As to an alleged effort of China to resume her old suzerain power over Owing to remoteness of interests, unfamiliarity with the merits of the An Anglo-French agreement as to Siam, signed at London, Jan. 15, 1896, is printed in For. Rel. 1896, 139. "An envoy from Siam has been accredited to this government and has presented his credentials." (President McKinley, annual message, Dec. 5, 1898.) In a letter of January 5, 1909, the Secretary of State recommended an appropriation for securing legation premises at Bangkok. 249, 56 Cong. 1 sess.) (H. Doc. As to repairs to the United States legation premises and grounds at As to the donation of property at Ratburi by the King of Siam to the With a despatch, No. 26, of July 21, 1870, Mr. Partridge, United States consul at Bangkok, enclosed to the Department of State certain correspondence in relation to the execution of two native servants of the Rev. Messrs. Wilson and McGilvary, citizens of the United States. The Department of State declared the proceeding to have been a plain violation not only of Article I. of the treaty of 1856, which stipulates that American citizens in Siam shall receive from the government full protection and assistance to enable them to reside there in security, but also of Article V., which stipulates for the free exercise of religion and for the right of Americans to employ Siamese subjects as servants. It appeared, however, that the Siamese government had ultimately receded from the ground, which it at first assumed, that the stipulations of the treaty were not applicable to the case in question. Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Partridge, No. 25, Oct. 5, 1870, 60 MS. By the treaty of amity and commerce of March 20, 1833, between the United States and Siam, the citizens of the former are forbidden. to import or sell in Siam (except to the King) "munitions of war." As to the meaning of this term, "I feel clear that a nomen generalissimum, such as munitions of war,' is far more comprehensive in its operation than would be any group of specifications, no matter how exhaustive. The rule, as you well know, is that the introduction of specifications operates to limit even general terms which may precede them, and in this view I can not but think that the terms firearms, Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Phelps, Jan. 7, 1886, MS. Inst. Gr. Brit. Mr. Bayard offered, however, in case Siam should make a formal applica- In 1887 a law was agreed upon, by a committee of representatives For. Rel. 1887, 972-974. As to the discussion among the foreign diplomatic and consular repre- XXXVII. SPAIN. The correspondence of Messrs. Carmichael and Short, United States ministers at Madrid in 1792, in reference to the Florida boundary, to Indian incursions aided by Spain, to commercial restraints, and to the navigation of the Mississippi, is given in 1 Am. State Papers, For. Rel. 260, 304. The delays of Spain in making treaty with the United States are noticed in 7 John Adams's Works, 145, 385, 389, 485, 496, 517, 520, 565, 582, 644. The papers in respect to the negotiations by Mr. Pinckney, minister of the United States, with the Spanish ministry in 1795 are given in 1 Am. State Papers, For. Rel. 535, together with the projects and counter projects. The correspondence as to the ratification of the convention of August 11, 1802, is given in 2 Am. State Papers, For. Rel. 624; that connected with the boundary negotiations of 1805 in 2 Am. St. Pap. For. Rel. 613. The ratification of the treaty of 1795 is noticed in 2 Madison's Works, 73, 75, 86, 94. 1. TREATY of October 27, 1795. § 883. "From the middle of 1793 to the middle or close of 1794 the problem of preserving peace appeared to be difficult. Negotiations. Great Britain occupied military posts within the United States, on the northern frontier, and had pushed a garrison far south towards Cincinnati. Spain occupied Natchez, and proposed to support the Indians who dwelt within what are now the States of Mississippi, Alabama, and a large part of Georgia, in maintaining their independence. The Indians in the Northwest were in open hostilities. Genet set the administration at defiance in the Atlantic States, and appealed to the nation to support him. Washington solved the difficulty by asking the recall of Genet, by sending Jay to London, and by ordering Thomas Pinckney to Madrid with full power and authority 'for and in the name of the United States to meet, confer, treat, and negotiate with the ministers, commissioners, deputies, or plenipotentiaries of his said Majesty [the King of Spain], being furnished with sufficient authority of and concerning the navigation of the river Mississippi; and such other matters relative to the confines of the territories of the United States and His Catholic Majesty, and the intercourse to be had thereon, as the mutual interests and general harmony of neighboring and friendly nations require to be precisely adjusted and regulated; and of and H. Doc. 551-vol 5-54 concerning the general commerce between the United States and the Kingdoms and dominions of His Catholic Majesty; and to conclude and sign a treaty or treaties, convention or conventions, thereon.' He also had a separate power to agree, treat, consult, and negotiate of and concerning all matters and causes of difference subsisting between the United States and his said Majesty, relative to the instructions of his said Majesty, or of any of the tribunals or authorities of his said Majesty, to his ships of war and privateers, of whatsoever date, as well as of and concerning restitution or compensation in the cases of capture or seizure made of the property of the citizens of the United States by the said ships of war and privateers, and retribution for the injuries received therefrom by any citizen of the United States, and to conclude and sign a treaty or treaties, convention or conventions, touching the premises.' 