of ten years, for the purpose of improving their social position and of maintaining their government authorities constituted in virtue of Article III. This annuity was to be paid half-yearly at Greytown to a person empowered by the chieftain of the Mosquitoes to receive it, and the first installment was to be paid six months after the exchange of ratifications of the Managua Treaty. This said exchange was effected on the 2d August 1860, in London.

"The payment of the annuity was irregular, and soon ceased altogether. When, in November 1865, the chieftain of the Mosquito Indians died, and his cousin, a boy of 11 years old, was proclaimed his successor, the Republic of Nicaragua refused to recognize him. It is not necessary to inquire here whether there were good grounds for the refusal, or whether it was to serve as a welcome pretext for withholding the payments of the subvention. The said chieftain afterward died (since 1875), and no objection has been raised against the legitimacy of his successor. Now, as the objects for the attainment of which the subvention was promised are still the same as they were before, and as the payment thereof is attached to no conditions whatever, there can be no doubt that the Republic of Nicaragua must be declared liable for the payment of the arrears to the amount of $30,859.03. This sum has meanwhile been deposited by the Republic of Nicaragua in the Bank of England on condition (Case, p. 78) that upon the delivery of an award for payment it is to be made over to the British Government for the benefit of the Mosquito Indians (Draft, Article VII.).

"When the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua intimates the desire to have the sum deposited in the Bank of England paid over to itself, in order that the said sum may be duly applied for the benefit of the Mosquito Indians, inasmuch as no one can be in a better position to judge of what is to be done than 'le Souverain dans ses domaines, et que le territoire de Mosquitia se trouvant dans les limites et sous la jurisdiction de la République, il est de son devoir de s'enquérir de ses besoins pour y subvenir autant que possible, prénant toutes les mesures qui peuvent contribuer à l'avancement moral et au progrès matériel de ce district' (Réponse, p. 16), it first of all overlooks the fact that the subvention is not only to serve for the improvement of the social position of the Mosquitoes, but also for the maintenance of their own government authorities. The Nicaraguan Government hereby seeks, in a way that is radically inadmissible, to take the place of the Mosquito government, whose own business is independently to attend to and provide for the concerns and interests of the Mosquitoes. For even in the treaty which the Republic of Honduras concluded with Great Britain at Comayagua on the 28th November 1859 it was stipulated that the ten years' subvention of $5,000 a year to be furnished by the said republic for the improvement of the intellectual and material position of the fully incorporated Mosquitoes should be paid to their chieftain (Article III, par. 2).

"The Republic of Nicaragua, however, can not be called upon to pay back-interest on the subvention sum in arrear. The subvention is not, indeed, as the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua intimates (Réponse, p. 18), a pure donation ('un don gratuit, un présent'), inasmuch as it was more properly promised in consideration' of the manifold advantages which were secured to the republic in the treaty and have

accrued therefrom, such as the relinquishment of the protectorate on the part of England, and the recognition of the republic's sovereignty over the whole Mosquito district, including the town of San Juan del Norte (Greytown). But, though the subvention has not the character of a pure donation, still it has the character of remunerating liberality, and the equitable nature of such an obligation precludes the liability for the payment of back-interest (Draft, Article VII.).

"V. As is generally acknowledged in theory and practice, the essence of a free port consists in this, that all goods imported and exported therein free and without payment of duty remain within the jurisdiction of the port itself, either to be sold or consumed there, or to be again exported therefrom to a place in the interior or abroad. A free port, which belongs to the territory of a certain state, and therefore is under the sovereignty of that state, is to be looked upon in regard to the customs just as a foreign country. But so soon as the goods are imported from the jurisdiction of the free port into the other part of the state territory, they may, on their entry into this territory, and consequently passing beyond the jurisdiction of the free port, be charged with an import duty. It is only in this sense that the concluding words of Article VII. of the Treaty of Managua can be understood; they are set in their true light by the stipulation immediately preceding, whereby the Republic of Nicaragua is not to be allowed to levy transit dues on goods which pass from sea to sea through the territory of the republic on the projected interoceanic canal. In like manner the goods exported from inland ('les articles du pays') can not indeed be charged with an export duty when they go out of the free port, but they can be so charged on their passage from the state territory into the jurisdiction of the free port (Draft, Article VIII.). The Nicaraguan presidential decree of the 22d June 1877 (Case, pp. 92, 93), which contradicts these principles, and which has already been suspended, for so long as the dispute is pending, by presidential decree of the 10th April 1878 (Case, pp. 93, 94), for San Juan del Norte (Greytown), must therefore definitively cease to take effect for that free port.

