belong to the department of international law, was a vindication on the authority of Vattel and Bynkershoek, of the right of expatriation, in answer to Gouverneur Morris, an eminent statesman and diplomatist of the Anti-Republican party. Nor was this subject then a mere theoretical question. Great excitement had prevailed, in consequence of the menaces of the enemy to execute the naturalized citizens of British origin, who might be taken prisoners of war, the barbarity of which was not a little increased by the fact that military service was exacted from natives of the United States domiciled in Canada. The retaliatory measures of the American government, in selecting as hostages British prisoners to double the number of the individuals whose lives were in jeopardy, seems to have prevented a perseverance in the threat. Questions of maritime law were frequently discussed, and in the columns of his friend's paper first appeared Judge Story's opinion, deciding the illegality of enemy's licenses a subject which, from the extent to which they were then used in order to supply with provisions the British armies in the Spanish Peninsula, attracted great

attention.

Enjoying, as Mr. Wheaton did, the confidence of the members of the Cabinet, the Advocate was frequently selected as a medium through which to acquaint the people with the views of the administration. Such was the case, as regards the statement of the reasons, which, at an eventful period of the war, induced the removal of General Dearborn from the command of the army, and of the causes of the failure of the subsequent campaigns of Generals Wilkinson and Hampton, with which he was furnished by the Secretary of War, General Armstrong. He received, after the conclusion of peace, through the AttorneyGeneral, Mr. Pinkney, an expression of the obligations of all his colleagues for the able support which he had rendered to the government, with a special commendation of the papers published by him on the treaty, and which that eminent jurist declared to be as well as could be wished."

Of an oration pronounced on 4th of July, 1814, and while the war still continued, a notice remains in a letter of the gentleman who succeeded Mr. Pinkney as Attorney-General. He says: "I have read it with equal attention and pleasure. It is filled with correct, enlarged, patriotic, forcible thoughts, purely expressed, and oftentimes with energy and eloquence. I am glad to see the republican mind getting roused to the assertion of our great principles in times like these, when the aristocracy of the other hemisphere is so boldly attacking them. I am particularly delighted with the manner in which you have handled the European question."

It was not merely to American affairs that the discussions of the Advocate were confined. His knowledge of Europe, with his intercourse with those most familiar with passing events, including the French Minister, Mr. Serurier, of whom he was a correspondent, enabled its editor to present the different aspects of the great pending contest, which was destined to change the whole fabric of European organization. His sagacity anticipated the permanent predominance, which Alexander was already achieving for Russia in the affairs of Europe; while the Emperor's accordance with us in maritime questions is shown to have been the reason, why, though united with him in an alliance, for continental matters, on which the destinies of both seemed to depend, Great Britain refused his proffered mediation, in the war with the United States.

While engaged in his editorial avocations, Mr. Wheaton received the commission of Division Judge-Advocate of the army. The unanimous confirmation of the appointment, on the 26th of October, 1814, was announced to him not only by letters from two distinguished Senators, but the venerable Vice-President Gerry made it the subject of a congratulatory communication, in which he says: "Your appointment was not only unanimous, but the voice of the Senate was expressed with cordiality." This was the more flattering, as General Armstrong had already quitted the War Office, and the National Advocate had

continued, in opposition to popular prejudice, excited against him on account of the disastrous affair of Washington, to support and sustain him, as "entitled to the gratitude of the nation, for having put out of the way the superannuated generals, and for bringing forward a set of generals, (Brown and Scott,) who rescued our country from eternal disgrace."

In May, 1815, Mr. Wheaton left the National Advocate, on being appointed one of the Justices of the Marine Court, a tribunal of limited jurisdiction, and which is now shorn of much of its former consideration; though in presiding over it, some of those, who were afterwards distinguished as the most eminent at the bar, passed a portion of their professional novitiate. Whilst occupying a seat in this court, which he continued to fill till July, 1819, he had occasion to vindicate the paramount treaty-making power of the Federal Government. The case arose in 1816, under the commercial convention with Great Britain of the preceding year, and the question was, whether the reciprocity provision extended to the exemption of British vessels from the discriminating charges imposed by a local law of the State on foreign vessels.

