affidavits, which they do not repress; and whether the omission proceeds from the want of means, or of inclination, the obligation of our Government to protect its own citizens, in either alternative, is equally imperative.

"You are particularly further instructed to use all your endeavors to prevent this incident from becoming an obstacle to the formation of a commercial treaty, and, if no other expedient offers, you may insert an article declaring that, not being able to agree, the subject is referred for future negotiation, but, in the meantime, we shall enjoy the right to the fisheries, as now practiced. This, however, is not to be resorted to unless it is found impossible to procure a treaty on any other terms.

"The additional information just received renders your presence at the place of your destination more necessary. And the President therefore directs me to say that, the vessel for your conveyance being ready, he expects that you will embark without delay."

Mr. Livingston, Sec. of State, to Mr. Baylies, chargé d'affaires to Buenos
Ayres, Feb. 14, 1832, MS. Inst. Am. States, XIV. 247.

"I have to inform you that a demand of indemnification for the seizure of
those vessels [the Breakwater and Harriet] has been pending for some
time past, and that no opportunity for bringing it to a satisfactory
close shall be omitted by this Department." (Mr. Webster, Sec. of
State, to Mr. Hayward, Pres. Suffolk Ins. Co., Nov. 24, 1842, 32 MS.
Dom. Let. 473.)

See, as to the release of the vessels and crews by Captain Duncan, and
the dispersion of Vernet's colonists, supra, § 89, pp. 298–299.
The first reference in the public documents of the United States to the
case of the Falkland Islands may be found in President Jackson's
annual message of Dec. 6, 1831. In this message President Jackson
stated that the name of the Republic of Buenos Ayres had "been
used to cover with a show of authority acts injurious to our com-
merce and to the property and liberty of our fellow-citizens;" that
an American vessel engaged in the pursuit of a trade “which we have
always enjoyed without molestation, has been captured by a band
acting, as they pretend, under the authority of the Government of
Buenos Ayres; " that he had sent an armed vessel to those seas and
should send a minister to inquire into the matter, as well as into
the claim, if any, that was set up by Buenos Ayres to the islands.
Meanwhile, he submitted the matter to the consideration of Con
gress, in order that he might be clothed with such means as might be
deemed necessary "for providing a force adequate to the complete
protection of our fellow-citizens fishing and trading in those seas."
(Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, II. 553.)
When this message was sent to Congress, an important discussion was in
progress at Buenos Ayres. With regard to this discussion and to
subsequent events, the following facts may be stated:

June 10, 1829, the Government of Buenos Ayres issued a decree, claiming as successor of Spain the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands, and announcing that a political and military governor would be appointed to reside there and enforce the laws of the Republic, including the

regulations respecting the seal fishery. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 314.) November 26, 1831, Mr. Slacum, United States consul at Buenos Ayres, protested against the seizure of the American sealing schooners Harriet, Superior, and Breakwater at the islands, by Mr. Luis Vernet, the governor. December 3, 1831, Mr. Anchorena, minister of foreign affairs, replied, justifying the seizure as being in accordance with law. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 314-316.

On the same day Mr. Slacum communicated to Mr. Anchorena a letter from Captain Duncan, U. S. S. Lerington, of December 1, 1831, announcing that he intended to proceed to the islands for the protec tion of American citizens engaged in the fisheries. Captain Duncan referred to the seizure of American vessels and stated that seven Americans had been abandoned on one of the islands without the means of subsistence. He adverted to the fact that the captures were made under the assumed authority of the Government of Buenos Ayres. Mr. Anchorena referred the letter to the minister of The Government of Buenos Ayres suggested that Captain Duncan delay his departure pending efforts to arrange the matter; but Mr. Slacum, December 6, 1831, stated that his protest was made by authority of his Government, and that he could not consent to its rejection or withdrawal. (Id. 317.)

war.

In a letter to Mr. Anchorena, of Dec. 7, 1831, Captain Duncan alleged that Vernet had plundered the Harriet of almost every article on board, and requested that he be delivered up to the United States on charges of piracy and robbery, or that he be arrested and punished by Buenos Ayres. (Id. 319.)

