of the parent state over that colony as still subsisting.--Gel- New states. ston v. Hoyt-S, Wheaton. 324, 1818. Rose v. Himely-4, Cranch, 272. Sup. Court U. S. 1808. The following public documents, respecting the revolt of St. Domingo. St. Domingo, were noticed by the Court: Notification by Mr Pichon, the French chargé d'affaires to the American Government, published in March, 1802, interdicking all manner of intercourse with ports of St. Domingo, in possession of the revolted negroes. The order of the commander-in-chief of the French republic in St. Domingo. The French arrétes of 22d June, 1802, 2d Oct. 1802. The decree of General Ferrand. of 1st March, 1804 --Rose v. Himely―4, Cranch. 273. 274, 275, Sup. Court U. S. 1808. Treaty of alliance between the French Republic and Spain -19th August, 1796.-4, Cranch, 259. 33. An American vessel seized by a French privateer within Prize. the territorial jurisdiction of the government of St. Domingo, for breach of the French municipal law, prohibiting intercourse with certain ports in that island, and carried by the captors directly to a Spanish port in the island of Cuba, was, Courts. while lying there, lawfully condemned by a French tribunal sitting at Guadaloupe.--Hudson v. Guestier--4, Cranch, 295, Sup. Court U. S. 1808. S4. The possession of the sovereign of the captors, gives jurisdiction to his courts. The possession of the captors, in a neutral port, is the possession of their sovereign. If the possession be lost by re-capture, escape, or voluntary discharge, the courts of the captor lose the jurisdiction which they had acquired by the seizure. The trial of a municipal seizure must be regulated exclusively by municipal law. No foreign court can question the correctness of what is done, unless the court passing the sentence lose its jurisdic-' tion by some circumstance which the law of nations can notice.--Hudson v. Guestier-4, Cranch, 293, Sup. Court U.S. 1808. id. 35. The sentence of a foreign court of admiralty, condem- Prize. Courts. ning a vessel for breach of blockade, is conclusive evidence of that fact in an action on the policy of insurance.--Croud son v. Leonard--4, Cranch, 433, Sup. Court. U. S. 1808. 36. A person born in the colony of New Jersey before the Treaty with Great year 1773, and residing there till 1777, when he joined the Britain. Alieus. id. Teaty with Great Blockade. Treaty with Great Blockade. Treaty with Great Courts. Treaty with Great Courts. British army, and ever afterwards adhered to the British, claiming to be a British subject, and demanding and receiving compensation, from that Government for his loyalty and his sufferings as a refugee, did not, by the treaty of peace, become an alien to the state of New Jersey, but had a right to take lands, by descent, in that State.--McIlvaine v. Coxe's lessee4, Cranch, 208, Sup. Court U. S. 1808. 37. A person born in England before the year 1775, and who always resided there, and never was in the United States, is an alien, and could not, in the year 1793, take lands in Maryland by descent from a citizen of the United States. --Dawson's lessee v. Godfrey-4, Cranch, 321, Sup. Court U. S. 1808. 58. Persisting in an intention to enter a blockaded port, after warning, is not attempting to enter it, within the meaning of the 18th art. of the British treaty of 1794.--Fitzsimmons v. The Newport Insurance Company-4, Cranch, 185, Supreme Court U. S. 1808. 59. If an act of confiscation, independent of the British treaty of peace of 1783, should be construed to destroy the claim of a British mortgagee of land in Georgia, the 5th art. of that treaty re-instates the lien in its full force.--Higginson v. Mein―4, Cranch. 419, Sup. Court U. S. 1808. 40. A vessel sailing ignorantly for a blockaded port, is not liable to condemnation, under the law of nations.--Featon v. Fry-3, Cranch, 335, Sup. Court U. S. 1809. 41 Copies of the proceedings in the vice admiralty court of Jamaica, are admissible in evidence, not only under the 19th art. of the British treaty of 1794, but under the law of nations, and the practice of Courts of Admiralty, when authenticated, under the seal of the Court, by the deputy Regis. trar, who is certified by the Judge of the Court, who is certified by a notary public.--id. ib. and p. 345. 42. If a defendant in ejectment in a State Court, set up an outstanding title in a third person, no party to the suit; and contend that such outstanding title is protected by the British treaty, and the State Court decide that such outstanding title is not protected by the treaty, it is not such a case arising under a treaty, as will give appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of the United States, under the constitution of the United States, although it be a case within the 25th sec. of the judiciary act of 1789.--Owens v. Norwoods' lessee—5, Cranch, 344, Sup. Court U. S. 1809. 43. The Continental Court of Appeals, in prize causes, had Prize. power to revise and correct the sentences of the Admiralty Courts. Courts of the several States.--U. States v. Judge Peters, 5Cranch, 115, Sup. Court U. S. 1809. council. 44. The British orders in council of the 11th of Nov. 1807, British orders in did not prohibit a direct voyage from the United States, to a colony of France.--King v. The Delaware Insurance Company-6, Cranch, 71, Sup. Court U. S. 1810. Colonies. Britain. 45. The Supreme Court of the United States has appellate Treaty with Great jurisdiction of a cause decided in the highest Court of one of the States, where the question is whether a confiscation under Confiscation. the law of the State, was complete before the treaty of peace of 1785, with Great Britain.-Smith v. Maryland Insurance Company-6. Cranch, 286, Sup. Court U. S. 1810. id. France. 46. By the confiscating acts of Maryland, the equitable interests of British subjects were confiscated, without office found, or entry, or other act done, and although such equitable interests were not discovered until long after the peace-id. 47. The jurisdiction of French Courts, as to seizures, is not confined to seizures made within two leagues of the coast. Prize. 48. A seizure beyond the limits of the territorial jurisdic- Territorial juristion, for breach of a municipal regulation, is warranted by diction. the law of nations.