perfect equality and reciprocity, and by care- | government of Buenos Ayres, and he wishes fully avoiding all those burthensome preferen- their attention may be drawn to the sentiment, ces, which are usually sources of debate, em- that it is incompatible both with the rights and barrassment, and discontent; by leaving also the obligations of the United States-with each party at liberty to make, respecting com- their rights, as an offensive exercise of sovermerce and navigation, those interior regula- eign authority by foreigners, within their juristions which it shall find most convenient to it- diction, and without their consent-with their self; and by founding the advantage of com- obligations, as involving a violation of the neumerce solely upon reciprocal utility, and the trality which they have invariably avowed, and just rules of free intercourse; reserving withal which it is their determination to maintain. to each party the liberty of admitting, at its The President expects, from the friendly displeasure, other nations to a participation of the position manifested by the supreme director same advantage." towards the United States, that no instance of In the second article of the same treaty, it this cause of complaint will hereafter be given. was also stipulated, that neither the United Mr. Adams requests Mr. De Forest to accept States nor France should thenceforth grant any the renewed assurances of his distinguished particular favor to other nations, in respect of consideration.-Washington, Jan. 1, 1819. commerce and navigation, which should not immediately become common to the other nations, freely, if the concession was free, or for the same compensation, if conditional.

In answer to Mr. De Forest's note of the 12th instant, Mr. Adams has the honor of assuring him, that the President has received with much satisfaction the information contained in it; and will derive great pleasure from every event which shall contribute to the stability and honor of the government of Buenos Ayres.

Mr. Adams requests Mr. De Forest to accept the assurance of his distinguished consideration.-Washington, Dec. 31, 1818.

*No. 9.

[*56

SIR-It is not my intention to give any unnecessary trouble to the department of state; but having had the honor of receiving two notes from Mr. Secretary Adams, on the 4th instant, dated December 31st, and January 1st, some explanation appears to be necessary. "that

In the first place, I do not suppose any privileges which may be attached to the consular character can avail in the judicial tribunals of this country, to influence, in any manner, the administration of justice." But, I suppose, that a consul duly accredited is, ex officio, the legal representative of Lis fellow-citiNo. 8. Mr. Adams to Mr. De Forest. zens, not otherwise represented by an express Mr. Adams presents his compliments to Mr. power; and that the tribunals of justice do, De Forest, and in reference to the case of the and will, admit the legality of such representaschooner brought into Scituate, mentioned in tion. Mr. Adams has misunderstood me in Mr. De Forest's communication of the 9th inst., another observation, which was in substance, as well as to several others which have occurred that there was a general opinion prevailing at of a similar character, requests him to have the Buenos Ayres, that the power first recognizing 55*] goodness to impress upon the *government our independence would expect some extraorof Buenos Ayres the necessity of taking meas- dinary privilege or advantage therefor; and ures to repress the excesses and irregularities that, in my opinion, the government of Buenos committed by many armed vessels, sailing Ayres would readily grant it if demanded. I under their flag, and bearing their commissions. know nothing, however, of any resolution havThe government of the United States have rea-ing been passed on this subject by the Congress son to believe that many of these vessels have at Tucuman. been fitted out, armed, equipped, and manned in the ports of the United States, and in direct violation of their laws.

Of the persons composing the prize crew of the vessel at Scituate, and now in confinement upon charges of murder and piracy, it is understood that three are British subjects, and one a citizen of the United States. It is known that commissions for private armed vessels, to be fitted out, armed, and manned in this country, have been sent from Buenos Ayres to the United States, with the names of the vessels, commanders, and officers, in blank, to be filled up here, and have been offered to the avidity of speculators, stimulated more by the thirst for plunder than by any regard for the South American cause.

Of such vessels, it is obvious that neither the captains, officers, nor crews, can have any permanent connection with Buenos Ayres, and from the characters of those who alone could be induced to engage in such enterprises, there is too much reason to expect acts of atrocity, such as those alleged against the persons implicated in the case of the vessel at Scituate.

The President wishes to believe that this practice has been without the privity of the

It appears, from the relation of a fact in Mr. Adams's note of the 31st ultimo, that the government of Buenos Ayres had intimated a desire (in the course of a negotiation with an agent of the United States) to reserve the right of granting more extraordinary privileges to Spain, on the settlement of a general peace, which must appear to every one contrary to their inclination, as well as interest; and it can be accounted for only by supposing that the proposition of the United States agent was merely of a temporary nature, and did not extend to an acknowledgment, by the United States, of the independence of South America; which act, I am confident, would have rendered any such reservation altogether unnecessary in the opinion of the government of Buenos Ayres, who must have seen that they were treating with an unauthorized person, and must have thought it good policy at this time to suggest such an idea. Indeed, were the government of Buenos Ayres to pursue that course, they might plead the example [*57 of a neighboring power, acknowledged to be independent by the United States; and its chief, both illustrious and legitimate. It is well known that the government of Brazil taxes the

