tion unaffected

lakes

this jurisdiction, they are considerered as parts of the territory of the nation herself." 6 Webster's Works, 306, 307. We do not accept the doctrine that, because by the treaty U. s. jurisdicbetween the United States and Great Britain the boundary by fact of boundary line running line between the two countries is run through the centre through center of of the lakes, their character as seas is changed, or that the jurisdiction of the United States to regulate vessels belong ing to their citizens navigating those waters and to punish offenses committed upon such vessels, is in any respect impaired. Whatever effect may be given to the boundary line between the two countries, the jurisdiction of the United States over the vessels of their citizens navigating those waters and the persons on board remains unaffected. The limitation to the jurisdiction by the qualification that the offenses punishable are committed on vessels in any arm of the sea, or in any river, haven, creek, basin, or bay "without the jurisdiction of any particular State," which means without the jurisdiction of any State of the Union, does not apply to vessels on the "high seas" of the lakes, but only to vessels on the waters designated as connecting with them. So far as vessels on those seas are concerned, there is no limitation named to the authority of the United States. It is true that lakes, properly so called, that is, bodies of water whose dimensions are capa- ever designated. ble of measurement by the unaided vision, within the limits of a State, are part of its territory and subject to its jurisdiction, but bodies of water of an extent which cannot be measured by the unaided vision, and which are navigable at all times in all directions, and border on different nations or States or people, and find their outlet in the ocean as in the present case, are seas in fact, however they may be designated. And seas in fact do not cease to be such, and become lakes, because by local custom they may be so called.

In our judgment the District Court of the Eastern District of Michigan had jurisdiction to try the defendant upon the indictment found, and it having been transferred to the Circuit Court, that court had jurisdiction to proceed with the trial, and the demurrer to its jurisdiction should have been overruled. Our opinion, in answer to the certificate, is that

The courts of the United States have jurisdiction, under section 5346 of the Revised Statutes, to try a person for an assault, with a dangerous weapon, committed on a vessel belonging to a citizen of the United

Great Lakes are seas in fact, how

States, when such vessel is in the Detroit River, out of the jurisdiction of any particular State, and within the territorial limits of the Dominion of Canada; and it will be returned to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Sixth Circuit and Eastern District of Michigan, and it is so ordered.

MR. JUSTICE GRAY and MR. JUSTICE BROWN dissenting.

Statement of

the case.

CASE OF THE THREE FRIENDS.

(Vol. 166, United States Reports, p. 1. Decided March 1, 1897. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER delivered the opinion of the court.)

The steamer Three Friends was seized November 7, 1896, by the collector of customs for the district of St. John's, Florida, as forfeited to the United States under section 5283 of the Revised Statutes, and, thereupon, November 12, was libelled on behalf of the United States in the District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The first two paragraphs of the libel alleged the seizure and detention of the vessel, and the libel then continued: "Third. That the said steamboat or steam vessel, the 'Three Friends,' was on, to wit, on the twenty-third day of May, A. D. 1896, furnished, fitted out and armed, with intent that she should be employed in the service of a certain people, to wit, certain people then engaged in armed resistance to the government of the King of Spain, in the island of Cuba, to cruise and commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens and property of the King of Spain, in the island of Cuba, with whom the United States are and were at that date at peace.

66

Fourth. That the said steamboat or steam vessel, 'Three Friends,' on, to wit, the twenty-third day of May, A. D. 1896, whereof one Napoleon B. Broward was then and there master, and within the said southern district of Florida, was then and there fitted out, furnished and armed, with intent that said vessel, the said 'Three Friends,' should be employed in the service of a certain people, to wit, the insurgents in the island of Cuba, otherwise called the Cuban revolutionists, to cruise and commit hostilities against the subjects, property and people of the King of Spain, in the said island of Cuba, with whom the United States are and were then at peace.

66

Fifth. That the said steamboat or steam vessel, 'Three Friends,' on, to wit, on the twenty-third day of May, A. D. 1896, and whereof one N. B. Broward was

the case.

then and there master, within the navigable waters of the Statement of United States, and within the southern district of Florida and the jurisdiction of this court, was then and there, by certain persons to the attorneys of the said United States unknown, furnished, fitted out and armed, being loaded with supplies and arms and munitions of war, and it, the said steam vessel Three Friends,' being then and there furnished, fitted out and armed with one certain gun or guns, the exact number to the said attorneys of the United States unknown, and with munitions of war thereof, with the intent, then and there, to be employed in the service of a certain people, to wit, certain people then engaged in armed resistance to the government of the King of Spain in the island of Cuba, and with the intent to cruise and commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens and property of the King of Spain, in the said island of Cuba, and who, on the said date and day last aforesaid, and being so furnished, fitted out, and armed as aforesaid, then and there aforesaid, from the navigable waters of the United States, to wit, from St. John's River, within the southern district of Florida, and within the jurisdiction of this court aforesaid, proceeded upon a voyage to the island of Cuba aforesaid, with the intent aforesaid, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided. And that by force and virtue of the acts of Congress in such case made and provided, the said steamboat or steam vessel, her tackle, engines, machinery, apparel and furniture became and are forfeited to the use of the said United States.

