by reason of the defalcations of Government officers, I may cite that recently afforded by the English Government in the case of the Registrar of the Court of Admiralty, the first sum awarded being to an American citizen.

In this case Mr. Upham did not deliver any judgment.

THE "LORD NELSON."

London, December 14, 1854.

THE umpire reports that the schooner "Lord Nelson" was captured on the 5th June, 1812, thirteen days before the declaration of war, by The United States' brig "Oneida," Captain Woolsey, on Lake Ontario, for an alleged breach of the Embargo Laws. The vessel was taken to Sackett's Harbour, where, after war was declared, the schooner and cargo were condemned and the proceeds paid into court. When peace was made, the owners of the "Lord Nelson" and cargo claimed their property, as captured in time of peace, and proceedings were permitted in the Court of The United States, and a decree passed ordering the proceeds of the vessel and cargo, amounting to 4,971 dollars, to be paid over to the claimants, when it was found the officer of the court, whose business it was to take care of the money, had absconded, leaving no assets. A petition was afterwards presented to the President of The United States, who pressed this claim on the attention of Congress, but no appropriation was made.

The period when the transaction took place, which is the foundation of this claim, places it without the jurisdiction of this Commission.

No compensation can, therefore, be awarded to the owners. of the "Lord Nelson."

JOSHUA BATES, Umpire.

FLORIDA BONDS.

MR. HORNBY, British Commissioner:

THIS is a claim advanced by certain holders of bonds issued by the Government of the territory of Florida, in the year 1833, payment of which is now claimed against The United States' Government, under the Convention of the 8th of February, 1853.

It appears that Florida was ceded, under a Treaty, by Spain to The United States, in the year 1819, and The United States assumed the sovereignty as the crown of Spain had held it, and also became possessed of such part of the land as had belonged to the crown, not merely in sovereignty, but as the possessors in absolute ownership. By the sixth article of the Treaty, it was arranged that the inhabitants of the territory should be incorporated in the Union, as soon as was consistent with the principles of the Federal Constitution, and admitted to all the privileges and rights of citizens of The United States. Previous, however, to its admission as a State of the Union, the Territorial Government appointed by Congress incurred certain liabilities; and the question we have now to consider is the position of the Federal Government, under the circumstances to which I shall presently allude, with regard to these debts.

To do this effectually, it will be necessary, in the first place, to examine the nature of the Government of the Territory of Florida, and its relation to the Federal Government of The United States.

The vast tracts of country belonging to The United States, not comprised within the limits of the several States

of the Union, are subject to the absolute government of Congress. An exclusive and unlimited power of legislation for these territories is conferred upon Congress by the constitution, and has been sanctioned by repeated decisions of The United States' Courts. So complete is the dominion of Congress over the territories, that it has even excited anxiety in the minds of eminent Americans, as being inconsistent in spirit with the republican institutions of the country. Chancellor Kent has the following observations on this subject:

"It would seem from these various congressional regulations of the territories belonging to The United States that Congress have supreme power in the government of them, depending on the exercise of their sound discretion. That discretion has hitherto been exercised in wisdom and good faith, and with an anxious regard for the security of the rights and privileges of the inhabitants, as defined and declared in the Ordinance of July, 1787, and in the constitution of The United States. All admit,' said Chief Justice Marshall, the constitutionality of a Territorial Government.' But neither the district of Columbia nor a Territory is a State within the meaning of the Constitution, nor entitled to claim the privileges secured to the members of the Union. This has been so adjudged by the Supreme Court. Nor will a writ of error or appeal lie from a Territorial Court to the Supreme Court, unless there be a special statute provision for the purpose. If, therefore, the Government of The United States should carry into execution the project of colonizing the great Valley of the Columbia, or Oregon River, to the west of the Rocky Mountains, it would afford a subject of grave consideration, what would be the future civil and political destiny of that country. It would be a long time before it would be populous enough to be created into one or more independent States; and, in the meantime, upon the doctrine taught by the Acts of Congress, and even by the judicial decisions of the Supreme Court, the colonists would be in a state of the most complete subordination, and as dependent upon the will of Congress as the people of this country would

have been upon the King and Parliament of Great Britain if they could have sustained their claim to bind in all cases whatsoever. Such a state of absolute sovereignty on the one hand, and of absolute dependence on the other, is not congenial with the free and independent spirit of our native institutions; and the establishment of distant Territorial Governments, ruled according to will and pleasure, would have a very natural tendency, as all pro-consular governments have had, to abuse and oppression."

Mr. Justice Story, in his "Commentaries on the Constitution," Sec. 1328, says :

"The power of Congress over the public territory is clearly exclusive and universal, and their legislation is subject to no control, but is absolute and unlimited, unless so far as it is affected by stipulations in the cessions or by the Ordinance of 1787, under which any part of it has been settled."

Not only, however, does the right of government belong to Congress, but The United States also own the soil of the immense tracts of unsettled lands throughout the territories, and the funds derived from the sale of these lands are at the absolute disposal of the national Government, and are applied to national purposes. "The Constitution," says Chancellor Kent,"*"gave to Congress the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulation respecting, the territory or other property belonging to The United States, and to admit new States into the Union. Since the constitution was formed, the value and efficiency of this power have been magnified to an incalculable extent by the purchase of Louisiana and Florida; and, under the doctrine contained in the cases I have referred to, Congress have a large and magnificent portion of territory under their absolute control and disposal. This immense property has become national and productive stock, and Congress, in the administration of this stock, have erected temporary Governments under the pro

* 1 Kent, 276.

visions of the Ordinance of Congress, under the confederation, and under the constitutional power." "On the other hand," says Mr. Justice Story,*"the public lands hold out, after the discharge of the national debt, ample revenues, to be devoted to the cause of education and sound learning, and to internal improvements, without trenching upon the property or embarrassing the pursuits of the people by burdensome taxation. The constitutional objection to the appropriation of the other revenues of the Government to such objects has not been supposed to apply to an appropriation of the proceeds of the public lands. The cessions of territory were expressly made for the common benefit of The United States, and therefore constitute a fund which may be properly devoted to any objects with and for the common benefit of the Union."

In a word, the territories are declared by the third section of the fourth article of the Constitution, to be the "property" of The United States, and as such are placed under the absolute disposal of Congress.†

Congress might, if it so pleased, govern the various territories directly and without the intervention of any local machinery; and it does, in fact, so govern the District of Columbia, which is in the same situation as the territories. In so governing Columbia, it has been held by judicial decision that Congress does not act merely as the Government of that district, but as the Government of the whole Union; and the same rule is applicable to the Government of the territories.‡

It is, however, impossible for Congress to govern all its many and distant territories directly in the same way that it governs Columbia; it is, therefore, compelled to delegate its authority to officers appointed for the purpose; it reserves to itself, however, the full power not only of repealing, modifying, or altering the acts of the local and temporary Government which it may have erected, but it may "at any time

Story on the Constitution, sec. 1327.

† Const. art. iv. s. 3, div. 2.

State v. New Orleans Nav. Co. 11 Martin 313.