commerce of the United States about thirty per | be skilled in the law of nations, nor of dicent. higher than that of Great Britain. It plomacy, nor would I doubt the correctness of may be that Great Britain is entitled to this any opinion expressed by the President, for preference, on account of important services ren- whose person and character I have entertained dered by her to the King of Portgual; and permit the most profound respect; yet, I must say me to ask you, sir, what services could be ren- that I cannot understand the difference between dered to any nation already in existence, so the sending of a consular agent, duly authorizgreat as would be the acknowledgment by ed, to Buenos Ayres, where one was accredited Great Britain, or by the United States, of the from this country, four or five years ago, and independence of South America? Such recog- has continued ever since in the exercise of the nition, merely, by either of these powers, would duties of his office, and the reception of a simprobably have the immediate effect of putting ilar agent here. I also beg leave to mention, an end to the cruel and destructive war, now that I was in this country soon after the arrival raging between Spain and South America, and of the present minister of Spain, the Chevalier crown with never-fading laurels the nation thus de Onis; and recollect to have heard it observfirst using its influence in favor of an oppressed, ed, that being a political agent, he was not acbut high-minded people. credited, because the sovereignty of Spain was in dispute; but, that the consuls, who acknowledged the same government (one of the claimants to the sovereignty, and the one actually in possession of it), were allowed to exercise their functions. *If this was the case at that [*59 time, the government of the United States must have then had a different opinion on this subject from what it now has. Mr. Adams will please to bear in mind that I have only solicited to be accredited as a consular agent, having never agitated the question of an acknowledgment of our independence as a nation, which most certainly is anxiously desired by the government and people of South America, but which, being a political question, I have never asked.

The account given by Mr. Adams, in his note of the 1st instant, respecting the irregular conduct of vessels sailing under the Buenos Ayres flag, has caused me much mortification, and has already been transmitted to my government by the Plattsburg; as also a copy of Mr. Adams's frank and friendly communication of the 31st ultimo. The supreme director will certainly be desirous to adopt the most prompt and efficacious measures within his power to remedy the evils complained of. But pray, sir, what can he do more than has already been done? The government of Buenos Ayres have established the most just rules and regulations for the government of their vessels of war, as well as of commerce; and have sent me to this country, invested with the title and powers of their consul-general; as well as to guard against any breach of those rules and regulations, by their citizens and vessels frequenting these seas, and the ports of these United States, as to protect them in their rights; but, sir, without a recognition of my powers, on the part of the government, I can have no right whatever to question any individual on the subject of his of La Plata, to his Excellency the President of the conduct; nor can any responsibility attach to 58*] me, nor to my government, *during such a state of things, for irregularities committed.

A considerable number of our seamen are foreigners by birth, who have voluntarily entered our service; therefore, it is not a matter of surprise, that, of the mutineers of the prize crew of the vessel at Scituate, three should have been born Englishmen, and one a North American. It is, however, an absolute fact, to which I am personally knowing, that the captors of that prize (the Buenos Ayres and Tucuman privateers) were legally fitted out at Buenos Ayres, early in the last year, from which port they sailed on a cruise off Cadiz; and it will afford the government of South America much satisfaction to learn that the United States will prosecute those mutineers, and punish such as are found guilty of crimes, according to the laws.

Before I close this note, I beg leave to make a few observations in answer to one of the reasons for not accrediting me, given by Mr. Adams, by direction of the President of the United States, in a conversation which I have had the honor of holding with him, viz. "That the act of accrediting me as consulgeneral would be tantamount to the formal acknowledgment of the independence of the government which sent me.' I do not profess to

"

Mr. Adams will also be pleased to accept the renewed assurances of my most distinguished consideration and respect.

(Signed) DAVID C. DE FOREST. GEORGETOWN, January 8, 1819.

No. 10.

The Supreme Director of the United Provinces

United States of North America.

MOST EXCELLENT SIR-The supreme government of these provences have long exerted their zealous efforts to establish the closest and most amicable relations with the United States of America, to which the most obvious interests seem mutually to invite them. This desirable object has hitherto been frustrated by the events of the times; but the moment appears at length to have arrived, which presents to the people of these provinces the flattering prospect of seeing their ardent wishes accomplished. În consideration of these circumstances, and in conformity with the 23d of the articles agreed upon with citizen William G. D. Worthington, the agent of your government in these provinces, I have nominated citizen David C. De Forest, their consul-general to the United States, with the powers specified in his commission and instructions respectively. I therefore request your excellency to grant him the attention and consideration, which in the like case will be afforded to the public agents of your excellency resident in these regions.

I avail myself of this renewed occasion of reiterating to your excellency, assurances of the sentiments of respect and consideration, with which I have the honor to be, your excellency's most obedient and most humble servant.