On the 9th of December Mr. Anchorena requested Mr. Slacum to notify Captain Davison, of the Harriet, in view of the pendency of legal proceedings against the schooner, not to leave the province without authorizing some one to act for him in the matter. On the same day Mr. Anchorena also replied to Mr. Slacum's note of December 6, protesting against the latter's course, and declaring that if Captain Duncan carried out his purpose of setting at naught the rights of the Republic the Government would address a formal complaint to the United States, in the belief that the United States would not despoil the Government of its possession of the islands. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 320–322.) In acknowledging, on the 15th of December, Mr. Anchorena's two notes of the 9th, Mr. Slacum stated that Captain Duncan had weighed anchor several hours before their receipt; that the late chargé d'affaires of the United States had been instructed to remonstrate against any measures of the Government of Buenos Ayres which might be "calculated in the remotest degree to impose any restraints whatever upon the enterprise of the citizens of the United States engaged in the fisheries in question, or to impair their undoubted right to the freest use of them;" and that such a remonstrance was not made, probably because the instructions reached the chargé d'affaires only just before his death. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 322-326.)

February 14, 1832, Mr. Garcia, who had succeeded Mr. Anchorena as minister of foreign affairs, notified Mr. Slacum that, in view of the "aberration of ideas" and "irregularity of language" in his notes, the Government had decided to suspend official intercourse with him and so to notify the United States; and on the same day the Govern

ment issued a proclamation stating that the commander of the Lerington had invaded the islands, destroying public property, and assaulted the colonists, some of whom had been driven or torn from their homes or deluded by deceitful artifices, and been brought away and cast upon the shores of Uruguay. It was declared that an appeal would be made to the Government at Washington. (Id. 326.) February 15, 1832, Mr. Slacum enclosed to the Government of Buenos Ayres a letter from Captain Duncan, dated off Montevideo, February 11, 1832, stating that he would deliver up or liberate the prisoners then on board the Lexington on an assurance from the Government that they had acted by its authority. Mr. Garcia immediately replied that Vernet was appointed military and political governor under the decree of June 10, 1829, and that he and those serving under him consequently could be answerable only to their own authorities. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 328.)

June 20, 1832, Mr. Baylies, the new United States chargé d'affaires, having reached his post, addressed a note to Mr. Maza, then minister of foreign affairs, with reference to the seizure of the Harriet Superior, and Breakwater, and the imprisonment of their crews, and to the imprisonment of the crew of the American schooner Belville, wrecked on the coast of Tierra del Fuego. He complained that Vernet had seized a large number of seal skins and a quantity of whalebone, and obliged the American crews by threats to sign certain agreements; that Vernet had discriminated against American vessels, since he had not interfered with a British sealer, declaring that he could not take an English vessel with the same propriety as he could an American. Mr. Baylies further stated that he was instructed to say that the United States utterly denied the existence of any right on the part of Buenos Ayres to interfere with vessels or citizens of the United States "engaged in taking seals, or whales, or any species of fish or marine animals in any of the waters or on any shore or lands of any or either of the Falkland Islands, Tierra del Fuego, Cape Horn, or any of the adjacent islands in the Atlantic Ocean." He demanded full indemnity for what had been done. In support of this demand he addressed to the minister of foreign affairs, July 10, 1832, a long note, in which he examined the Argentine title to the islands, as well as the question of the fisheries, in the sense of his instructions. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 330336, 338-344, 345-346, 350-352.)

August 8, 1832, Mr. Maza communicated to Mr. Baylies a long report from Vernet, defending his conduct as well as the Argentine title to the islands. The Argentine Government refused to give reparation for Vernet's acts, but on the contrary demanded reparation for the acts of Captain Duncan, and suggested the mediation or arbitration of a third power. Mr. Baylies, however, demanded his passports, which, after much insistence on his part, were at length sent to him. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 358, 364–436. ) January 24, 1833, the Government of Buenos Ayres sent to its House of Representatives a message relating to the occupation of the Falkland Islands by Great Britain. The act of taking possession was performed by Captain Onslow, of the British ship of war Clio, January 3, 1833. (20 Br. & For. State Papers, 1194–1199.)

June 17, 1833, Mr. Moreno, minister of Buenos Ayres at London, addressed to Lord Palmerston a long protest, giving a full exposition of

the Argentine claim of title. Lord Palmerston's answer was made January 8, 1834. It maintained that Great Britain had unequivocally asserted her sovereignty in the discussions with Spain in 1770 and 1771, which ended in Spain's restoring the islands. (22 Br. & For. State Papers, 1366-1394.)

