101 U. S. 755, 770; Runkle v. United States, 122 U. S. 543, 557; 11 Opinions of Attorneys General, 397, 399." Jones v. United States (1890), 137 U. S. 202, 217. The foregoing passage related to a certificate or proclamation, the text of which is given in the opinion, issued by the Department of State in the case of Navassa Island. It is not the practice of the Department to vouch for the legality of mortgages and assignments in respect of guano islands. It merely places them on file as requested, and, having no means of assurance that they constitute a complete record even as they stand, declines to recount them to inquirers, though they are open to inspection by authorized persons. Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Gordon, Oct. 19, 1893, 194 MS. Dom. It is not the practice of the Department of State to furnish certified copies of papers relating to guano island claims, except to the legal holder of the claim or his duly authorized representative. Mr. Brown, Chief Clerk, to Mr. Neymann, Jan. 24, 1879, 126 MS. Dom. The bond. "The act of Congress of August 18, 1856, authorizes the President, after certain prerequisites have been performed, to determine that islands upon which guano deposits have been discovered, appertain to the United States. It is only after this preliminary decision has been made that it becomes necessary to determine whether the discoverers may have exclusive possession of the islands for the purpose of taking off the guano and selling it; and the bond and securities provided for in the second section of the act are not required except with reference to the exclusive possession." Mr. Cass, Sec. of State, to Messrs. Wood and Grant, July 1, 1857, 47 MS. Dom. The bond is to be given by the discoverer, or his assigns; but, in determining the proper party to give the bond required by the act of Congress, the political department of the Government can only look to the party complying with the conditions of the statute, without considering the legal or equitable rights of other parties to share in the profits of the speculation, the determination of which rights belongs to the judicial tribunals. 9 Op. 364, Black, 1859. It appears that by a general regulation of the Department of State, in force in The sureties on a guano island bond having asked to be released from their obligation, on the ground that the conditions of the bond had been violated by their principal, and that they had no power to restrain him from committing further breaches, it was advised that the President possessed, under the statute, no authority to grant the request. 11 Op. 30, Bates, 1863. The breach, by a discoverer or his assignee, of the conditions of his bond affects "the private rights only of the delinquent," and does "not impair the dominion of the United States or the jurisdiction of their courts." Jones v. United States (1890), 137 U. S. 202, 224. On the contrary, as was shown in the case of Arenas, Chica, and other islands, supra, "the bonds can not be relied upon as showing that the islands to which they severally relate are 'considered as appertaining to the United States.' (Mr. Uhl, Acting Sec. of State, to the Sec. of the Treasury, Dec. 20, 1894, 200 MS. Dom. Let. 41.) (3) RIGHTS OF THE DISCOVERER. The discoverer, when the terms of the statute have been fulfilled, acquires for himself and assigns, "during the pleasure of Congress, the exclusive right of working and disposing of the guano," subject to the conditions and limitations prescribed by law. Mr. Evarts, Sec. of State, to Mr. Russell, April 5, 1878, 122 MS. Dom. Let. 384. . "The right conferred by the United States, under the guano islands act of August 18, 1856, c. 164 (Rev. Stat., tit. 72), upon the discoverer of a deposit of guano and his assigns, to occupy, at the pleasure of Congress, for the purpose of removing the guano, an island determined by the President to appertain to the United States, is not such an estate in land as to be subject to dower, notwithstanding the act of April 2, 1872, c. 81 (Rev. Stat., sec. 5572), extending the provisions of the act of 1856 to the widow, heirs, executors or administrators of such discoverer' if he dies before fully complying with its provisions." Syllabus, Duncan v. Navassa Phosphate Co. (1891), 137 U. S. 617. "The pertinent sections of the Revised Statutes, 5570-78, appear to rest wholly on the American ownership of the rights granted. Sect. 5573, in particular, says, 'The discoverer or his assigns, being citizens of the United States,' etc. The bond given is under section 5574, and engages that the guano shall be delivered only to citizens of the United States for use in the United States; but that section has been several times suspended, and is now under suspension for five years from the date of the act of Congress approved April 18, 1884. This suspension permits the export of the guano to any foreign country, or on account of aliens; but it clearly does not suspend the precedent condition of American ownership of the grant from which the right to export is derived, and upon which the exercise of protection and jurisdiction on the part of the United States depends. Hence, a case arising, I should deem that the assignment of a guano grant to an alien owner would annul the relation which the Government of the United States holds under the existing statutes." Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Parrott, May 13, 1885, 155 MS. Dom. Let. 368. "It is conceived that a disallowed or abandoned claim would not be a bar to the subsequent acquirement of rights under the act of Congress by another claimant." Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Romero, Mex. Minister, Feb. 18, 1886, MS. As to whether the nonuse of the privilege of working the guano causes a forfeiture thereof, "the law is silent upon the subject, and the Department has never prescribed any method of procedure in such case. Moreover, the Department has no power to adjudicate upon any conflict that may arise between parties, who are compelled to settle their differences before the legal tribunals of the country. The Department has never attempted to determine what constitutes abandonment of a guano island,' and it seems probable that this question should be decided by the courts, the case arising." The same reply may be made to the question whether an island "once entered, and forfeited or abandoned by original discoverer, or his assigns," may be entered upon and worked by other parties, not claiming under the original grantee. If it be admitted that failure to work the deposit causes a forfeiture of the right, the Department of State, "in the absence of any specific provision of law affecting this question, must decline to fix a limit of time as a precedent." Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Gordon, Oct. 19, 1893, 194 MS. Dom. Let. 57. The Department has no power to determine disputes between citizens of the United States in respect of their rights in a guano island, "and the claimants must vindicate their title before the legal tribunals of the country." Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mrs. Stevens, June 21, 1869, 81 MS. Dom. Let. 289; (4) LISTS OF ISLANDS. § 115. Two formal lists of guano islands appear to have been made in the Treasury Department. The first one was annexed to a circular of Mr. McCulloch, Secretary of the Treasury, to collectors of customs, of February 12, 1869, in which it was described as a "corrected list," based upon “the bonds and papers, transmitted from the Department of State, now on file in the office of the First Comptroller of the Treasury." The second, which was reported by the First Comptroller to the Secretary of the Treasury, Dec. 22, 1885, was based upon the bonds in his office, and included the islands which had been bonded since 1869. A copy of it was sent to the Secretary of State July 3, 1890. Another copy was communicated by the First Comptroller to the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Sept. 16, 1893. Reduced to one alphabetical list, the islands that have been bonded are as follows: |