(Signed) JN. MM. DE PUEYRREDON.

GENERAL INDEX

TO THE

FOUR VOLUMES OF WHEATON CONTAINED IN THIS BOOK.
FORMED BY CONSOLIDATION.

N. B. Figures at right of title show volume to whose index it belongs.

Figures in parenthesis refer to marginai paging of the volumes contained in this book respecively,
while the black-faced figures indicate the page of this book on which the marginal paging, referred to

The Eolus,

(392) 418
26. Libel under the 25th sec. of the registry act of
1792, ch. 146 (1.), for a fraudulent use by a vessel of
a certificate of registry, to the benefit of which she
was not entitled. Vessel forfeited. The provisions
of the 27th sec. apply as well to vessels which have
not been previously registered as to those to which
registers have been previously granted.
The Neptune,

11. The statute of 1794, ch. 50, s. 3, prohibiting the 25. A question of fact under the non-importation
fitting out any ship, &c., for the service of any for- laws. Defense set up on the plea of distress, re-
eign prince or states, to cruise against the subjectspelled. Condemnation.
of any other foreign prince, &c., does not apply to
any new government, unless it has been acknowl-
edged by the United States, or by the government
of the country to which such new state previously
belonged. A plea setting up a forfeiture under that
statute, in fitting out a ship to cruise against such
new state, must aver such recognition, or it is bad.
ld.
(328) 402
12. A plea justifying a seizure under this statute,
need not state the particular prince or state by
name, against whom the ship was intended to cruise.
Id.
(329) 402
13. The 7th section of the statute of 1794, was not
intended to apply, except to cases where a seizure
or detention could not be enforced by the ordinary
civil power, and there was a necessity, in the opin-
ion of the President, to employ naval or military
power for this purpose.

ld.

(331, 334) 402, 403
14. The definitive sentence of a court of admiral-
ty, or any other court of peculiar and exclusive
jurisdiction, whether of condemnation or acquittal,
is conclusive, wherever the same subject-matter
comes incidentally in controversy in any other
tribunal.

Id.

(315) 398
15. Application of this principle to a recent case
in England.
Note 1,
(322) 400
16. Supposing that the third article of the Consti-
tution of the United States, which declares that
"the judicial power shall extend to all cases of ad-
miralty and maritime jurisdiction," vests in the
United States exclusive jurisdiction of all such
cases, and that a murder committed in the waters
of a state, where the tide ebbs and flows, is a case
of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; yet Con-
gress have not, in the 8th section of the act of 1790,
ch. 9," for the punishment of certain crimes against
the United States," so exercised this power as to
confer on the courts of the United States jurisdic-
tion over such murder.

The United States v. Bevans,
(336, 387) 404, 416
17. Quare, Whether courts of common law have
concurrent jurisdiction with the admiralty over
murder committed in bays, &c., which are inclosed
parts of the sea.
ld.

(387) 416
18. Congress having, in the 8th section of the act
of 1790, ch. 9, provided for the punishment of mur-
der, &c., committed upon the high seas, or in any
river, haven, basin, or bay, out of the jurisdiction
of any particular state," it is not the offense com-
mitted, but the bay, &c., in which it is committed,
that must be out of the jurisdiction of the state.
ld.
(387) 416
19. The grant to the United States, in the consti-
tution, of all cases of admiralty and maritime juris-
diction, does not extend to a cession of the waters in
which those cases may arise, or of general jurisdic-
tion over the same. Congress may pass all laws
which are necessary for giving the most complete
effect to the exercise of the admiralty and mari-
time jurisdiction granted to the government of the
Union; but the general jurisdiction over the place,
subject to this grant, adheres to the territory as a
portion of territory not yet given away; and the
residuary powers of legislation still remain in the
state.
Id.
(389) 417
20. Congress have power to provide for the pun-
ishment of offenses, committed by persons on board
a ship of war of the United States, wherever that
ship may lie. But Congress have not exercised that
power in the case of a ship lying in the waters of
the United States; the words within any fort,
arsenal, dock-yard, magazine, or in any other place
or district of country under the sole and exclusive
jurisdiction of the United States," in the third sec-
tion of the act of 1790, ch. 9, not extending to a ship
of war, but only to objects in their nature fixed and
territorial.
Id.
(390) 417
21. Texts on the admiralty jurisdiction.
Note 3, 4,
(357, 361) 409, 410
22. Resolution of 1632, upon the cases of admiralty
jurisdiction.
(365) 411
23. Agreement of the judges of the King's Bench
and the admiralty of 1575.
(367) 411
24. Case of The King v. Bruce. Note 1, (371) 412

Note 4,

Note 5,

See Piracy.

See Practice, 5, 6, 7.
See Prize.

ADMIRALTY—4.

