The authorities there cited are:

Don Antonio Riquelme, Derecho International, Tome I, p. 83.

Don Andres Bello, Derecho Int., p. 38.

Don Jose Maria de Pando, Derecho Int., p. 99.
Almeda, Derecho Publico Tome I, p. 199.

The following quotation is from Sala Mexicana, Tome II, pages 61-65, section 6:

22. Continuous accession is divided into natural and industrial and occurs in personal property and real estate. Natural accession in real estate arises from four causes-alluvion, flood or manifest force of rivers, change of bed or channel, and islands appearing in rivers. In this same class of property there occurs industrial accession through building, and there is a mixed accession consisting of planting or sowing. The Emperor Justinian says of alluvion that it is inclementum latens; that it is confined as the successive, imperceptible accretion to property from rivers. This acquisition is recognized by the law of nations, and the reason why such an increase belongs industrious to the owner of the land which has been increased by alluvion, consists in the imperceptible nature of the increase, for although, in order that a river may have added land to my possession, it must necessarily have taken it away from some other possession, this increase, as it is supposed to be imperceptible, does not show for certain the owner who lost it.

The following quotations and authorities bear out the same doctrine:

The Institutes of Justinian, translation by J. B. Moyle, 4th ed., pages 38, 39.

Moreover, soil which a river has added to your land by alluvion, becomes yours by the law of nations. Alluvion is an imperceptible addition; and that which is added so gradually that you can not perceive the exact increase from one moment of time to another is added by alluvion. Rayneval, Institutions de Droit de la Nature et des gens, Vol. I, page 307, sec. 2:

It often happens that the course of rivers is toward one shore rather than the other, and that they leave accretions on the opposite shore which are formed by alluvion. In this case the accretions go to the nation to which the contiguous land belongs, the other having no right to demand compensation.

Travers Twiss, The Law of Nations (London, 1884), Chapter IX, sec. 154, page 252.

Creasy, International Law, pages 221-224:

With regard to the third class of lands, i. e., agri arcifinii, a river which bounds them changes the boundaries of territory and jurisdiction by gradually altering its course; and whatever it adds on one side belongs to the territory on that side, because the two States between which the river flows are presumed to have originally taken the center

of the river as their natural boundary.

This is so where the change of

the course of the river is gradual. For there the change of its parts does not destroy its identity but leaves it the same.

Hall, International Law, pages 121-122.

Halleck's International Law, vol. i (Sir Sherston Baker, Bart.) pages 182 to 184.

Puffendorf, Law of Nature, pages 403-406.

Carnassa Amari. Traite de Droit International Public en Temps de Paix, sect. 18, p. 522:

The land imperceptibly abandoned by the current of the water belongs to the nation on whose side the abandonment takes place, the other nation on to which the river advances not being allowed to demand any compensation, because the damage it sustains arises from a natural and fortuitous phenomenon. The river continues to constitute the boundary between the two nations, and the line of the thalweg is always situated in its axis.

Italian Civil Code, Art. 436.

Handbuch des Volkerrechts Holtzendorff, vol. 2, Hamburg, 1887, sect. 36, pages 266-268.

Taylor, International Public Law, pages 274, 275.

Vattel, le Droit des Gens (1863) Tome 1, pp. 563, 564.
Whewell's Grotius, Cambridge, 1853, Chap. III.

Ch. Calvo, Droit International, Tome I, ed. 5, 1896, section 333, has the following reference to the treaty of 1848:

By virtue of the Convention of Guadalupe, under date of February 2, 1847, it is the Rio Grande, the Gila, and Colorado Rivers that constitute the boundary between the United States and Mexico from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean.

PRESCRIPTION.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ASSERTS INTERNATIONAL TITLE TO "EL CHAMIZAL" BY RIGHT OF PRESCRIPTION.

The Republic of Mexico is estopped to assert international title over the territory known as "El Chamizal" by reason of the undisturbed, uninterrupted, and unchallenged possession of said territory by the United States of America since the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

The right of prescription here invoked by the United States of America is an integral principle of the law of nations."

a Bello: "Prescription is even more important and necessary between nations than between individuals." (Derecho Internacional, edition 4, pp. 42, 43; paragraph 6.) Bluntschli: Prescription "is absolutely indispensible in International Law." (Das Moderne Völkerrecht [1878], p. 177, par. 290.)