-Hudson v. Guestier-6, Cranch, 281, Su preme Court, U. S. 1810. Courts. 49. The letter of Mr Merry, to the Secretary of State, of the 12th April, 1804, extended to the island of Curraçoa, the orders of the Lords Commissioners of the admiralty of the 5th of January, 1804, respecting the Blockade of Martinique Blockade. and Guadaloupe, by which the British officers were directed "not to consider any blockade of those Islands as existing unless in respect of particular ports, which may be actually "invested; and then not to capture vessels bound to such "ports, unless they shall have been previously warned not to "enter them."-Maryland Insurance Company v. Wood—7, Cranch, 402, Sup. Court U. S. 1813. 50. A sentence of a foreign tribunal condemning neutral Prize. property under an edict unjust in itself, contrary to the law of nations, and in violation of neutral rights, and which has Foreign sentence. been so declared by the legislative and executive departments of the government of the United States, changes the property of the thing condemned.--Williams v. Armroyd-7, Cranch, 423. Sup. Court U. S. 1813. 51. A sale by the authority of the captors, before sentence Prize. of condemnation, is affirmed by such sentence, and is good ab initio.-id. ib. Prize. Courts. Prize. Courts. Alien. Law of nations. tion. 52 A French tribunal, at Guadaloupe, had jurisdiction of property seized on the high seas for breach of the Milan decree, and carried into the Dutch port of the Island of St Martins, and there sold by order of the Dutch Governor of St. Martins, before condemnation, without any authority from the French tribunal at Guadaloupe.— id. ib 53 The American owner cannot reclaim, in the courts of this country, his property which has been seized and condemn ed in a French Court under the Milan Decree.-id. ib. 54. An Alien Enemy may take lands in Virginia by devise, and hold the same until office found, and such title is confirmed by the British Treaty of 1794.-Fairfax v. Hunter-7, Cranch. 604. Sup. Court U. S. 1813. 55. A public vessel of war, of a foreign sovereign, coming Municipal jurisdic into our ports, and de neaning herself in a friendly manner is exempt from the jurisdiction of this country.-The Schooner Exchange, v. McFaddon-7, Cranch, 116. Sup. Court U. S. Prize. Domicil. id. Confiscation. Prize. Enemy trade. Prize. Prize. 1812. 56. A Spanish subject who came to this country in a time of peace between Spain and Great Britain, to carry on a trade between this country and the Spanish provinces, under a Royal Spanish license, and who continues to reside here and carry on that trade after the breaking out of war between Great Britain and Spain, is to be considered as an American merchant, although the trade could be lawfully carried on by a Spanish subject onlv.-Livingston v. Maryland Insurance Company-7, Cranch, 507. Sup. Court United States, 1813. 57. The national commercial character of a person is to be decided by his domicil, and not by the nature of his trade.id ib. 58. British property found in the United States. on land, at the commencement of hostilities with Great Britain, cannot be condemned as enemy's property, without a legislative act authorizing its confiscation. The act, of the legislature, declaring war, is not such an act.-Brown v. United States -8, Cranch, 110. Sup. Court United States, 1814. 59 After a declaration of war an American citizen cannot lawfully send a vessel to the enemy's country to bring away his property.-The Rapid-8, Cranch, 136. Sup Court United States. 1814. The Alexander-8, Cranch, 179. Sup. Court United States, 1814. 60. The sailing on a voyage under the license and passport of protection of the enemy, in furtherance of his views or interests, constitutes such an illegality as subjects the ship and cargo to confiscation as prize of war.-The Julia--8, Cranch, 181. Sup. Court United States, 1814. The Aurora-8, 61. It is not necessary, in order to subject the property to License. condemnation for sailing under a license from the enemy, that the person granting the license, should be duly authorised to grant it, provided the person receiving it takes it with the expectation that it will protect his property from the enemy. The Aurora, 8. Cranch, 203. Sup Court U. S. 1814. Prize. 62. Sailing, with intent to further the views of the enemy, Enemy trade. is sufficient to condemn the property, although that intention be frustrated by capture. 63. Sailing with a cargo of provisions to the port of a neu- id. tral, who is the ally of our enemy in his war with another poser, is such a furtherance of the views of the enemy, as win subject the ship and cargo to condemuation as prize of id. war.-The Hiram-8, Cranch, 444, Sup. Court U. S. 1814. t4. The case of a vessel and cargo belonging to a citizen Salvage. of one belligerent nation, captured on the high seas by a cruizer of the other belligerent. given by the captor to a neutral, Prize. and by him brought into a port and libelled in a court of his Own C atry, between which, and the nation to which the ves is rally belonged, war breaks out before final adjudication, pasidered as a case of salvage. One moiety adjudged Confiscation. Thats, and the other moiety to remain subject to the of the court below; and to be restored to the downer after the termination of the war, unless provi Sold previously be made for the confiscation of enemy's found in the country at the declaration of war.— venture-8, Cranch, 1. Sup. Court, U. S., 181 ́. The istrea-1, Wheaton, 12, Sup Court, U. S.. 1816. 65. If a citizen of the United States establish his domicil in Prize. & foreign country, between which and the United States hostili ties afterwards break out, any property shipped by such citi Domicil. zen before knowledge of the war, and captured by an American cruizer after the declaration of war, must be condemned as lawful prize. The Venus-8, Cranch, 253, Sup. Court, U. S. 18 4. interest. 66. If the option be given to the consignee to take the goods Proprietary to his own account or not, the right of property does not vest Prize. in the consignee until he has made his election —id, ib. 67. A naturalized citizen, who, in time of peace, returns Prize. to his native country for the purpose of trade but with is tention of returning to his adopted country, commung in the for |