Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-09-15
MRS BURNS INTEREST
Mes AUpie Powers Esisie ksy
 Locale Channel Isles.

Upon the final determination of the question, Are the Channel isles foreign or local possession, depend ency or colony of England" will de- pend whether or not Mrs Annie Burns of Waterville shall receive any or all of the realty left by her aunt Mrs Annie Powers who died in Mat teawan, N. Y., last spring. Upon an application of Mayor Thoms, Judge Lowe in the probate court ruled yesterday that the Channel Isles are foreign possession of the English crown and so far favored the contention of Attorney James M. Lynch counsel for Mrs Burns. Mayor Thoms thereupon, acting for Mrs Powers's sister Mrs Hanna Fitzgerald who is a resident of the island of Sark, one of the Channel islands, filed notice of appeal to the superior court and thus this question of treaty between the United States and Eng land by which aliens In England or its possessions are said to be allowed one year in which to dispose of prop erty left them by relatives in the United States is to be settled.
 The rumored fear of war with Germany, the trouble that is liable to result from the operation of the old age pensions act, the enforcement of the patent law or even the agita- tion for home rule itself, either or all of these matters is not liable to cause so much worry to the British exchequer as this question of the jurisdiction of England over the few chunks of rock and land in the Eng lish channel known on the maps as the Channel isles. The department of state in Washington and even the British ambassador, MT Bryce, have admitted in communication to MT Lynch that this question of prop erty treaty between England and the United States has never been tested, that is, dispute never before came up under it's provisions and conse- quently there is no precedent to go by, no lighthouse or land mark to guide the way to settlement of it now. .....
 It is peculiar that this stupendous question, for stupendous it is, in the opinion of able lawyers, should come up for final ruling on matter that involves only few thousand dollars. Those who have to do with matters of this kind were apparently having nice time of it until Mayor Thoms in poking around among his treas ures of legal lore hit upon this treaty relating to property left by citizens of this country having relatives in foreign lands: ...
 The treaty as presented to the court by Mir Thoms says that it's pro- visions shall not apply to any colony or foreign possession of Great Britain unless said possession signifies it's willingness to come within the pro- visions of the treaty, within one year from the date of its ratification. MT Lynch claimed that inasmuch as Mrs Fitzgerald was a resident of the Channel islands she could not claim the benefit of the treaty. He claim ed the Channel islands are not part of Great Britain proper, but for eign possession. In support of this claim he cited several authorities.
 MT Lynch held that the various states of the United States possess constitutional right to maintain and limit the right of aliens might have in real estate situated within their limits. And that inasmuch as this state had exercised that right pre- yious to the existence of the treaty in question, the treaty did not sus- pend or operate to repeal the state law. In conclusion, he claimed that until the United States supreme court decides this point in favor of the aliens, the state courts must follow the law as laid down by the supreme court of errors.
 The whole question depends upon the elements of possession by Great Britain of the Channel isles. The books say that these isles ar north of that part of France called Normandy and they form the only part of that country now in the possession of England. If the high courts deter mine they are foreign possession of England Mrs Fitzgerald will receive no benefit from the estate of her aunt, Mrs Powers, but it will all go