Despagnet: Prescription "is almost universally admitted in the International Relations." (Droit International Public, 3rd Ed., sec. 380.)

Field: "The uninterrupted possession of territory or other property for fifty years by a nation, excludes the claim of every other nation." (International Code, second edition, sec. 52, p. 22.)

Supreme Court of the United States of America: "Prescription is applicable to the title to national property." (Rhode Island versus Massachusetts, 4 Howard, 591; Boyd's Lessee versus Graves, et al, 4 Wheaton, 513; Indiana versus Kentucky, 136 U. S., 479; Virginia versus Tennessee, 148 U. S., 503; United States versus Chaves, 175 U. S., 509; Louisiana versus Mississippi, 202 U. S., I. Moore.-International Arbitrations, vol. 4, pp. 4179-4203.)

* * *

Foignet: "Prescription must be recognized as a mode for acquisition among nations notably in determining the boundaries between two nations.' (Manuel Elémentaire de Droit International Public. Edition 6, pp. 116, 117, paragraph 4.) Glenn: "When title to territory has received the consecration of time it should be declared valid." (International Law, p. 51, section 38.)

Hall: "Title by prescription arises out of a long continued possession." (International Law, 4th edition, chapter 36, p. 123.)

Lawrence: "Though its existence in international law has been denied by some writers, the balance of authority is overwhelmingly in its favor." (Principles of International Law, p. 166.)

Maxey: "The doctrine is necessary in order to prevent strife and give stability to titles." (International Law, p. 146.)

Martens: "The mutual advantage to the nations seems in reality to demand that we recognize it." (Précis du Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, vol. 1, Chapter IV, section 70.)

Oppenheim: "Prescription in international law may be defined as the acquisition of sovereignty over territory through continuous and undisturbed exercise of sovereignty over it." (International Law, chapter 16, p. 293.)

Phillimore: "It will be found * * in the highest degree irrational to deny that Prescription is an ultimate means of International Acquisition.' (International Law, vol. 1, chap. 13.)

Grotius: "If we should admit it to be true (that prescription can not take place between two free nations), a very great inconvenience would follow; the disputes about kingdoms and boundaries would never be at an end, which is * * * contrary to the common sense of nations." (Rights of War and Peace, Book chapter 4.)

Puffendorf: "There can happen very few cases in which dominion and sovereignty shall not be the consequence of prescription when a State or people have 71210-11-8

113

OF WHAT MAY BE PRESCRIBED.

Any right which may be the subject of sovereign title may be prescribed, i. e., territory and boundaries.

In this case the United States of America asserts a dual prescription. First. To the Rio Grande as a water boundary since 1836. Second. To the Chamizal tract since it was formed, beginning in 1852."

HISTORICAL NOTE.

It has already been stated that in the negotiations in 1804 between the French Republic and the Spanish Monarchy, debating their claims to the lands bordering the Gulf of Mexico, France asserted the Rio Bravo, from its mouth to the thirtieth degree of latitude, to be the line of demarcation.c After the acquisition of Louisiana by the United States of America, the Secretary of State, addressing the Spanish plenipotentiary, asserted the rights of the United States to extend to the Rio Bravo, citing in support of this claim Don Thomas Lopez, geographer to the King of Spain. (United States Countercase Appendix, 124.)

possessed themselves of anything upon a peaceful title." (The Law of Nature and Nations, Book 4, chapter 12, section 9.)

Ralston, in his volume entitled "International Arbitral Law and Procedure," cites the treaty between Venezuela and Great Britain for determination of the boundary between British Guiana and Venezuela: “(a) Adverse holding or prescription during a period of fifty years shall make a good title." (P. 270.)

Riquelme: "The dominion of nations is acquired and lost by prescription." (Derecho Público Internacional, 1875, p. 29.)

Vattel: "Having shown that * * * prescription is founded in the law of nature, it is easy to see that (it) is equally à part of the Law of Nations." (Law of Nations, chapter 11, p. 190 (?).)