"The right of the Argentine Government to jurisdiction over it [the territory of the Falkland Islands], being contested by another power [Great Britain], and upon grounds of claim long antecedent to the acts of Captain Duncan which General Alvear details, it is conceived that the United States ought not, until the controversy upon the subject between those two Governments shall be settled, to give a final answer to General Alvear's note, involving, as that answer must, under existing circumstances, a departure from that which has hitherto been considered as the cardinal policy of this Government."

Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to General Alvear, Dec. 4, 1841, quoted by Mr.
Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Quesada, Mar. 18, 1886, MS. Notes to
Arg. Rep. VI. 257.

In May, 1853, the British Government gave notice to the United States of an intention to send a force to the Falkland Islands, for the purpose of preventing the killing of wild cattle as well as other depredations there by persons landing from vessels of the United States; and a warning was issued by the Department of State to the masters of vessels and other citizens of the United States resorting to that quarter. In February, 1854, the American whaling ship Hudson and her tender, the schooner Washington, while lying at New Island, one of the Falkland group, were arrested on a charge of taking some pigs from one of the islands and were taken to Port Stanley, where they were restored, but not till it was too late to complete the season's voyage. Complaint was made to the British Government of this proceeding as unjustified by the circumstances, it being alleged that the crews of the vessels had killed only a few wild pigs, the progeny of hogs left by them on an uninhabited island for the purpose of breeding and furnishing food in future voyages. In a note to the British minister at Washington of July 1, 1854, Mr. Marcy, who was then Secretary of State, remarked that the warning issued by the Department of State "said nothing about the sovereignty" of the islands, and that "while it claimed no rights for the United States, it conceded none to Great Britain or any other power;" but that, "should the fact, however, be admitted that these islands were British territory," the treatment of the American ships must be considered as exceedingly hard. Mr. Marcy added: “A still graver matter of complaint is the pretension set up by these authorities to exclude our citizens from fishing and taking whale in the waters about these

islands. This right they have long enjoyed without its being questioned."

The British Government disavowed the action of its authorities in taking the vessels to Port Stanley, but on the other hand complained of the conduct of the commander of the U. S. S. Germantown, who was present in the islands when the incident occurred. With regard to the question of jurisdiction, Lord Clarendon expressed surprise that Mr. Marcy "should appear to call in question the right of Great Britain to the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands," and added: "Her Majesty's Government will not discuss that right with another power, but will continue to exercise, in and around the islands of the Falkland group, the right inherent under the law of nations in the territorial sovereign, and will hold themselves entitled, if they think fit, to prevent foreigners, to whatever nation belonging, from fishing for whale and seal within three marine miles of the coast, or from landing on any part of the shores of the Falkland Islands for the purpose of fishing or killing seals. Furthermore, and to prevent all possibility of mistake, Her Majesty's Government declare that they will not allow the wild cattle on the Falkland Islands to be destroyed, or other depredations to be committed on the islands by any foreigners, to whatever nation they may belong, and that all persons committing any such spoliations on the islands will be proceeded against under the enactments of the colonial laws."

Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Crampton, British min., July 1, 1854, and
Lord Clarendon, foreign sec., to Mr. Crampton, Sept. 21, 1854, S. Ex.
Doc. 19, 42 Cong. 2 sess. 47.

In an instruction to Mr. Buchanan, then minister to England, of Septem-
ber 27, 1854, Mr. Marcy directed that a claim for indemnity be pre-
sented to the British Government. It appears, however, that the
claim was not presented, owing to the receipt by Mr. Buchanan of a
letter from Mr. Marcy, of Oct. 8, 1854, which was unofficial and does
not appear on the records of the Department of State. This letter
was written by Mr. Marcy in consequence of the receipt by him of
Lord Clarendon's dispatch to Mr. Crampton of Sept. 21, 1854, afte:
the sending to Mr. Buchanan of the instructions of the 27th of that
month. (S. Ex. Doc. 19, 42 Cong. 2 sess. 12.)

"This Government is not a party to the controversy between the Argentine Republic and Great Britain; and it is for this reason that it has delayed, with the tacit consent of the former, a final answer to its demands. For it is conceived that the question of the liability of the United States to the Argentine Republic for the acts of Captain Duncan, in 1831, is so closely related to the question of sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, that the decision of the former would inevitably be interpreted as an expression of opinion on the merits of the latter. Such an expression it is the desire of this Government to avoid, so far as an adequate reference to the points of