izing the appointment of a collector, were liable to duty. That is, that although Florida had, by cession, actually become a part of the United States, and was in our possession, yet, under our revenue laws, its ports must be regarded as foreign until they were established as domestic, by act of Congress; and it appears that this decision was sanctioned at the time by the Attorney-General of the United States, the law officer of the government. And although not so directly applicable to the case before us, yet the decisions of the Treasury Department in relation to Amelia Island, and certain ports in Louisiana, after that province had been ceded to the United States, were both made upon the same grounds. And in the latter case, after a custom-house had been established by law at New Orleans, the collector at that place was instructed to regard as foreign ports Baton Rouge and other settlements still in the possession of Spain, whether on the Mississippi, Iberville, or the sea-coast. The Department in no instance that we are aware of, since the establishment of the government, has ever recognized a place in a newly acquired country as a domestic port, from which the coasting trade might be carried on, unless it had been previously made so by act of Congress." § 105. The position reversed; the "Castine" Case; War of 1812; Justice Story's opinion.-In deciding the Tampico case the Supreme Court adopted the reverse position, although under the reversed conditions it was consistent, to that which it had taken as to the status of American territory, conquered and occupied, by British forces, during the War of 1812, and subsequently surrendered pursuant to the Treaty of Peace executed at Ghent on the conclusion of that War. The port of Castine, Maine, was captured by the British forces; during the period of conquest goods were imported into the port; owing, however, to the occupation by the British troops no duties were collected thereon by the United. States custom authorities; after the war actions were commenced by the United States for the unpaid duties; the Supreme Court held that so far as the execution of the laws of the United States were concerned, the territory ceased, for the time being, to be under the jurisdiction of the United States, and merchants, therefore, were not obligated to pay duties during the period of occupation. Mr. Justice Story says in his opinion: 1 1 "Under these circumstances, we are all of opinion, that the claim for duties cannot be sustained. By the conquest and military occupation of Castine, the enemy acquired that firm possession which enabled him to exercise the fullest rights of sovereignty over that place. The sovereignty of the United States over the territory was, of course, suspended, and the laws of the United States could no longer be rightfully enforced there, or be obligatory upon the inhabitants who remained and submitted to the conquerors. By the surrender the inhabitants passed under a temporary allegiance to the British government, and were bound by such laws, and such only, as it chose to recognize and impose. From the nature of the case, no other laws could be obligatory upon them, for where there is no protection or allegiance or sovereignty, there can be no claim to obedience. Castine was, therefore, during this period, so far as respected our revenue laws, to be deemed a foreign port; and goods imported into it by the inhabitants, were subject to such duties only as the British government chose to require. Such goods were in no correct sense imported into the United States. The subsequent evacuation by the enemy, and resumption of authority by the United States, did not, and could not, change the character of the previous transactions. The doctrines respecting the jus postliminii are wholly inapplicable to the case. The goods were liable to American duties, when imported, or not at all. That they are so liable at the time of importation is clear from what has been already stated; and when, upon the return of peace, the jurisdiction of the United States was re-assumed, they were in the same predicament as they would have been if Castine had been a foreign territory ceded by treaty to the United States, and the goods had been previously imported there. In the latter case, there would be no pretence to say that American duties could be demanded; and, upon principles of public or municipal law, the cases are not distinguishable. § 105. Sup. Ct. 1819, 4 Wheaton, 246, 1 United States vs. Rice, U. S. p. 254, STORY, J. The authorities cited at the bar would, if there were any doubt, be decisive of the question. But we think it too clear to require any aid from authority." § 106. Status of Cuba.-The same questions that arose after the War of 1812, and the Mexican War, have arisen not only in regard to the territory which was actually ceded by Spain to the United States, but also in regard to Cuba, which was not ceded to the United States, although Spain relinquished her sovereignty thereover, the United States assuming by the terms of the treaty the obligations arising under international law by reason of the occupation of the Island by the military forces of this country. What the internal relations of the United States and Cuba may be is beyond the province of this volume: but undoubtedly, so far as foreign relations are concerned, the decision. of the Supreme Court in Fleming vs. Page is directly in point. At the present time there is no local government of Cuba, and if any question should arise involving foreign powers, it would have to be settled through the medium of the United States Government, as the military forces of the United States are in occupation of the Island.' § 106. 