In 1815, under the modest title of a "Digest of the Law of Maritime Captures or Prizes," Mr. Wheaton published his first systematic treatise. This was a subject to which he appears to have directed his attention from the period when, by the declaration of war by the United States against England, the admiralty jurisdiction became a matter of serious attention to the members of the legal profession, resident in the seaports. But, though its preparation was induced by the want of a work, for the daily reference of the practising lawyer, its utility was far from being limited to the circumstances out of which it arose. The "Digest" is not a mere index, but presents an exposition of the law of nations, as then understood and administered; and though the language of the original authorities, to insure is properly employed in preference to his own, no position is stated, the full effect of which is not appreciated by the writer.

accuracy,

Intended as a practical treatise, Mr. Wheaton gives a full analysis of the adjudications of the tribunals of different countries, and especially of England and the United States, on questions of prize, and which necessarily involved a review of all those debateable points of maritime law, which had been the subjects of our diplomatic discussions. The opinions on which the reputation of Sir William Scott (Lord Stowell) is based, had already been promulgated, with his views of the influence which the instructions of his government ought to have even over tribunals professedly acting as the exponents of the law of nations. And if any important additions have since been made to the authorities, on which reposes the law, deduced from the decisions of Admiralty Courts, as it was understood prior to the commencement of the present war, it is mainly in the reports of that tribunal, with which Mr. Wheaton's name is indissolubly connected, that they are to be found.

In reference to this work, Judge Story wrote to the author, on 13th of December, 1815:-"You have honorably discharged that duty, which every man owes to his profession, and I am persuaded that your labors will ultimately obtain the rewards which learning and talents cannot fail to secure." At the same time, the Attorney-General of the United States, Mr. Rush, who was subsequently Minister, at different periods, to England and France, informed him that he had made his book the basis of a work on the state of American jurisprudence.

Thirty years after its publication, an English writer, a high authority on international law, declared the work on captures to be, "in point of learning and methodical arrangement, very superior to any treatise on this department of the law, which had previously appeared in the English language." Nor has it been superseded by the other books of Mr. Wheaton. embraces a department of public law not discussed, or at most only incidentally touched on, in the more general treatises with

1

It

Reddie's Researches, Historical and Critical, in Maritime International Law.

which he has enriched the science of international jurisprudence. Though intended as an exposition of the existing state of prize law, as administered in our tribunals, nowhere else can so clear and accurate a view of the English and French edicts against neutral commerce be found; and in no other publication are they so ably brought to the test of the universal law of nations.

Mr. Wheaton also prepared, in 1815, a bankrupt law, and endeavored to procure its passage through Congress. This measure was, at that time, deemed the more important, as the constitutionality of the State Insolvent Laws began to be questioned, and it was believed that the power delegated to the General Government could alone meet the provisions on this subject, supposed to be required in a commercial community.

He also published, after the peace of Ghent, "An Essay on the Means of Maintaining the Commercial and Naval Interests of the United States." He advocated, as called for by the restrictive policy then existing in Europe, a navigation act, giving special advantages to our vessels, and excluding all foreign sailors from our merchant marine. The former measure has been rendered inapplicable, in a great degree, in consequence of the arrangements since made with most maritime States by our reciprocity treaties, or by means of the acts of Congress, proffering to all nations a mutual abrogation of the discriminating duties on the tonnage of their respective vessels, and on the produce, manufactures, and merchandise imported in them.1

The exclusion of alien seamen was repeatedly proposed by by the Executive, not, however, on politico-economical considerations, but in connection with an arrangement with the British government on the impressment question, but without result. Though we cannot distinguish between native citizens

1 See act March 3, 1815, United States Statutes at Large, vol. iii. p. 224; act January 7, 1824, Ibid. vol. iv. p. 2; May 24, 1828, Ibid. p. 308; May 31, 1830, Ibid. p. 425; July 13, 1832, Ibid. p. 579.