that "the justice of the claim was recognized in a letter from the Department of State to the Spanish minister, of the 19th of March, 1847," and that "in his annual message of the same year the President recommended its payment." Under the circumstances, the attention of Congress was again invited to the subject. President Pierce, in his annual message of December 5, 1853, expressed the opinion that good faith required the prompt adjustment of the claim, and recommended it to the early and favorable consideration of Congress. A similar recommendation was made by President Buchanan, in his annual messages of December 8, 1857, December 6, 1858, and December 19, 1859. March 5, 1860, a convention was concluded at Madrid, by which the Spanish government agreed to pay what were known as the "Cuban claims," while it was stipulated that the Amistad claim should be submitted to arbitration. The Senate, on June 27, 1860, declined to advise and consent to the exchange of the ratifications of the convention. The claim thus remained unsettled. United States v. Amistad, 15 Pet. 518; opinion of Mr. Grundy, At. Gen., For correspondence and reports, see message of President Van Buren, Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, IV. 232, 551; V. 184, 209, 446, 511, 561, 641. The treaty of 1795 with Spain prohibited citizens of the United States from taking commissions to cruise in a privateer against the commerce of Spain, but not from serving in a public armed vessel of a belligerent nation. Article XIV. The Santissima Trinidad, 7 Wheat. 283. "The seventeenth article of the treaty with Spain, which provides for certain passports and certificates, as evidence of property on board of the ships of both states, is, in its terms, applicable only to cases where either of the parties is engaged Article XVII. in a war. This article required a certain form of passport to be agreed upon by the parties, and annexed to the treaty. It never was annexed; and, therefore, in the case of the Amiable Isabella, 6 Wheaton, 1, it was held inoperative." United States v. Schooner Amistad, 15 Pet. 518, 595. 66 The form of passport referred to in article 17 of the treaty of 1795 is not annexed either to the original treaty signed by the negotiators, or to the copy bearing the ratification of the King of Spain on file in the Department of State. It is remarkable, however, that to the Spanish version, appearing in vol. 2, p. 429, of Coleccion de los Tratados de Paz,' &c., published at Madrid in 1800, two forms of passports in Spanish are annexed-one for ships navigating European seas, and the other for those navigating American seas. These forms are found in 6 Wheat. 97. No explanation has been discovered of these facts. It is stated, however, in a letter from Jacob Wagner to Mr. Monroe, dated November 3, 1814, that a form was agreed on." (Cadwalader's Digest (1877), 257.) The 20th article of the treaty with Spain of 1795 does not extend the jurisdiction of our courts to offenses committed Article XX. in Spain, nor vice versa, and, according to the com"mon law, the commandant of the island of Amelia is not liable to any public prosecution before any of our courts for his transactions in Florida. Lee, At. Gen., 1797, 1 Op. 68. "The XXth article of the treaty of 1795 between the United States and Spain secures to the citizens of each country in the other the same rights and privileges in regard to judicial proceedings that may be held or enjoyed by the citizens of such other country; but, even in civil jurisprudence, neither this stipulation nor any known rule of international law confers on the government of the foreign country any right to interfere in the modes of procedure or administration of the reasonable local municipal laws of the other country." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Valera, Span. min., March 15, 1884, MS. Notes to Spain, X. 291. For the history of art. 21 of the treaty of 1795, see Moore, Int. Arbitrations, II. 991 et seq. 2. TREATY OF FEBRUARY 22, 1819. $884. See Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. 4487-4531. Spain in ceding the Floridas to the United States, by the treaty of February 22, 1819, ceded only so much thereof as Articles II., III., IV. belonged to her, and hence did not cede the territory lying between the Mississippi and Perdido rivers, which territory. though claimed by Spain, was treated by the United States as already ceded by France. McDonogh v. Millaudon, 3 How. 693. Articles IX., X., XI. Article IX. contains the following stipulation: "The United States shall cause satisfaction to be made for the injuries, if any, which, by process of law, shall be established to have been suffered by the Spanish officers, and individual Spanish inhabitants, by the late operations of the American army in Florida." The treaty created no tribunal by which these damages were to be adjusted, and gives no authority to any court of justice to inquire into or adjust the amount which the United States were to pay to the respective parties who had suffered damage from the causes mentioned in the treaty. It rested with Congress to provide one, according to the treaty stipulation. Undoubtedly Congress was bound to provide such a tribunal as the treaty described. But if they failed to fulfill that promise it is a question between the United States and Spain. United States v. Ferreira, 13 How. 45, 46. Certain slaves were shipped by their Spanish owners from Havana to Pensacola in an American vessel in violation of the laws of the United States. The vessel