States, do not militate against this view. Those officers were agents of the pueblo or city, and acted under its authority in the distribution of its municipal lands. They did not assume to alienate or affect the title to lands which was in the United States. Welch v. Sullivan, 8 California, 165; White v. Moses, 21 California, 34; Merryman v. Bourne, 9 Wall. 592.

"It follows from what is thus said that it would be a sufficient answer to the contention of the defendants that the grant under which they claim to have acquired a perfect title conferred none. The grantees were not invested with such title, and could not be without an official delivery of possession under the Mexican Government, and such delivery was not had, and could not be had, after the cession of the country, except by American authorities acting under a law of Congress.

More Steinbach (1888), 127 U. S. 70, 81.

That laws relating to the alienation of the public domain pass away with the transfer of sovereignty, see Magoon's Reports, 467.

"It is contended that the mere change of sovereignty revoked all authority to make sales of the public lands, and United States v. Vallejo, 1 Black, 541, is cited, in which it was held that the decrees of the Spanish Cortes of 1813, in relation to the disposition of the crown lands, was inapplicable to the state of things which existed in Mexico after the revolution of 1820. And also More v. Steinbach, 127 U. S. 70, 81. . . It is doubtless true that a change of sovereignty implies a revocation of the authority vested by the prior sovereign in local officers to dispose of the public lands. And yet we think that rule is not controlling in this case, for the new sovereign made an order continuing the functions of the local officers, and one of those local officers making a sale in accordance with the provisions of the prior laws caused the money received therefrom to be paid into the treasury of the new sovereign, and that sovereign never returned the money thus received nor challenged the validity of the sale thus made."

Ely's Adm. v. United States (1898), 171 U. S. 220, 230–1.

Advised, that when Spain's sovereignty was withdrawn from Porto Rico the Spanish governor-general and all other officers of the Crown of Spain, whose authority consisted in the exercise of Royal prerogatives delegated to them, ceased to exercise such authority, and that the powers possessed by them under the Royal decree of August 16, 1878, in regard to the formation of corporations did not pass to the authority of the United States.

Mr. Magoon, law officer, Division of Insular Affairs, June 14, 1899, Magoon's
Reps. 490.

"The French occupation of the Island of Madagascar has been followed by the incorporation of the territory into the Republic as a formally proclaimed colony. This Government has been assured of the fullest extension to American citizens and interests in that quarter of all rights and privileges under the treaties between the United States and France. The extraterritorial jurisdiction of our agents in Madagascar will accordingly be relinquished as fast as effectively replaced by the jurisdiction of established French courts.

"An important commerce, fostered by treaties with the Hova Government, had been built up by American interests during recent years, and it remains to be seen whether the natural advantages of that traffic will outweigh the reserved trade of the colony with the mother country or enable it to enter into successful competition with the trade of other countries which enjoy the reciprocal benefits of the minimum customs tariff of France.

Report of Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to the President, Dec. 7, 1896, For. Rel. 1896, lxvii.

"The establishment of French sovereigty and civil jurisdiction over the island of Madagascar puts an end to the extraterritorial rights of the United States in that country, and to the judicial powers of our consul dependent thereon. This changed condition is assumed to have gone into effect on the 16th of October, when, according to the statement of the French resident-general, the French courts were to have been opened for bussiness."

Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to Mr. Eustis, ambassador to France, Dec. 10, 1896,
For. Rel. 1897, 152, 153.

The French minister of the colonies instructed the French resident-general to
give all facilities to the foreign consuls for settling the cases brought
before their courts before October 16, 1896. (For. Rel. 1897, 154.)

"I have the honor to acknowledge your note of yesterday's date, asking information concerning the recognition of the consular officer of your government in Hawaii by the Government of the United States.

"Foreign consuls in the Hawaiian Islands may exercise their functions under the provisional régime now existing in Hawaii, but in consideration of the change of government there, it would be as well for the governments of such consuls to send their new credentials at a convenient time, upon which new exequaturs will be issued by the Government of the United States.

“With regard to your further inquiry touching the recognition of consuls in Puerto Rico, and the occupied ports of Cuba, I beg to state that, the territory of Puerto Rico being under the military control of the United States until Congress shall make other provision, there would seem to be no objection to the consuls of your Government continuing for the present, to act in their official capacity under existing

exequaturs. As to Cuba, a similar course may be permitted for the time being."

Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Grip, Swedish min., November 17, 1898, MS.
Notes to Swedish Legation, VIII. 109.

See, also, as to the provisional recognition of consuls in the Philippines, Mr.
Hay, Sec. of State, to the Sec. of War, March 26, 1900, 244 MS. Dom. Let. 19.
Official recognition was accorded by the United States to foreign consuls in
Porto Rico upon receipt of their commissions addressed to the President
of the United States, or "to whom it may concern," and they were mean-
while permitted to act temporarily pending the receipt of their commis-
sions, if a request was made in the usual way through the proper legation
at Washington. (Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Allen, Gov. of Porto
Rico, May 23, 1900, 245 MS. Dom. Let. 232.)

The diplomatic representatives at Washington of the various governments having consuls in the Philippines were requested to ascertain the wishes of their governments as to the formal recognition of such officers by the United States, they holding over meanwhile and being allowed to discharge their duties. (Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to the Sec. of War, Jan. 22, 1901, 250 MS. Dom. Let. 341.)

