instance in the presence of the umpire.' The convention expressly required that the umpire should, if required, hear one person on each side, on behalf of each government, and that he should consult with the commissioners before rendering his final decision. This provision, or rather the wise practice under it, made the umpire substantially a member of the commission and did much to obviate the inconveniences, the delays, the double arguments, the waste of effort, the temptation to disagree, and the opportunity and incentive to claimants to attempt to concentrate personal influence, that generally and to some extent inevitably result from having two or four commissioners and an umpire, instead of a board of three or five commissioners. Jurisdiction of the The jurisdiction of the commission embraced, as it was defined in Article I. of the convention, "all claims on the part of corporations, companies or private individuals, citizens of the United States, upon the government of her Britannic Majesty, and all claims on the part of corporations, companies or private individuals, subjects of her Britannic Majesty, upon the government of the United States, which may have been presented to either government for its interposition with the other since the signature of the treaty of peace and friendship, concluded between the United States of America and Great Britain at Ghent, on the 24th of December, 1814, and which yet remain unsettled, as well as any other such claims, which may be presented within the time specified in Article III. hereinafter." By Article III., to which reference was thus made, it was provided that "every claim" should be "presented to the commissioners within six months from the day of their first meeting, unless in any case where reasons for delay shall be established to the satisfaction of the commissioners or of the arbitrator or umpire, in the event of the commissioners differing in opinion thereupon; and then, and in any such case, the period for presenting the claim may be extended to any time not exceeding three months longer." It was expressly agreed "that no claim arising out of any transaction of a date prior to December 24, 1814," should be admissible under the convention. The commissioners were required to examine and decide every claim within one year from the day of their first meeting; and they, and, in case they differed, the umpire, were empowered "to 'S. Ex. Doc. 103, 34 Cong. 1 sess. 44, 46, 48. decide in each case whether any claim has or has not been duly made, preferred, and laid before them, either wholly, or to any and what extent, according to the true intent and meaning of this convention." Procedure. In the investigation and decision of claims the commissioners were authorized to proceed in such order and in such manner as they might think proper, but upon such evidence or information only as should be furnished by or on behalf of their respective governments; and they were bound to receive and peruse all written documents or statements which might be presented to them by or on behalf of their respective governments in support of or in answer to any claim. All decisions of the commissioners or the umpire were required to be in writing, and to be signed by them respectively, and were to be final and conclusive on each claim decided by them. Provision as to It was provided that all sums awarded by the commissioners, or by the umpire, on ac count of any claim should be paid by the one government to the other, as the case might be, within twelve months after the date of the decision, without interest, and without any deduction, except that the whole expenses of the commission, including contingent expenses, should be defrayed by a ratable deduction on the amount of the sums awarded, provided always that such deduction should not exceed the rate of 5 per cent on the sums awarded, any deficiency to be defrayed by the two governments in equal moieties. As to the amount of the expenses, the convention provided that, while each government should pay its own commissioner, the salary of each commissioner should be the same and should not exceed $3,000, or £620, a year; that the salary of the umpire should be determined by mutual consent at the close of the commission; and that the salary of the clerk should not exceed $1,500, or £310, a year. Extension of the As frequently happens in such cases, the amount of business that came before the commission was much larger than was anticipated. From the 15th of September 1853 to the 12th of June 1854 the commission held sixty-seven sessions, and on the latter day "took into consideration the propriety of requesting from the two governments an extension of the time originally assigned for the termination of the commission, the better to enable them to dispose of the very great and unanticipated amount of business which had devolved upon them; and a letter was drawn up by them to the American minister, and to her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, recommending the extension of the commission for four months." In consequence of this representation, Mr. Marcy, Secretary of State, and Mr. Crampton, British minister, concluded at Washington on July 17, 1854, a convention extending the existence of the commission for a period not exceeding four months from the 15th of the following September, should such extension be deemed necessary by the commissioners, or by the umpire, in case of their disagreement. But it was agreed that nothing in the new convention should in anywise alter or extend the time originally fixed for the presentation of the claims. Adjournment of After June 12, 1854, the commission held sixty-seven sessions more, making in all from the day of its first meeting a hundred and thirty-four sessions. Its last meeting was on January 15, 1855. On that day the commissioners met with the umpire for the consideration of claims remaining undisposed of. This purpose was accomplished by the announcement of the umpire's decision in two cases. Directions were given for the collection of all accounts and expenditures