New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-02-26

House satisfactorily for the fast I've years"
Avoid limitations. There Is nothing '!USt as good"
when you can obtain Tie genuine article wien hiSt nave
the signature Of johann Io1" on the neck OF eleIy oo,te.
lie cited Halls International Law to show that
no form is needed to make Il treats DlndIng-that
il is 10 be observed by both oaFt!e; IL would
have been an omission on the dcicildahl ; pdFl 10
allow the l9ctOrT to go on. lac nation might
have hrcu held responsible for neglect on his part
| TO enforce the provisions OF me lhouuS NiieHIi.
70 show that a treaty IS Diiuiis On d n".ton, ne
cited Hall, Stephen and entity, clc' lie tnouSht
these authorities showed the moduS was binding
ON The %plaintitf, and that the factory was IN con-
traventiol of the treaty. 1...,r
As 70 the other objections, MI. hcnt sald: All
Her Nlaiesty's powers to enter INTO treaties OF
peace apply with equal force to treaties Tor The
maintenance of peace. rs in making, so II carry
inc ont. Suppose the queen mas not tIlc power
10 make this treaty, then it was for Parliament
TO deal with this matter, and not the courts. IN
this case she mad the power nota 10 maze ana
In carry out. and was rot amenaOlc to her own
courts" He cited cases u snow that
when a court is satisfied it IS an act of
State that is complained OF. II VIII allow no further
steps ~ be taken against a Governor or other
bich official. The defendant in this case was a
high Official. His act was done in his political
capacity. and has been confirmed by, Her Majesty.
All the cases referred 10 10y Sir James W WINTER
we're undcr statutory hight and not under tLe pre-
r%ocativc. AS 10 Parliamentary interference,
May and Todd both hold that. unlcSSs where a
,reafy does not require Parliamentary sanction
r., r. %iE il validity" The act complaincd Of in
tbs case is not such a thing as may be inquired
into judicially. If the plai;::!n is agglIIeved' his
proper course is 10 apply 70 Parliament
Sir William WhitcwaY sad he appeared AZ thc
instance OF the Queen. TO maintain Her MaJeSty's
position as regards her prer0aa'IIG ria.l,
Sir James Winter objected t. the interference
of any party not a party N the suit. cen though
that party vas Her Majesty II NIr NIl'h aP
pcared for the defendant, well ana good.
Sir William said the TllhtS 81 me ti0Wn were
interfered with. and he appeared IN protection oi
those rights. The Chief Justice said " That Will
not do. Do you appear for the HriendanI , ~
Sir William then went on 10 argue that a treaty
made to prevent war was as much a treaty OF
peace as one 10 conclude a war. Inc h9uuS VI
vcndi was made 10 prevent W2'' ana thcI'IoIr
the making of il was within the power OF the
Crown. Authorities OF great weight hat reenl
cited by plaintiff, but no judicial decision ha"
been quoted 10 show that the Queen ) prcrogatFc
TO make treaties was not absolute. To show that IL
was lie cited several cases. lie couId say 'i'"'
there would be an inquiry held as 90 thc loss
sustained by persons on account of the modus
viycndi. and where loss was shown 10 have been
sustained conversation would be even.
Sir James Winter closed tic ,orglmcnt ana re-
piled TO defendant counsel, lie orHT" INV .r
captain Of the Emerald had any authority over
Newfoundland fishermen. except u pF"tcr' hsI',
iSh subjects from foreigners. Nj Inc c'Se' 'ti''
only went TO show that a treaty was ui.'"lIs
as between the nations VINO were p'tlN - IT,
lie Ifed from Whcaon's international La" PCS
3lS-2O. edition 1873. in support OF tbs position.
On The point That there c'uII ~ ~
against the Queen, he said FOR that Vc,y Iel>1h
there should be- a remedy against her oi''er WHO
executed an uulawfal command.
ON Sir William WAltcWdy ) statement ttdI COM
rcnsation would lie made for loss sustained, 81 tuc'
II meant that coming mo court tEr tC''uu;n' ""S
not resisting tie claim # the plalni!I on Us own
merits, but for outside purposes ol some AlIIu OF
Thus closed tho argument in this remarkable
case. believe ~ Is unique IN tiIs r'a!'''-l'"t
Tor tie first time the question 81 thr p'WtI 81
81 .--N ffa~a rnI I IfFnNfntNnTl IN lIfaNA-
making are sought 10 lie determined. can me
sovereign make a treaty, ana, without rama
mcntary sanction, order "a naval olIcef 1" ''lloi'r
il, and in doing 50. give linn power. 10 1'PaaI'c
a subject of his property and business ne
counsel for the defendant answer IN Inc alhFllIf'I o.
and argue in favor of the absolute power 81 ne
uroroontivc. Their whole case rests r. that.
Sir James Winter, in his mastery ana c'hp4'
hensivc argument. has torn me pI'I"S''I'c pi'i
10 shrcds and proved Tat H. is limited hN law ani
cannot invade the u2hts OF private lI"P,rEi "u.
that Sir BALDWIN, was guilty OF an uh!a"IIi "Cl
i'm closing Mr. Haird'> factory under t+' mod Us W.,
vcndi The bar here are loud m th"lr PRAISES "l
Tho abIe manner I'M which Sir James has con-
Lucfcd the case. and are almost unnnlnous m
considering the case Of Sir BaId"tn, ~ presenter
i'm court, cXceciiusly weak. Whh' me ,,,IImen,
Of the court viii Doe time VIII t"I We S,'l!
hardly know under q month or stN weeks hit
whatever the verdict. 1t Is highly prontpir an
opDcal will be taken 10 the tllgll-h lriNS 'ouN
eli. If i'm favor Of Baird, tie DEFENDANTS oil th'
royal prcrocatiyc viii not submit wliloui an aP-
neal Should the Judgment be- against h'I!d'
the interests o. inc fOlNllN l''ll4I' 'H'' '' ~
neal he taken. aS it, right, and liberties must be-
offended. 50 far Mr.. Baird has fought single
handed. taken all The risk and cost, ana purely
on public and patriotic Grounds, Tor ne ms ION;
since been privately informed that II ne dropped
the suit his claims for damages would hc allowed
He refused thr tempting offer and fought II 9at
on public grounds. II, however, ~. appear ne
comes necessary. il would bP unfair that the
heavy expenses Of such a proceeding should fall
on an individual. The amount required would
soon he raised by public Subscription. In any
| ease, however. as Sir William said in court; com
pcnsation for his losses Will be made II Inc
ROYAL prcrogatiyc can 10 preserved inyiolatc no
| expense viii he spared.
One of our iudccs said in private that tho ar.
cuincrts and decision i'm this famous ease. would
be cited in law courts for the ncNt hundred years,
II is an " open secret" here thrt the British
Government have At length decided not tn renew
the obnoxious modus vivendi. This caS" Of Baird
against Walker has undoubtedly turned the scale
and saved us from a continuation Of this hateful
measure. All hope Of a settlement by treaty Of
the French shore question Is now abandoned
since the Governors speech announced that the
proposals of the British Government bad not
been fayorably received by France. NJ II.