The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-12-05


q commissioners under the esy Of lrss with spain
haye been examined and settled BY the supreme Court 81 the
Curt ases he Hs5spe Ts@ ssei ~ lie treaty
was 10 inYSsG tie Commissioners ~tE fG. Fey asi 1u.o
VALIDITY q lie aersd shd uaen Ioa sr damages
injuries. Their decision, within the scope OF this
.horiy, Is conclusive aud hna II they pronounce the
claim valid or invalid, il they ascertain the amount their
award m the premises Is not reexauinabe The par
ties must abide by II as the decree Of competent tri
be brought again under review In any Judicial trbuna
amount liked is final ascsrainent Of the damages
uty This the obvious parnor Of the language Of the
treaty C9hegys e. Vase, Peters Rep, isJ 2ls,-
Thomas and Others the United States decided by this
court These decisions are precisely Ia point and show that
the question have Just been considering mist Dc deter
mined against the claimant.
We are next to examine the the petitioners COM
Pla,nt thas the seizure was by French vessel.
The first article q tie ccnycslion between the United
States and France, Of the tn of Judy 1881 follows
The French government order f. herate itself
pete from all the recamaons preferred against by riii
OF the United States for unlawful seizures captures Sc
questracn conseatons distinctions of their vessels
cargoe or other property engages to pay sum Of twenty
i've millions Of francs the government Of the United States
who shall distribute it among those entitled in the manner
and sesordipg to the rules which il shall Determine Stat
On the 18th Of July 1884, an act Of Congress passed
carry into effect the said convention with France The fret
section OF that act Is in these words; The President 1T The
United States ny and with the advice and consent o. the
Senate, shall appoint three eopmiesioners who shall
board whose duty it shall 10 receive and examine all
claims which may be presented them Under hs convention
between the United States and France Of the 4h Of July
s3 which are provided for by the said convention accord
ing to the provisions of the same and the principles Of JUS
ce, equity, and the law of nations The said board shall
have secretary yersed in the English French and Spanish
lapgua as clsrk both 70 be- appointed by Presi
dent BY aud Will, The advice and consen 81 the enate and
The duties Of their Offices. take oath we and faithfully
to perform the duties thereof Stat. at Large, "a.
The commissioners provided for by said act Of 1891 were
accordingly appointed and the board Afterwards organ
ised as the act required.
The petition contains the following statement: Your petit
toner brought said claim before tie board OF commission
appointed to carry into effect the treaty concluded with
France in 1881 but said board refused to entertain said CLAIM
he ma
spanish and not French vessel that your petitioner,
other of said has been excluded from the pro-
visions made by each for indemnity for Illegal captures BY
an alternate denial o. jurisdiction Inc petition here shows
claim the merits The ground of the rejection
egrdng to the petition Tia. the offending vessel was span
spoiaton could not be sustained without proof that the
offending vessel was French and the decision against the
There but one other question in this part OF the case
which need be examined aud that is whether not the de
con OF the last named board of commissioners bar
much Of the petition alleges the seizure to have been by
French vessel?
given in the former part Of this opinion to the first question
presented The decision against the petitioner made by the
commissioners appointed under the treaty with France to
whom he bad submitted the present demand be examined
bar To the claim The board had exclusive jurisdiction Of
ing appeal from the Judgment to any other tribunal
may be proper mention, that believing the decisions
fore to be material part Of the case applied to
the State Department for information the subject
o
of the proceedings OF the commissioners under the convention
with Spain of 1919 has been examined and appears that
the claim of Jonathan jerks growing of the capture OF
the brig Jane, duly presented TO the board of comm
sioners and dsalowed The claim Of Robert Roberts,
growing out of the capture Of the brig Experiment. pre-
sentcd TO the board of commissioners, and dial
lowed The claim also presented to the board Of
appointed to into effect the treaty with
France 1881 and by that board also dalowed. The
evidence OF these decisions 10 derived from minutes the
dockets OF the several boards of commissioners but docu
ment be found in either stating the principle
which the decision founded"
This communication shows what the petition admits, that
the claim In question had been dsaowed by both said
boards OF commissioners to which it was presented
The petition in order show the liability Of the govern
And your petitioner further shows that the United
in the Treaties aforesaid both with France and SPAIN has
10 her sovereign capacity released those from
all further recamatons and claims indemnity than such
therein provided for of the like character those
therein provided for and has thereby become responsible for
claims of that character which have been excluded the
benefits Of the provisions Of said treaties
This argument, which the claim to have been
valid against either Spain France has been already
think sufficiently answered. The boards of commissioners
legally organized for the determination OF such claims tho
before have upon the application of the petitioner
HIMSELF examined hs claim and decided against its validity
namely the validity of the claim against either Spain
France previously the treaties referred todoes not
exist.
The decisions of said boards Of commissioners against
the claim like the Judgment Of court OF competent urisdic
ton, have before shown, bar to this petition for
the demand.