“Inasmuch as no duties at all may be levied on goods in a free port, it is equally unallowable to levy duties on imported or exported goods for the purpose of meeting the costs of the administration of the port town and of the maintenance of the free port. The means for covering such local requirements must be raised by local taxation in other forms, as, for example, by levying a tax upon the consumption of goods imported duty free. The system of providing for the costs of the administration of the town and the maintenance of the free port of Greytown, introduced by presidential decree of the 20th February 1861 (Case, pp. 88, 89), by an import duty on the goods imported there, will therefore have to make room for some other system.

"There is no dispute about the right of the Republic of Nicaragua to levy duties and charges' on ships in the free port of San Juan del Norte (Greytown) for the purposes of the port (Article VIII.).

"Upon the other points brought forward by Her Britannic Majesty's Government for decision (Counter Case, pp. 32, 33, Nos. 15-19) it is not expedient to enter, inasmuch as some of them relate partly to administrative affairs and to reclamations in civil law by private persons, while, in

regard to others, the necessary statistical materials and particulars of account are not within reach.

"VI. The Government of the Republic of Nicaragua disputes the right of Her Britannic Majesty's government to take part in the affairs relating to the Mosquito Indians and to the free port of San Juan del Norte (Greytown), or to come forward as complainant in the present litigation, inasmuch as such a proceeding would involve an unauthorized intermeddling with the internal concerns of Nicaragua, and a reassertion contrary to treaty of the relinquished protectorate over Mosquitia (Exposé, pp. 53, 54, 63; Réponse, pp. 16, 17).

"This contention against England's legitimatio ad causam can not be pronounced well founded.

"Then, in regard to the port of San Juan del Norte (Greytown), the Republic of Nicaragua, in Article VII. of the Managua Treaty concluded with England, undertook the engagement to constitute and declare it a free port; and such constitution and declaration did ensue by presidential decree of the 23d November 1860 (Case, p. 87). But England has a treaty right to insist also that that constitution and declaration should not be merely nominal, but that the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua should not enact any provisions and regulations incompatible with the essence and character of a free port. Now, if English merchants, settled in Greytown or trading thither, appeal to the protection and interposition of the English Government against measures on the part of the Nicaraguan Government which are prejudicial to the free port character of Greytown, and thereby to their commercial interests, and if subjects of other states join in such steps, there would be nothing herein contrary to the rules of international law or to the ordinary practice generally acknowledged as admissible.

"In regard, however, to the affairs of the Mosquito Indians, it is true that England, in the Treaty of Managua, has acknowledged the sovereignty of Nicaragua and renounced the protectorate, but this still only on condition, set forth in the treaty, of certain political and pecuniary advantages for the Mosquitoes ('subject to the conditions and engagements specified in the treaty, Article I.') England has an interest of its own in the fulfillment of these conditions stipulated in favor of those who were formerly under its protection, and therefore also a right of its own to insist upon the fulfillment of those promises as well as of all other clauses of the treaty. The Government of Nicaragua is wrong in calling this an inadmissible intervention,' inasmuch as pressing for the fulfillment of engagements undertaken by treaty on the part of a foreign state is not to be classified as intermeddling with the internal affairs of that state, which intermeddling has unquestionably been prohibited under penalty. No less unjustly does the Government of Nicaragua seek to qualify this insistence on treaty claims as a continued exercise of the relinquished protectorate, and on that ground wish to declare England's interposition inadmissible. "Finally, the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua also expresses the desire (Réponse, p. 17) that the award should declare that the Treaty of Nicaragua [Managua], as having accomplished its purpose, is annulled in respect of Mosquitia, and that in future the parties concerned are bound in this respect to comply solely with the decisions adopted and enumer