6 "Pinckney arrived in Madrid on the 28th of June, 1795. Short, who was there as chargé, had written the government that the moment was opportune for concluding a treaty. Pinckney was met at the outset by a proposal for a triple' alliance between France, Spain, and ourselves, which he declined. He also declined to guarantee the Spanish possessions in America. By the 10th of August the parties The first projét for a treaty came began to put their ideas on paper. from Spain, and was handed Pinckney by the Prince of Peace before the 23d of September. On the 27th of October the parties signed a treaty, which has formed the basis of the relations between Spain and the United States from that day to this. "It defined the southern boundary of the United States in accordance with the definitions in the treaty with Great Britain. It conceded the navigation of the Mississippi, and gave us a right of deposit and storage for our produce at New Orleans. It embodied many of the leading commercial provisions of the previous treaties with France or Prussia. And a provision was made for a commission to terminate all differences on account of the losses sustained by the citizens of the United States, in consequence of their vessels and cargoes having been taken by the subjects of His Catholic Majesty during the late war between Spain and France.' A copy of this treaty was sent to Congress by President Washington on the 29th of March, 1796, and an act was passed to carry it into effect. Though transmitted in the midst of debate on Jay's treaty,' it was considered and acted on without more than a casual allusion to it in that debate, and without discussion on its own merits. The provisions of this treaty respecting limits and the withdrawal of garrisons had not been carried out when Louisiana was acquired by the United States, and meanwhile disputes had arisen in consequence of the arbitrary order discontinuing the right to deposit and store American produce at New Orleans, and reclamations were made upon Spain for losses suffered from this cause, and also for maritime spoliations before the peace of Amiens." Davis, Notes, Treaty Vol. (1776-1887), 1383. Article II. "The United States have never claimed any part of the territory included in the States of Mississippi or Alabama under any treaty with Spain, although she claimed at different periods a considerable portion of the territory in both of those States. By the treaty between the United States and Spain, signed at San Lorenzo el Real, on the 27th of October, 1795, the high contracting parties declare and agree, that the line between the United States and East and West Florida, shall be designated by a line, beginning on the River Mississippi, at the northernmost part of the thirty-first degree of north latitude, which from thence shall be drawn due east to the middle of the Chatahuchee River,' &c. This treaty declares and agrees, that the line which was described in the treaty of peace between Great Britain and the United States, as their southern boundary, shall be the line which divides their territory from East and West Florida. The article does not import to be a cession of territory, but the adjustment of a controversy between the two nations." McKinley, J., Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan, 3 How. 212, 225. See Hickey's The treaty between the United States and Spain of 1795 ascertained and After the outbreak of the Cuban insurrection of 1868 the Spanish government issued decrees embargoing the property Article VII. of certain citizens of the United States, and prohibiting the alienation of such property. The government of the United States complained of this and other oppressive actions as violating the 7th article of the treaty of 1795. The result was the reference of the questions involved to a mixed commission. Senate Ex. Doc. 108, 41 Cong. 2 sess. 243. For the history of the mixed commission, and a digest of the decisions thereunder, see Moore, Int. Arbitrations, II. 1019 et seq. Whether or not the first clause of art. 7, wherein it is agreed that the subjects and citizens of each nation, their vessels or effects, shall not be liable to any embargo or detention on the part of the other for any military expedition, or other public or private purpose whatever," was originally intended to embrace real estate and personal property on land as well as vessels and their cargoes, the same |