"Sixth. And the said attorneys say that by reason of all and singular the premises aforesaid, and that by force of the statute in such case made and provided, the aforesaid and described steamboat or steam vessel 'Three Friends,' her tackle, machinery, apparel and furniture, became and are forfeited to the use of the said United States."

And concluded with a prayer for process and monition and the condemnation of the vessel as forfeited. Attachment and monition having issued as prayed, Napoleon, B. Broward and Montcalm Broward, masters and owners, intervened as claimants; applied for an appraisement of the vessel and her release on stipulation; and filed the following exceptions to the libel:

"1. Sec. 5283, for an alleged violation of which the said vessel is sought to be forfeited, makes such forfeiture dependent upon the conviction of a person for doing the

Statement of act or acts denounced in the first sentence of said section,

the case.

and as a consequence of conviction of such person; whereas the allegations in said libel do not show what persons had been guilty of the acts therein denounced as unlawful.

"2. The said libel does not show the 'Three Friends' was fitted out and armed, attempted to be fitted out and armed, or procured to be fitted out and armed in violation of said section.

66 3. The said libel does not show the said vessel was so fitted out and armed, or so attempted to be fitted out and armed, or so procured to be fitted out and armed or furnished, with the intent that said vessel should be employed in the service of a foreign prince, or state, or of a colony, district or people with whom the United States are at peace.

“4. The said libel does not show by whom said vessel was so fitted out.

5. Said libel does not show in the service of what foreign prince, or state, or colony, or district, or body politic the said vessel was so fitted out.

"6. The said libel does not show that said vessel was so armed or fitted out or furnished with the intent that such vessel should be employed in the service of any body politic recognized by or known to the United States as a body politic."

The vessel was appraised at $4000 and a bond on stipulation given for $10,000, upon which she was directed to be released. The cause came on to be heard upon the exceptions to the libel, and on January 18 the following decree was entered:

"This cause coming on to be heard upon exceptions to the libel and having been fully heard and considered, it is ordered that said second, third, fifth and sixth exceptions be sustained and that the libellant have permission to amend said libel and in event said libel is not so amended within ten days the same stand dismissed and the bond herein filed be canceled."

From this decree the United States, on January 23, prayed an appeal to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which was allowed and duly prosecuted.

The following errors were assigned:

"First. For that the court over the objection of the libellants allowed the said steam vessel 'Three Friends' to be released from custody upon the giving of bond.

the case.

"Second. For that the court erred in sustaining the 2d, Statement of 3d, 5th and 6th exceptions of the claimants to the libel of information of the libellants.

"Third. For that the court erred in entering a decree dismissing the libel of information herein."

On February 1 application was made to this court for a writ of certiorari to bring up the cause from said Circuit Court of Appeals, and, having been granted and sent down, the record was returned accordingly.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER, after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court:

The libel alleged that the vessel was "furnished, fitted opinion. out and armed, with intent that she should be employed in the service of a certain people, to wit, certain people then engaged in armed resistance to the Government of the King of Spain, in the island of Cuba, to cruise and commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens and property of the King of Spain, in the island of Cuba, with whom the United States are and were at that date at peace.

The learned District Judge held that this was insufficient under section 5283, because it was not alleged "that said vessel had been fitted out with intent that she be employed in the service of a foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district or people recognized as such by the political power of the United States."

Revised Statutes;

tion.

In Wiborg v. United States, 163 U. S. 632, which was Title LXVII, an indictment under section 5286, we referred to the eleven as to its opera sections from 5281 to 5291, inclusive, which constitute Title LXVII of the Revised Statutes, and said: "The statute was undoubtedly designed in general to secure neutrality in wars between two other nations, or between contending parties recognized as belligerents, but its operation is not necessarily dependent on the existence of such state of belligerency," and the consideration of the present case arising under section 5283 confirms us in the view thus expressed.

It is true that in giving a résumé of the sections, we referred to section 5283 as dealing "with fitting out and arming vessels in this country in favor of one foreign power as against another foreign power with which we are at peace," but that was matter of general description, and the entire scope of the section was not required to be indicated.