incurred during the sittings of the commission, and for the completion of its records and proceedings. The joint report of the commissioners to each of the two governments was then drawn up and signed, and the business of the commission terminated. The whole number of claims presented to the American Claims. commission was 115. Of these, some of which embraced numerous items, 75 were against the United States and 40 against Great Britain. Of their gross amount no computation was made, and none is possible from the records, but it reached far into the millions. Of the American claims against Great Britain, 12 were allowed, 27 dismissed, and 1 withdrawn. In the claims that were allowed, 2 of the awards were by the commissioners and 10 by the umpire. Of the 27 claims that were disallowed, 23 were dismissed by the commissioners and 4 by the umpire. The total amount awarded to American claimants was $329,734.16, or, at the rate of exchange established by the commissioners of $4.84 to the pound sterling, £68,131 74d. The grounds of dismissal, in the cases in which any were assigned, were various; but, except in certain cases where the umpire delivered opinions, they were stated in such manner as to disclose nothing of the reasoning. Of the claims that were allowed, two were for customs duties improperly collected, in one case at the Bay of Islands, in New Zealand, in 1840 and 1841, and in the other at Halifax in 1822. In the latter case the vessel, which had put in merely on her way to a market, was required to enter and pay duties, and was thus forced to dispose of her cargo at a loss. Three claims were allowed on account of wrongful seizures of vessels on the charge of being engaged in the slave trade; three for the wrongful seizure of vessels engaged in the fisheries adjacent to the coasts of British North America; and one for the capture of an American vessel by a British ship of war on March 5, 1815, when peace existed by the terms of the Treaty of Ghent at the place where the seizure occurred. The three remaining cases in which awards were made in favor of American claimants were those of the brigs Creole and Enterprise, and the schooner Hermosa. These belonged to a series of cases which at the time of their occurrence produced much excitement in the United States, especially in the South, and threatened serious international complications. Cases of "Comet" and "Encomium." In 1831 the American brig Comet, while on a voyage from Alexandria, then in the District of Columbia, to New Orleans, with a cargo of slaves, the property of American citizens, was wrecked on the Bahama banks. The slaves were saved and carried to the island of New Providence, where they were libeled for forfeiture under the British acts prohibiting the slave trade. The libel was dismissed by the court, but the governor on his own authority declared the slaves to be free, and refused to permit the owners to take them from the island. Mr. Van Buren, who was then minister to England, was instructed to lay the case before the British Government, with a strong expression of confidence that the action of the governor would be disavowed. On February 25, 1832, Mr. Van Buren presented the case to Lord Palmerston, and asked that the slaves be ordered to be restored and that a reasonable indemnity be paid for their detention. The case was referred to the law officers for their opinion, but though often urged to do so the British Government failed to reply to Mr. Van Buren's note. In February 1833 the American brig Encomium, while on a "Hermosa." voyage from Charleston to New Orleans, with 45 slaves on board, was wrecked at nearly the same place as the Comet. The slaves were saved and taken to Nassau, where they were liberated by the police magistrate against the protest of the United States consul. On the 2d of August 1834 Mr. Vail, who was then chargé d'affaires of the United States in London, was instructed by Mr. Forsyth, then Secretary of State, to press for an answer to Mr. Van Buren's note in the case of the Comet, and also to call attention to the case of the Encomium. On the 11th of May 1835, no answer in these Cases of the "Enter cases having been received, Mr. Vail renewed prise" and the the subject, and also presented the case of the brig Enterprise, which while on a voyage from Alexandria to Charleston in 1835, with 73 slaves on board, was driven from her course by stress of weather and compelled to put into the port of Hamilton, in Bermuda, for provisions. On her arrival there she was seized by the colonial authorities, but was afterward released. The customs authorities however detained the ship's papers, in order to learn the pleasure of the governor, and in the mean time a writ of habeas corpus, issued by the chief justice, was served on the master, requiring him to produce the slaves, who on disembarking were taken from his custody and set at liberty. Mr. Vail, in bringing the occurrence to the notice of the British Government, said it was the third case "of an American vessel, pursuing a voyage recognized as lawful by the legislation of the United States, and by all the principles of public law, forced, by act of God, to seek, in a British port, a refuge from the tempest, relief from starvation for her crew and passengers, and that aid, protection, and hospitality," which were due to the distressed mariner and the property in his charge, and which were in these cases denied. On November 13, 1835, Lord Palmerston stated that it had been decided to refer the whole subject to the judicial committee of the privy council. In 1836 Mr. Stevenson, who had become the diplomatic representative of the United States in England, twice pressed for a decision, his second note bearing date December 13. On the 7th of February 1837 the Senate of the United States adopted a resolution, which was offered by Mr. Calhoun, asking the President for the correspondence "in relation to the outrage committed on our flag and the rights of our citizens, by the authorities of Bermuda and New Providence, in seizing slaves on board the brigs Encomium |