Piédelièvre: "The largest number of international law writers accept it (the doctrine of prescription), and we believe rightly. It is certain that the doctrine is in conformity with international practice.' (Précis de Droit International Publico ou Droit des Gens, Vol. I, sec. 430.)

Wheaton: "It can not be seriously doubted, that long-continued firm possession, especially if practically undisputed by force, is sufficient to create sovereign title." (Elements of International Law, 8th ed., chap. 4, pt. 2, sec. 164.)

Wildman: "The principle of prescription applies no less forcibly to national than to private parties." (Institutes of International Law, vol. 2, p. 24.)

Calvo: "Acquisition by prescription is more necessary for states than individuals." (Droit International, vol. I, par. 173.)

a Field: International Code, second edition, section 53; Supreme Court of the United States of America, Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, IV Howard, 591.

Lawrence: Principles of International Law, p. 166; Grotius: Rights of War and Peace, Book, chapter 4; Riquelme, Derecho Público Internacional, edition of 1875, page 29; Pièdeliévre: Precis de Droit International Public ou Droit des Gens, Vol. I, sec. 430.

'Prescription renders great service, notably in determining boundaries between two nations. Foignet, Manuel Elémentaire de Droit International Public, sixth edition, pages 116-117, section 4.

b See supra, p. 8.

See secret instructions for the Captain-General of Lɔuisiana approved by the First Consul (U. S. Countercase Appendix, 123.)

After cession by the United States of America of all rights in Texas to Spain in exchange for the Floridas in 1819, title to both banks of the Rio Grande rested in the Spanish Crown until Mexico achieved her independence from Spain in 1824. Twelve years later Texas won her independence from Mexico, and in the treaty of Velasco the Rio Grande was established as the boundary between Mexico and Texas from its mouth to its source."

OF THE LENGTH OF TIME NECESSARY TO PERFECT THE RIGHT.

Phillimore says:

It will be found, on the one hand, in the highest degree irrational to deny that Prescription is a legitimate means of International Acquisition; and it will, on the other hand, be found both inexpedient and impracticable to attempt to define the exact period within which it can be said to have become established—or, in other words, to settle the precise limitation of time which gives validity to the title of national possessions."

Field proposes a period of 50 years as a suitable time, while many writers fix the lapse of time "necessary for a generation to be born, educated, and come into possession of the powers and duties of the State."@

OF THE PROOFS OF PRESCRIPTION.

Phillimore says:

The proofs of prescriptive possession are simple and few. They are principally publicity, continued occupation, absence of interruption, aided no doubt generally, both morally and legally speaking, by the employment of labor and capital upon the possession by the new possessor during the period of the silence or passiveness, or the absence of any attempt to exercise proprietary rights by the former possessor.

To the same effect in general are the various international law writers heretofore quoted herein, to whom reference is hereby made.

a See Congressional Globe, Appendix, Thirtieth Congress, first session, page 660. See also United States Countercase Appendix, page 134. See act of Congress, Republic of Texas, approved December 31, 1838; also United States Countercase Appendix, page 132; Ibid., page 133; Ibid., page 135; Ibid., page 137; Ibid., page 138. Phillimore's International Law, volume 1, chapter 13.

c See Field's International Code, second edition, page, 22, section 52.

d Bello, Derecho Internacional, Edition 4, pages 42-43, section 6; pages 46-47, section 1; pages 135-139, section 3; Bluntschli, Das Moderne Völkerrecht (1878), paragraph 290, page 177; Foignet, Manuel Elémentaire de Droit International Public, Edition 6, pages 116, 117, section 4; Glenn, International Law, page 50, Maxey, International Law, page 146; Oppenheim, International Law, chapter 16, section 243; Phillimore, International Law, volume 1, chapter 13, paragraphs CCLV and CCLVI; also see CCLVIII and CCLIX; Piédelièvre, Précis de Droit International Public ou Droit des Gens, volume 1, section 430; Taylor, International Public Law, section 219; Twiss, The Law of Nations (London, 1884), chapter 8, section 129, pages 212-213; also Twiss, The Oregon Question Examined, pages 170-174; Vattel, Law of Nations, chapter 11, pages 190-191; Wheaton, International Law, Part II, chapter 4, secs. 164-165.