of diplomacy. Viewed in the light of after events, the delay in taking prompt possession of Iloilo was undoubtedly a mistake, as all negotiation was thrown away on the leaders of the people, who were heart and soul committed to the insurgent government, with which they were in full sympathy, and the success of which they supposed to forward their own individual ambitions and interests. It is also, I think, undoubtedly true that the immediate occupation of the city would have been unopposed and no loss of life or property resulted. Notwithstanding all this, the course pursued was the only wise one to have been taken at the time and under the circumstances. Conciliation was necessary to avoid precipitating the Visayans into the insurrection; as soon as it was apparent that we must contend with Visayan as well as Tagal, then the blow was struck and the city taken.

It is unnecessary, however, to dwell upon the merits of the case and consider the question whether the course pursued by General Miller was or was not judicious, or whether the policy of conciliation recommended by the president was wise or unwise, it being, I think, an undisputed principle of international law that the court will not inquire into the motive An attempt to take forcible possession of Iloilo was of the chief magistrate or the commanding officer of likely to precipitate hostilities with the Visayans. The the army; that the discretion of either civil or miliinsurgent government at Malolas were urging them tary chief will not be inquired into or interfered to cast their lot with their countrymen and make with. Should claimants against the government be common effort with them for the independence of permitted to question the wisdom of the course pur

sued by the administration, or criticise the conduct or subjects against the other government that may of a military campaign, then would the government have arisen since the beginning of the late insurrection in Cuba, and prior to the exchange of ratifications of the present treaty, incuding all claims for indemnity for the cost of the war.