25th of September 1873, when it rendered a final award against the United States for the amount of the various sums awarded against that government.

Reports of the
Agents.

Both Mr. Hale and Mr. Howard made full reports to their respective governments of the proceedings of the commission. Mr. Hale's report was published at the Government Printing Office in Washington in 1874, and it forms a part of the third volume of the Foreign Relations of the United States for 1873. Mr. Howard's report was presented to Parliament in 1874, and was printed as Blue Book "North America No. 2 (1874)."

Business Transacted.

Notices in regard to the presentation of claims to the commission were published both by the United States and by Great Britain. On or before the 26th of March 1872, which was the last day for the regular presentation of memorials under the treaty, there were filed in the office of the secretary of the commission 421 British claims and 18 American. In the next three months, ending on the 26th of June 1872, during which new claims. might be presented only with the permission of the commissioners, 57 additional British claims and 1 American claim were filed, making in all 478 British claims and 19 American before the commission.

The British claims, exclusive of interest, amounted to about $60,000,000, and, including interest for the average time allowed by the commission, to about $96,000,000. The American claims amounted to a little less than $1,000,000, exclusive of interest.

Of the 478 British claims presented, 259 were for property alleged to have been taken by the military, naval, or civil authorities of the United States and appropriated to the use of the government; 181 were for property alleged to have been destroyed by the military and naval forces of the United States; 7 were for property alleged to have been destroyed by the Confederate forces; 100 were for damages for alleged unlawful arrest and imprisonment of British subjects by the authorities of the United States; 77 were for damages for the alleged unlawful capture and condemnation or detention of British vessels, and their cargoes, as prize of war by the naval

Howard's Report, 253-266.

forces and civil authorities of the United States; 3 were for damages for the alleged unlawful warning off of British vessels by United States cruisers from coasts and ports not at the time lawfully blockaded, and 34 were of a miscellaneous character. The records of the commission show that the sum of the different classes of claims exceeded the entire number of memorials filed. This circumstance is accounted for by the fact that one memorial sometimes included two or more claims falling under different classes.1

Disposition of
Claims.

In the disposition of the British claims by the commission, 1 was dismissed on account of indecorous language in the memorial, without prejudice to the presentation of a new memorial, which was subsequently filed; 28 were dismissed for want of jurisdiction; 260 were disallowed on the merits; 8 were withdrawn by the British agent by leave of the commission, and 181 were allowed, the awards in favor of the claimants amounting to $1,929,819.

Of the claims of citizens of the United States against Great Britain, 12 grew out of the St. Albans raid, and were for acts of plunder alleged to have been committed in the town of St. Albans, Vermont, in October 1864 by Confederate soldiers who came by way of Canada; 1 was for a similar raid alleged to have been executed on the American steamers Philo Parsons and Island Queen on Lake Erie in September 1864; 4 were for damages for the alleged unlawful detention of vessels laden with saltpeter at Calcutta in January and February 1862, under ordinances issued by the governor-general of India prohibiting the exportation of that article; 1 was for injuries to property on San Juan Island in 1862 and 1864 by the alleged act or procurement of the commander of the British forces on the island during its joint military occupation by the United States and Great Britain, and 1 was for a royalty claimed from the British Government for the use by that government of an invention for the improvement of breech-loading firearms. All the American claims were dismissed.

The entire number of cases, American and British, decided by the commission, after deducting the eight claims that were withdrawn by the British agent, was 489.

'Hale's Report, 9.

In Howard's report there is the following tabular statement of the manner in which the awards were made:

1. Unfavorable awards in British cases.-272 signed by the three commissioners; 17 signed by Commissioners Corti and Frazer only.

2. Unfavorable awards in American cases.-15 sigued by the three commissioners; 4 signed by Commissioners Corti and Gurney only.

3. Favorable awards in British cases.-85 signed by the three commissioners; 94 signed by Commissioners Corti and Gurney only; 2 signed by Commissioners Corti and Frazer only.

bok."

Among the British claims unanimously disCase of the “Spring- allowed by the commission was that for the cargo of the bark Springbok, which was condemned, together with her cargo, by the district court of the United States at New York. The Supreme Court of the United States reversed the decree as to the vessel, but affirmed it as to the cargo.3 Damages were claimed before the commission both for the detention of the vessel and the condemnation of the cargo. The commission unanimously awarded $5,065 for the detention of the vessel from the date of the decree of the district court to the date of her discharge under the decree of the Supreme Court. The claim for the cargo was unanimously disallowed. This case has provoked more discussion than any other prize case that arose during the civil war. The Springbok was captured while ostensibly on a voyage from London to the British port of Nassau, in New Providence, before she had reached her port of destination, on the ground that she intended to run the blockade of the Confederate ports. The Supreme Court found that Nassau was her real destination, and therefore acquitted her, but affirmed the condemnation of the cargo on the ground that it was intended to find its way to some Confederate port, all Confederate ports being at the time under blockade. The doctrine of continuous voyages was thus applied to the cargo as distinct from the vessel on which it was borne at the time of capture, and the character of the cargo was adduced as evidence of its belligerent destination.5 A

Howard's Report, 5.