1 NOTE AS TO STATUS OF CUBA. The principal executive, congressional and judicial precedents relating to Cuba and the status thereof, so far as its relations with the United States are concerned are: (1) The Teller resolution of April 20, 1898; (2) the stipulations in regard to Cuba in the treaty with Spain of December 10, 1898; (3) The Foraker Amendment as to franchises in Cuba; (4) the executive orders relating to the government of Cuba and the regulation of its commerce, as promulgated by the President through the War Department; (5) the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Neely vs. Henkel, in regard to the extradition of Neely under the statute passed in regard to the extradition of prisoners charged with crime from the United States to any place under the occupation of the military forces thereof; (6) the Platt amendment in regard to the relations of the United States to Cuba, and the establishment thereof, and the Cuban constitution. The documents referred to will be given in order below with the exception of the decision in Neely vs. Henkel, which appears as a footnote to section 107, post. 1. THE TELLER RESOLUTION. "(No. 24.) Joint resolution for the recognition of the independence of the people of Cuba, demanding that the Government of Spain relin 107. Status of Cuba involved in the Neely case; extradition. The status of Cuba was involved and determined quish its authority and government in the Island of Cuba, and to withdraw its land and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters, and directing the President of the United States to use the land and naval forces of the United States to carry these resolutions into effect. "Whereas the abhorrent conditions which have existed for more than three years in the Island of Cuba, so near our own borders, have shocked the moral sense of the people of the United States, have been a disgrace to Christian civilization, culminating, as they have, in the destruction of a United States battleship, with two hundred and sixty-six of its officers and crew, while on a friendly visit in the harbor of Havana, and cannot longer be endured, as has been set forth by the President of the United States in his message to Congress, of April eleventh, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, upon which the action of Congress was invited: Therefore, "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, First. That the people of the Island of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent. "Second. That it is the duty of the United States to demand, and the Government of the United States does hereby demand, that the Government of Spain at once relinquish its authority and government in the Island of Cuba and withdraw its land and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters. "Third. That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is, directed and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of the United States, and to call into the actual service of the United States the militia of the several States, to such extent as may be necessary to carry these resolutions into effect. “Fourth. That the United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said Island except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination, when that is accomplished, to leave the government and control of the Island to its people." 'Approved, April 20, 1898." (U. S. Stat. at Large, Vol. 30, pp. 738 739.) 2. STIPULATIONS AS TO CUBA IN TREATY WITH SPAIN, 1898. "ARTICLE I. Spain relinquishes all claim of sovereignty over and title to Cuba. "And as the Island is, upon its evacuation by Spain, to be occupied by the United States, the United States will, so long as such occupation shall last, assume and discharge the obligations that may under international law result from the fact of its occupation, for the protection of life and property." "ARTICLE XVI. It is understood that any obligations assumed in this treaty by the United States with respect to Cuba are limited to the time of its occupancy thereof; but it will, upon the termination of such oc in decisions already made by the Circuit Courts of the United States, and is also involved in questions which have been submitted to the Supreme Court. cupancy, advise any Government established in the island to assume the same obligations." 30 U. S. Stat. at Large, 1754-1761. 3. THE FORAKER AMENDMENT AS TO FRANCHISES IN CUBA. Chap. 423 (army appropriation bill), 55th Congress, Sess. III, approved March 3, 1899: "§ 2, That no property, franchises, or concessions of any kind whatever shall be granted by the United States, or by any military or other authority whatever, in the Island of Cuba during the occupation thereof by the United States." 30 U. S. Stat. at Large, 1064, p. 1074. 4. EXECUTIVE ORDERS RELATING TO CUBA. Immediately after the exchange of the treaty of peace and even prior to its ratification, Spain withdrew from Cuba and relinquished all sovereignty thereover. The formal act took place on January 1, 1899, and on that day the Military Governor, Major General John R. Brooke, U. S. A., appointed by the President of the United States, assumed control of the Island. The best synopsis of the orders issued by the Military Governor, and the method of administering the affairs of the Island of Cuba will be found in the civil report of Major General John R. Brooke, October 1, 1899, published by the War Department, Washington, 1900; special attention is called to the report of Major Edgar S. Dudley, Judge-Advocate, U. S. V.,—Judge-Advocate for the Division of Cuba, September 30, 1899,-pages 163 et seq. of Major General Brooke's report, and to the lists and synopses of military orders at pages 167, et seq., and 429, et seq. of the same volume. These orders show that up to this time Cuba is under a strictly military government, and that both as to military and civil jurisdiction the authority of the commander in the field is practically supreme. The orders are promulgated by the Military Governor and are as a general rule formulated as to all matters of importance at Washington by the War Department. The rules of international law as to military occupancy control the relation of the United States with Cuba, and the President as Commander in Chief is supreme in power, acting, as must necessarily be the case, through the War Department and the Military Gov ernor. 5. DECISION IN NEELY VS. HENKEL. 6. THE PLATT AMENDMENT AS TO RELATIONS WITH CUBA. During the fall of 1900, General Leonard Wood, Military Governor of Cuba, promulgated an order permitting the people of Cuba to hold a constitutional convention: That convention met at Havana and prepared |