Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1835-11-17

the facts and documents, which derived
a complete relutation of the objection above cited
In 1893 and 1904, SPAIN then member of the Euro
pean alliance against France committed numerous acts
OF violence against the neutral flag of the United States
On the 9th of October 1895, she concluded treaty of
amy and navigation with the United States, by the 9th
article of which, each party engaged protect the
sells and property of the subjects citizens of the other
within its jurisdiction on land sea, and TO
cause restitution ofthe same 10 be made in case they
should have been taken In i797 Spain became the al
y of France, and the French Government at that
time exceedingly irritated against the Government OF
the United States. French and Spanish prvateers in
great numbers making on American COM
merce and many prizes carried into the ports of
Spain and there ndudged TO their respective captors.
The United States and Spain became friendly TO-
wards each other, and Con vention consequence
and in which promise of decentralization was made in
favor of the United States. In execution CT this
on not only for the prizes taken by the Spanish cruisers
but also for those taken by the French and adndged in
the ports of Spain in contempt OF the guarantee Pro
missed BY Spain to the American flag in all places under
lis jurisdiction The negotiation to which this deriand
rise, continued for several years. was opened
at Madrid in 1905 resumed at Philadelphia in 1914 and
terminated the 22d of February 1919, by the
treaty of cesson of the Floridas.
In order to apporlion the of five millions which
retained decentralization out the price paid
this cesslon, list of claims MADE out, and
mission appointed for their examination The owners of
vessels seized by French cruisers aud adjudged in the
ports of Spain by the French authorities produced their
proofs and their clnims allowed. The owners of
the vessels seized al Saint Sebastian and sold at Baycnne
also brought forward their claims Their appear
in the list formed om documents by the President
oil the commission, made IN june 1874 they were re-
Jected The Commission based its decision the fact,
that Spain could not have afforded the promised proec
ton in ports occupied by foreign power, and could not
be responsible FOR injuries committed in its territory by
its declared enemies The subsequently
claimed their share of the ndemncaton of twenty-five
millions promised by France, and their right admit
ted without difficulty.
Thus, in the opinion of the United States, manifested
two OCCASIONS the vessels equestced Saint Sebas
ans not comprehended under the Florida treaty.
Let us what the opinion of Spain the subject
considered
paying for the vessels Saint Sebasans
she would have required France 10 repay herr but no
demand of this kind has been made In the treaty Of
December Both, 1928 by which the debt of Spain to
France fixed at eighty millions, all the claims of the
two already asserted, which may be asserted,
are limited to the expenses of the campaign of 1928 and
of the occupation of Spain by the French forces Final
~, the Minister of Foreign Affairs has presented TO
the accounts brought forward by Span after the treaty
Of 1925 and they contain claim whatever relative TO
the ships sequestered at Saint Sebastans.
We have therefore admitted just, the restitution of
the prices of the vessels sequesered at Saint Sebasans
have, however, suotracted three vessels with their
cargoes, for which have given in the state
mcnt.
Class THIRD
PrSses Seq0eersd ia Hoand and ceded TO France, by
tie Gr6afy If .HaTch 18Th, 1910.
The system of blockades established in France by the
deeIees of Berlin and Milan, also established in Hoi
land by decree of January 9th, 1908 The prohibitions
of this decree being euded the Emperor exacted
severe and efficient measures decree of the 23d of
October following, closed the ports of Holland national
well foreign vessels being forbidden from importing
exporting second decree of November 9th, limit
cd the duration of this voluntary blockade the 3ls of
March, 1909 Attic beginning OF March, 1909, third de-
rendered the system less vessels whether
ona neutral belonging to countries in alliance with
France, allowed export and import provided they
confined themselves to articles enumerated in tariff,
which vigorously excluded all colonial goods those
coming from Great Britain.
resolution of June Both, 1909, confirmed the right
previously granted for the period following the 3st of
March, and also extended 1t three months longer ia
yor of American vessels The cargoes be placed
at the disposition of the consgnees, if they
consisted OF goods, the importation Of which allow
ed; 1t otherwise, they to be sequestered. But
resolution of the day reduced the list OF prohibited
articles, and permitted the importation cotton from
the United States and of sugar and coffee from java
for month AFTER the King of Holland was forced TO re-
peal the resolution of June Both, by issued on
the 29lh of July, 1909. number of American vessels
had taken advantage of this temporary suspension
they had been particularly induced TO do so, by the
circumstance that the British Orders in Council
were, at the time, temporarily suspended, with
| gard to American vessels going TO Holland. Sc
! veral OF these vessels were in Holland, when the
! treaty of March l6, 1910, concluded between
cargoes were sequesercd and placed at the disposition
OF France, the vessels being ordered away The
goes carried to Antwerp Paris, where they
sod and the price was paid into the public treasury
! appears from the statements of the Custom House.
Should The produced by the sale of these cargoes
be repaid These cargocs least the greater part of
them, had entered at period when by the DEGREES of
March and June, 1909, the ports of Holland legal
y open to vessels which had had no communication with
the enemy But these cargoes consisted almost entirely
OF colonial goods, and the resolution of June 30 only
permitted The Importation of articles coming from Amc
On this point, uncertain, and have, present.
no means of ascerlaining the fact
The assimilation Of the Holland cargocs to those of
St-Sebastians is not therefore evidently established
Moysovcr the treaty of cession agreed TO by Holland
differs from the Retaiatory Decree Of Rambouiet The
execson of the Retaatory Decree is only to be mpu
ed to France whereas the Treaty of Cesson appears
have imposed the responsibility of the sequestr1on,
rather upon the cedng party than that TO which the
cessop made. II may indeed be replied that this
cesson only made the condition that the ceded
property should be disposed OF according the Of
political relations between France and the United States,
and that these relations having become amicabe since
the Ist of May, $780, and since the LIST Of Mo-
yrmbcr following the sale Of the cargoes for the benefit
OF France, violation If not Of the letter. least Of
the spirit OF the treaty.
In this controversy, have not found suicen Mt
for admitting tie Holland cargoes into the rigorous
estimate which have undertaken TO make bot it was
impossible to reject them, and have cassed them
apart, as subjects for compromise.
CATEGORY Nv.
PessseS seized and condemned aer NoUember lsf 1870
The principle Of this category does not require discus
SION Ghe most solemn promises, the avowals Of the
Empire and the Restoration, the favorable opinions Of
all the commissions place the question beyond
you places fifteen vessels in this category; have sub
motives which have been explained in our Ow state
mcnt II had been proposed 10 admit for indcmnifca-
ton tie vessels seized before the repeal Of the decFeea
but condemned after IT, In principle this proposition is
inadmssible condemnation does not decree the right
bot only declares il the right is derived from capture
Of which condemnation establishes the legality. If the
be icral. ri0lt % cal