was captured by the American military force then occupying Fort Barrancas. Afterward, while proceeding to adjudication, the slaves and vessel were seized by a revenue vessel and carried into the port of Mobile. The vessel and cargo were condemned, but restitution of the slaves was awarded, because the original capture was not made by a "commissioned vessel of the United States." The original capture being lawful, and the slaves, though restored, being on board unlawfully, the Spanish owners have no claim as for an "injury " under the treaty with Spain of 1819. Berrien, At. Gen., 1820, 2 Op. 198. The United States are bound, by the treaty with Spain of the 22d of February, 1819, to pay the Spanish inhabitants of Florida for slaves carried away or killed by troops of the United States prior to that treaty; and remuneration should be made for the loss of services of such slaves as have been restored. Grundy, At. Gen., 1838, 3 Op. 391. The extraordinary expenses of a party, incurred in living at St. Mary's, whither he retired after the destruction of his property in Florida, are matters too remotely consequential to be the proper subject of damages under article 9 of the treaty of 1819. Cushing, At. Gen., 1854, 6 Op. 530. The Department of State was made the depository, by stipulation, of the records and papers referred to in article 11 of the treaty with Spain of 1819, and they must not be delivered up to the claimants; and any law of Congress that shall authorize or require their delivery will be a violation of that treaty. Taney, At. Gen., 1832, 2 Op. 515. Under the treaty of 1819 the commissioner had power to decide conclusively upon the amount and validity of claims, but not upon the conflicting rights of parties to the sums awarded by them. Comegys v. Vasse, 1 Pet. 193. The claims of American citizens against Spain, for which by the treaty of 1819 the United States undertook to make satisfaction to an amount not exceeding $5,000,000, were such claims as, at the date of the convention, were unliquidated, and statements of which had been presented to the Department of State or to the minister of the United States. The convention, as signed 22d February, 1819, subject to ratification within six months, though it was not ratified within the time stipulated, was never abandoned, though some expressions in the notification of August 21, 1819, by the United States to Spain (notifying to that government that after the next day, "as the ratifications of the convention will not have been exchanged, all the claims and pretensions of the United States will stand in the same situation as if that convention had never been made "), indicated that the United States might be induced to carry it into effect. The notification did not, by the nonratification within the six months, make revocable the power which citizens of the United States, by filing their claims with it, had given their government to make reclamations against Spain in their behalf. Meade v. United States, 9 Wall. 691. 3. CONVENTION OF FEBRUARY 17, 1834. $ 885. A convention was concluded between the United States and Spain February 17, 1834, for the settlement of claims of citizens of the United States against the Spanish government, arising between February 22, 1819, and the date of the conclusion of the convention. Davis' Notes, Treaty Vol. (1776–1887), 1387; Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. As to the claims convention of February 11-12, 1871, see Moore, Int. As to the protocol of Jan. 12, 1877, concerning judicial procedure, see supra, § 187. Concerning the suspension of discriminating duties, as to the Antilles, For a modus vivendi as to the commerce of Cuba and Porto Rico, see For. 4. RECIPROCITY AGREEMENT, 1891. § 886. In 1891 a reciprocity agreement with reference to Cuba was concluded between the United States and Spain, under section 3 of the McKinley Act. An error was made in the publication by Spain of the definite repertory in Cuba. This error was afterwards rectified. For. Rel. 1894, 598, 611. As to the part taken by Spain in the World's Columbian Exposition at 5. TREATY OF DECEMBER 10, 1898. § 887. A treaty of peace between the United States and Spain was concluded at Paris, December 10, 1898. As to the negotiations, see supra, § 109. See Lebraud (Élie), La Guerre Hispano-Américaine et le Droit des Gens: Articles V., VI. By Article V. of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain of December 10, 1898, the United States engaged to send back to Spain, at its own cost, the Spanish soldiers taken as prisoners of war on the capture of Manila by the American forces. By Article VI. the United States agreed to release all persons made prisoners of war by the American forces, and to undertake to obtain the release of all Spanish prisoners in the hands of the insurgents in Cuba and the Philippines; and it was further stipulated that the United States should, at its own cost, return to Spain, and that Spain should, at its own cost, return to the United States, Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines, according to the situation of their respective homes, prisoners released or caused to be released by them, respectively, under the article. The stipulation that the United States "will undertake to obtain che release of all Spanish prisoners in the hands of the insurgents in Cuba and the Philippines" was "not an absolute engagement to obtain the release of Spanish prisoners in the hands of the insurgents," but a "pledge" that the United States would "exercise its |