2 Blatchford's Prize Cases, 434.

35 Wallace, 1.

4 Hale's Report, 122.

5 Wharton's Int. Law Digest, III. 394.

brief of remarkable power, discussing the facts as well as the law of the case, was prepared by Mr. William M. Evarts for the claimant of the cargo before the commission. This brief, however, was not filed till late in August 1873, when the commission was striving to complete the business before it within the few weeks that remained of its existence. A full report of the case will be found in the accompanying digest.

The Confederate
Debt.

The question of the liability of the United States for debts contracted by the Confederacy was raised by the presentation to the commission of a claim against the United States for the payment of a "cotton-loan bond" purchased by the claimant in 1864. Mr. Hale, deeming the claim not to be within the terms of the treaty, laid the matter before the Department of State, and the British Government was asked to cause the claim to be withdrawn. This request not having been complied with, Mr. Hale moved that the claim be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. December 14, 1871, the commission unanimously dismissed the claim on the ground "that the United States is not liable for the payment of debts contracted by the rebel authorities."

General

Business.

Character

As to the general character and conduct of and Conduct of the business before the commission, Mr. Hale in his report makes the following observations: "The claim as presented by the claimant in his memorial and proofs often gave the first and only information to the government of the existence even of the claim, and involved an inquiry into the facts of the case through very circuitous and difficult channels. In such cases the government always stands at a great disadvantage as against private claimants, who have full knowledge of all the circumstances of their own claims, when actual and bona fide, and of the proofs by which they may be established, and who, in the case of fraudulent, simulated, or excessive claims, have facilities in the manufacture of evidence often very difficult to be exposed or rebutted by the agents charged with the defense of the government, and acting through secondary agents often at remote and almost inaccessible points.

"In view of the number and amount of the claims presented, and the importance of the questions to be determined, the time limited by the treaty for their examination and decision was very short. Two years for the complete examination, trial, and decision of all these cases, nine months of which time was allowed (six absolutely, and three under limitation) for the

2 Hale's Report, 4-6.

h

presentation of the claims by the claimant, constituted a shorter time than should have been taken for the thorough and satisfactory examination of all the cases.

"The fact that in this scanty time the government was enabled to make the examination and trial of the cases as thorough as it was made, and to arrive at results so satisfactory, is certainly a subject of congratulation, the awards made by the commission against the United States amounting to only about two per cent. of the claims presented to the commission against them. "The entire expense of the commission inExpenses. curred by the United States, including compensation of commissioners and officers of the commission, of the agent and counsel before the commission and his assistants and clerks, of counsel, agents, commissioners, witnesses, &c., in taking testimony, and also printing and incidental expenses, has been about $300,000, of which amount about $50,000 will be reimbursed by the deduction from the amount of the awards, pursuant to Article XVI. of the treaty. All the memorials, evidence, and arguments were printed for the use of the commission, the expense of printing being borne jointly and equally by the two governments. The entire printed matter thus submitted, and now collated and bound, makes up seventy-four octavo volumes, averaging about 800 pages each.

"In an early case before the commission, inAssociate Counsel. volving the question of the effect of domicile within the United States upon subjects of Great Britain, by paramount allegiance, domiciled within the United States, Hon. Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar, of Massachusetts, was retained by the government at my request as associate counsel, and filed a very learned and valuable argument. In a few other cases, not exceeding fifty in all, I was assisted in the preparation of arguments by Gen. Benjamin S. Roberts and by Messrs. Edwin L. Stanton and A. S. Worthington, of Washington, whose services were faithfully rendered and were very valuable. With these exceptions the arguments in all the British cases were prepared solely by myself.

"In the taking of testimony a large number Taking of Testimony. of counsel and agents were employed, under my supervision, in the localities where testimony was taken as above related. Among those who have rendered faithful and efficient service in this way, I deem it not invidious to mention Messrs. Kortrecht, Craft & Scales, of Memphis, Tenn.; Messrs. M. A. Dooley and William G. Hale, of New Orleans, La.; Franklin H. Churchill, esq., of New York City; Hon. D. H. Chamberlain, of Columbia, S. C.; Marcus Doherty, esq., of Montreal, P. Q., Canada; Hon. Andrew Sloan, of Savannah, Ga.; Horatio D. Wood, esq., of St. Louis, Mo.; Frederick C. Hale, esq., of Chicago, Ill.; Messrs. Speed & Buckner, of Louisville, Ky.; Messrs. Bradley & Peabody, of Nashville, Tenn.; and Gen. H. B. Titus, of Washington, D. C.