ated in the award. This desire militates against universal principles of law, and therefore can not be acceded to. The interpretation of a treaty can never supersede the treaty interpreted, and the judicial decision creates no new right, but only affirms and establishes the existing right." Great Britain and Nicaragua.-By a convention signed at London November 1, 1895, it was agreed to constitute a mixed commission "to fix the amount due to British subjects in respect of injury caused to them or their property or goods in the Mosquito Reserve, owing to the action of the Nicaraguan authorities in the course of the year 1894." It was provided that the commission should be composed of a British representative, who must be well acquainted with the Spanish language; a Nicaraguan representative, who must be well acquainted with English; and “a jurist, not a citizen of any American state." Should the two governments be unable to agree on this jurist he was to be named by the President of the Swiss Confederation. The commissioners were to sit in Bluefields, and to decide the claims before them "in accordance with the principles of international law and the practice and jurisprudence established by such analogous modern commissions as enjoy the best reputation." By a protocol annexed to the convention, it was provided: "Her Majesty's government will not support the claim of any person before the commission unless they consider him to be a British subject; and, on their part, the Nicaraguan Government will accept such status as duly established, subject to the production by them of proof that the claimant is not entitled to it in contemplation of English law.”1

Great Britain: Boundary of the Province of Ontario.-Award of the arbitrators appointed to define the north and west boundary of the province of Ontario.

"To all to whom these presents shall come: The undersigned having been appointed by the governments of Canada and Ontario as arbitrators to determine the northerly and westerly boundary of the province of Ontario, do hereby determine and decide that the following are and shall be such boundaries, that is to say: Commencing at a point on the southern shore of Hudson Bay, commonly called James Bay, where a line produced north from the head of Lake Temiscaming would strike the said south shore; thence along the said south shore westerly to the mouth of the Albany River; thence up the middle of the said Albany River, and of the lakes thereon, to the source of the said river at the head of Lake St. Joseph; thence by the nearest line to the easterly end of Lac Seul, being the head waters of the English River; thence westerly through the middle of Lac Seul and the said English River to a point where the same will be intersected by a true meridianal line northerly from the international monument placed to mark the most northwesterly angle of the Lake of the Woods by the recent boundary commission, and thence due south, following the said meridianal line to the said international monument; thence southerly and easterly, following upon the international boundary line between the British possessions and the United States of America into Lake Superior. But if a true meridianal line drawn northerly from the

1 For. Rel. 1896, 307. See, as to the events out of which the claims in question grew, For. Rel. 1894, Appendix I. 234–363.

said international boundary at the said most northwesterly angle of the Lake of the Woods shall be found to pass west of where the English River empties into the Winnipeg River, then and in such case the northerly boundary of Ontario shall continue down the middle of the said English River to where the same empties into the Winnipeg River, and shall continue thence on a straight line drawn due west from the confluence of the said English River with the said Winnipeg River until the same will intersect the meridian above described, and thence due south, following the said meridianal line to the said international monument; thence southerly and easterly, following upon the international boundary line between the British possessions and the United States of America, into Lake Superior.

"Given under our hands at Ottawa, in the province of Ontario, this 3d day of August 1878.

"ROBT. A. HARRISON. "EDWARD THORNTON. "F. KINCKS.

"Signed in presence of:

"THOMAS HODGINS.

"E. MONK."

Great Britain and Peru.-Award of the commission appointed by the Senate of Hamburg to adjudicate the case of Captain T. Melville White, referred to that body for arbitration.

[House of Commons Paper No. 482 (1864); translation from the German.]

"The demand of the British Government for an indemnification of 4,5001. in favor of Thomas Melville White from the Republic of Peru, now under consideration, is based on the following points:

"1. The arrest and the long, unjust imprisonment of White, founded on a serious but wholly groundless and unsupported accusation.

"2. The suffering and annoyances to which he was subjected during his imprisonment.

"3. The neglect of the rules and principles not only of Peruvian but of universal law, which was evinced by delaying the trial, and by the manner in which the preliminary proceedings were conducted.

"4. His expulsion from the Peruvian dominions, as the result of these unjust proceedings.

"As Captain Thomas Melville White has also communicated a statement drawn up by him as claimant, it is to be observed, in reference to that document, that it can only be taken into consideration as being specially referred to in the representations of the British Government.

"It appears to be in general a passionate and partial account, with obvious misrepresentations and exaggerations, and wherein candor is wanting; for this reason the British Government could not get a clear idea of its contents. The arbitrator has, therefore, only to keep to the official representations of the Government.

"The four above-mentioned complaints will now be examined separately: "1. With regard to the first complaint-the unjustifiable arrest and long imprisonment-it is first of all to be shown that White was arrested on

Br. & For. State Papers, LXIX. 299–300.