(601) 469

1. Where the pleadings in an admiralty cause are
too informal and defective to pronounce a final
sentence upon the merits, the cause will be re-
manded by this court to the Circuit Court, with
directions to permit the pleadings to be amended,
and for further proceedings.

The Divina Pastora,

(52,64) 512, 515

2. A collector of the customs, who makes a seiz-
ure of goods for an asserted forfeiture, and before
the proceedings in rem are consummated by a sen-
tence of condemnation, is removed from office,
acquires an inchoate right by the seizure, which
by the subsequent decree of condemnation gives
him an absolute vested right to his share of the
forfeiture under the collection act of the 2d March,
1799, c. 128.

Van Ness v. Buel,

(74) 517

3. In a case of civil salvage, where under its pecu-
liar circumstances, the amount of salvage is discre-
tionary, appeals should not be encouraged upon
the ground of minute distinctions of merit, nor
will the court reverse the decision of an inferior
court, unless it manifestly appears that some im-
portant error has been committed.

The Sybil,

(98) 522

4. The demand of the ship-owners for freight and
general average in such a case, is to be pursued
against that portion of the cargo which is adjudged
to the owners of the goods, by a direct libel, or pe-
tition, and not by a claim interposed in the salvage
cause.
Id.

(99) 522
5. Any citizen may seize any property forfeited
to the use of the government, either by the munic-
ipal law, or as prize, in order to enforce the for-
feiture; and it depends upon the government
whether it will act upon the seizure; if it proceeds
to enforce the forfeiture by legal process, this is a
sufficient confirmation of the seizure.

11. A shipwright who has taken a ship into his
possession to repair it, is not bound to part with
the possession until he is paid for the repairs. But
if he parts with the possession (of a domestic ship),
or has worked upon it without taking possession,
he has no claim upon the ship itself.
Id.
(443) 611

12. The common law being the law of Maryland
on this subject, material men cannot maintain a
suit in rem in the District Court of Maryland for
supplies furnished to a domestic ship, although
they might have maintained a suit in personam in
that court.
Id.

(443) 611

See Duties, 1, 2, 3.
See Domicile.

See License.

See Practice, 5, 6.

See Prize.

ALIEN-3

1. An alien enemy may take lands by purchase,
though not by descent; and that whether the pur-
chase be by grant or by devise.
Note 3,
(14) 322
2. A title acquired by an alien enemy by pur-
chase is not devested until office found.
ld.

(14) 322
3. The 9th article of the treaty of 1794, between
the United States and Great Britain completely
protects the title of a British devisee, whose estate
has not been previously devested by an inquest of
office, or some equivalent proceeding.

Id.

(14) 322

6. A person born in England, before the declara-
tion of independence, and who always resided
there, and never was in the United States, cannot
take lands in Maryland by descent.

Id.

(13) 322
7. By the acts of Maryland of 1780, ch. 45 and 49,
the equitable interest of British subjects in lands
were confiscated, and vested in the state, without
office found, prior to the treaty of 1783, so that the
British cestui que trust was not protected by the
stipulations in that treaty against future confisca-
tions, nor by the stipulation in the treaty of 1794,
securing to British subjects, who then held lands
in this country, the right to continue to hold them,
(13) 322
8. An alien may take, by purchase, a freehold or
other interest in land, and may hold it against all
the world except the King, and even against him
until office found; and is not accountable for the
rents and profits previously received.

Id.

Craig v. Leslie,

See Constitutional Law, 1, 2, 5.
See Lex Loci.

NOTES-2.

(589) 466
9. Where W. R. claimed title to lands in Ken-
tucky, derived from a warrant issued in 1774, by the
Governor of Virginia, on which a grant issued in BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND
1788, to W. S., who was a native subject of the King
of Great Britain, and who left Virginia prior to the
year 1776, and has never since returned to the
United States; held, that W. S. took a legal title to
the lands under the warrant and grant, which not
having been devested by any act of Virginia prior
to the treaty of 1794, was rendered absolute and in-
defeasible by the 9th article of that treaty.
Craig v. Radford,
(594, 599) 467, 468
See Chancery, 6.

See Treaty, 1.

ALIEN-4.!

1. An alien may take an estate in lands by the act
of the parties, as by purchase; but he cannot take
by the act of the law, as by descent.

Orr v. Hodgson,

(453) 613
2. Where a person dies, leaving issue, who are
aliens, the latter are not deemed his heirs in law;
but the estate descends to the next of kin who
have an inheritable blood, in the same manner as
if no such alien issue were in existence.
ld.

(237) 80

PROMISSORY

(lb.) 613
3. The 6th article of the treaty of peace of 1783,
between the United States and Great Britain, com-
pletely protected the titles of British subjects to
lands in the United States, which would have been
liable to forfeiture, by escheat, for the defeat of BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY
alienage. That article was not meant to be con-
fined to confiscations jure belli.