dangerous in this regard were detained alike. That no claim had ever been made by the British government, through the usual diplomatic channels, upon the United States for compensation; and that it could not be believed that such claim would not have been made if Her Majesty's government had considered such a claim valid. The counsel for the United States cited, in this connection, the letter of Mr. Stuart, Her Majesty's minister at Washington, to Mr. Seward, of 1st August, 1862, (U. S. Dip. Cor., 1862, 1863, part 1, p. 273,) upon a somewhat analogous question, in which Mr. Stuart says:

I have been instructed to state to you that Her Majesty's government, after considering these dispatches, in connection with the law-officers of the Crown, are of opinion that it is competent for the United States, as a belligerent power, to protect itself within its own ports and territory by refusing clearances to vessels laden with contraband of war or other specified articles, as well as to vessels which are believed to be bound to confederate ports. And that so long as such precautions are adopted, equally and indifferently in all cases, without reference to the nationality or origin of any particular vessel or goods, they do not afford any just ground of complaint.

The case of the detention of the Labuan, it was contended on the part of the United States, was governed by the same principles and justified by the same rules as the cases referred to by Mr. Stuart. The counsel referred to the decision of the commission upon the American claims against Great Britain, growing out of the prohibition of the exportation of saltpetre at Calcutta, (American claims, Nos. 11, 12, 16, 18,) herein before reported, and in which such prohibition was held by the commission not to involve a violation either of international law or of treaty stipulation; and urged that the principles which would sus tain the validity of such prohibition must also include such a case as the detention of the Labuan.

The counsel for the claimant maintained that the detention of the Labuan was in effect a deprivation of the owners of the use of their property for the time of the detention for the public benefit; that it was in effect a taking of private property for public use, always justified by the necessity of the State, but likewise always involving the obligation of compensation. He cited 3d Phillimore, 42, and Dana's Wheaton, 152, n.

The commission unanimously made an award in favor of the claimant for $37,392.

In the case of Catharine J. Johnson, executrix, No. 449, the memorial alleged that the claimant's testator was the sole registered owner of the British schooner James Douglas, which vessel, while on a voyage from Cuba to New York, met with disaster which led to her being abandoned by the master and crew; that she was subsequently fallen in with by a United States vessel of war, which took her into the port of Beaufort, North Carolina, where she was appropriated to the use of the United States Government; that on application to that Government for her restoration, the Secretary of the Navy gave directions that

the vessel be surrendered to her owner on his renouncing all claims for the use of the vessel by the United States; that, notwithstanding these orders, the vessel had never been restored to her owner, but was still in the port of Beaufort under the control of the officials of the United States. The claimant claimed damages $7,000, besides interest.

The proofs showed that, after the vessel was brought into port, and before any claim was interposed on behalf of her owner, some use had been made of the vessel by the Navy Department; that the claim of the owner was interposed through the British legation, and that the United States Government at once offered to surrender her on payment of a reasonable salvage to the officers and crew of the vessel which brought her in. Some objection being made to the payment of the salvage asked, the United States Government directed her surrender without salvage, on the claimant's waiving claim for compensation for the use that had been made of her while in port. No objection was made to this condition, and no further claim was ever advanced by any person for the vessel. She remained lying at Beaufort waiting requisition of her owner, and nothing further was ever heard of the matter until the filing of the memorial before the commission.

The commission (Mr. Commissioner Gurney dissenting) made an award in the following words:

We think it does not appear that the United States appropriated the vessel, and we regard it as yet being the claimant's property. The claim is, therefore, disallowed. All which is respectfully submitted.

WASHINGTON, November 30, 1873.

ROB: S. HALE, Agent of the United States, &c.

The high contracting parties agree that all claims on the part of corporations, companies, or private individuals (citizens of the United States) upon the government of Her Britannic Majesty, arising out of acts committed against the person or property of citizens of the United States during the period between the thirteenth of April, eighteen hundred and sixty-one, and the ninth of April, eighteen hundred and sixtyfive, inclusive, not being claims growing out of the acts of the vessels referred to in Article I of this treaty, and all claims, with the like exception on the part of corporations, companies, or private individuals, (subjects of Her Britannic Majesty,) upon the Government of the United States, arising out of acts committed against the persons or property of subjects of Her Britannic Majesty during the same period, which may have been presented to either government for its interposition with the other, and which yet remain unsettled, as well as any other such claims which may be presented within the time specified in Article XIV of this treaty, shall be referred to three commissioners, to be appointed in the following manner, that is to say: One commissioner shall be named by the President of the United States, one by Her Britannic Majesty, and a third by the President of the United States and Her Britannic Majesty conjointly; and in case the third commissioner shall not have been so named within a period of three months from the date of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty, then the third

commissioner shall be named by the representative at Washington of His Majesty the King of Spain. In case of the death, absence, or incapacity of any commissioner, or in the event of any commissioner omitting or ceasing to act, the vacancy shall be filled in the manner hereinbefore provided for making the original appointment; the period of three months in case of such substitution being calculated from the date of the happening of the vacancy.

The commissioners so named shall meet at Washington at the earliest convenient period after they have been respectively named; and shall, before proceeding to any business, make and subscribe a solemn declaration that they will impartially and carefully examine and decide, to the best of their judgment, and according to justice and equity, all such claims as shall be laid before them on the part of the governments of the United States and of Her Britannic Majesty, respectively; and such declaration shall be entered on the record of their proceedings.

ARTICLE XIII.

The commissioners shall then forthwith proceed to the investigation of the claims which shall be presented to them. They shall investigate and decide such claims in such order and in such manner as they may think proper, but upon such evidence or information only as shall be furnished by or on behalf of the respective governments. They shall be bound to receive and consider all written documents or statements which may be presented to them by or on behalf of the respective governments in support of or in answer to any claim, and to hear, if required, one person on each side on behalf of each government, as counsel or agent for such government, on each and every separate claim. A majority of the commissioners shall be sufficient for an award in each case. The award shall be given upon each claim in writing, and shall be signed by the commissioners assenting to it. It shall be competent for each government to name one person to attend the commissioners as its agent, to present and support claims on its behalf, and to answer claims made upon it, and to represent it generally in all matters connected with the investigation and decision thereof.

The high contracting parties hereby engage to consider the decisions of the commissioners as absolutely final and conclusive upon each claim decided upon by them, and to give full effect to such decisions, without any objection, evasion, or delay whatsoever.

ARTICLE XIV.

Every claim shall be presented to the commissioners within six months from the day of their first meeting, unless in any case where reasons for delay shall be established to the satisfaction of the commissioners, and then, and in any such case, the period for presenting the claim may be extended by them to any time not exceeding three months longer. The commissioners shall be bound to examine and decide upon every claim within two years from the day of their first meeting. It shall be competent for the commissioners to decide in each case whether any claim has or has not been duly made, preferred, and laid before them, either wholly or to any and what extent, according to the true irtent and meaning of this treaty.

ARTICLE XV.

All sums of money which may be awarded by the commissioners on account of any claim shall be paid by the one government to the other,