On the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by the United States the laws of Hawaii for the registration of vessels ceased to operate, and the national character of Hawaiian vessels became American.

Griggs, At.-Gen., Sept. 12, 1899, 22 Op. 578.

By the act of April 12, 1900, in relation to the government of Porto Rico, the Commissioner of Navigation was empowered to make such regulations, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, as he might deem expedient for the nationalization of all vessels owned by the inhabitants of Porto Rico on April 11, 1899, the date of the exchange of the ratifications of the treaty of cession, and which continued to be so owned up to the time of such nationalization, and for their admission to all the benefits of the coasting trade of the United States.

By the joint resolution of annexation the public property of Hawaii, including the public lands, became vested in the United States, and the officials of Hawaii were thenceforth without power to convey a title, legal or equitable, to such lands. In this respect the resolution. is to be considered as having taken effect on July 7, 1898, the day of its approval by the President, and not on Aug. 12, 1898, the day on which the ceremonies of the formal transfer of possession took place.

Griggs, At.-Gen., Nov. 21, 1899, 22 Op. 627. S. P., Griggs, At.-Gen., Sept. 9, 1899, 22 Op. 574.

It was advised that the inhabitants of the Hawaiian Islands, after annexation, were not entitled to the benefits of the United States copyright laws, in the absence of affirmative legislation by Congress.

Griggs, At.-Gen., Dec. 2, 1898, 22 Op. 268.

The power to dispose permanently of the public lands and property in Porto Rico rests in Congress, and, in the absence of a statute conferring such power, can not be exercised by the Executive Departments of the Government.

During the military control of Porto Rico leave or license may be granted an individual to make temporary use of portions of the public domain.

The grant of a right or privilege to exist in perpetuity, or as long as the conditions of the grant are fulfilled, for the erection of a pier at Ponce, Porto Rico, is beyond the power of the Secretary of War, and ought not to be made,

Syllabus, Griggs, At.-Gen., July 26, 1899, 22 Op. 544.

By Executive order promulgated by the general commanding the United States forces in Cuba, all grants and concessions of franchises and similar rights were forbidden to be made by any authority in the island, except upon the approval of the Secretary of War.

Griggs, At.-Gen., March 25, 1899, 22 Op. 408.

In affirmation of the policy declared by the Executive, Congress, by an act of March 3, 1899, directed that no property, franchises, or concessions of any kind whatsoever should be granted by the United States or by any military or other authority in the island of Cuba during the occupation thereof by the United States. While the power of Congress to control the Executive in the matter was doubted, yet it was advised that as the act was in harmony with the Executive policy, it would be inexpedient to grant permission for the landing of a cable in Cuba, especially as the solicited concession was alleged to be in violation of the existing rights of another company.

Griggs, At.-Gen., March 25, 1899, 22 Op. 408.

On the cession of territory by one nation to another, those internal laws and regulations of the former designated as municipal continue. in force and operation until the new sovereign imposes different laws and regulations.

The laws which are political in their nature, and pertain to the prerogatives of the former government, immediately cease upon the transfer of sovereignty.

Any inchoate rights or grants made by a municipal body in Cuba under Spanish sovereignty, which for their completion require the assent or approval of the Crown or its officers, in the absence of such assent or approval made prior to the treaty of cession, are ineffective and incomplete.

In the exercise by the United States of the powers of municipal government, it may change or modify the form or constitutions of the

municipal establishment, and in this exercise of sovereignty may provide the method, terms, and conditions under which internal improvements may be carried on, or forbid them to be carried on, although inchoate or even completed contracts therefor have previously been entered into.

Any rights of Dady & Co., for the construction of certain works in Havana, if vested, are preserved by the treaty of Paris.

Syllabus, Griggs, At.-Gen., July 10, 1899, 22 Op. 526.

"If Michael J. Dady & Co. had, at the time the treaty of Paris was signed, any rights under their alleged contract which can properly be called vested rights, those rights are undoubtedly preserved by the terms of the treaty."

The continuance of military government in the islands ceded by Spain to the United States, after the exchange of the ratification of the treaty of peace, by which the cession was made, was in harmony with the theory previously accepted and approved by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Government of the United States.

Report of Mr. Magoon, law officer, Division of Insular Affairs, War Department, Oct. 19, 1899, Magoon's Reports, 11, 19.

The views set forth in this report were approved by the Secretary of War, and were acted upon by the War Department in the government of the islands.

3. ON REVENUE LAWS.

$94.

On the cession of Florida to the United States the jurisdiction and authority of the former sovereign continued in full force until possession of the ceded territory had actually passed. It follows that an importation of goods into the Floridas after the cession, but previously to the delivery of possession, was an affair between the importer and the Spanish Government, of which the Government of the United States. had no right to complain.

But goods carried into a port of Florida before the delivery of possession, remaining in port on shipboard until after delivery and then brought into the United States, having never been entered in the Spanish custom-houses, would be subject to the revenue laws of the United States.

1 Op. 483, Wirt, 1821.

When Florida was ceded to the United States and possession of it had actually been taken it was held by the Secretary of the Treasury, whose opinion was sanctioned by the Attorney-General, that, under our revenue laws, its ports must be regarded as foreign until they were established as domestic by an act of Congress.

Fleming v. Page, 9 Howard, 603.