cessation of the wrong, but its reparation. The subject is still under discussion, the result of which will be communicated to you in due time." President Pierce, annual message, Dec. 3, 1855, Richardson's Message I. 332. As to the subsequent dismissal of Mr. Crampton, the British minister, and certain British consuls, see supra, § 640. Joseph Wagner, who, at the October term, 1855, of the United States district court for the southern district of New York, was convicted of being concerned in the unlawful enlistment of men to serve a foreign prince, and sentenced to two years' imprisonment, and to pay a fine of $100, was pardoned in July, 1856. (Mr. Thomas, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Hillyer, July 31, 1856, 45 MS. Dom. Let, 427.) It is not a crime, under the neutrality law, to leave this country with intent to enlist in foreign military service; nor to transport persons out of the country with their own consent who have an intention of so enlisting. To constitute a crime under the statute, such person must be hired or retained to go abroad with the intent to be so enlisted. United States v. Louis Kazinski, 2 Sprague, 7. "I have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 145 of the 7th instant, in which you report your action in relation to a public announcement in a newspaper of Ciudad Bolivar that the Spanish viceconsul in that city had, by the authority of the Spanish legation at Caracas, opened books for the enrollment of volunteers and the reception of subscriptions' in aid of Spain in her war with the United States. You state that both the President and the minister of foreign affairs of Venezuela agreed that the Spanish legation had gone too far, and that a stop should immediately be put to its efforts to raise men and money on Venezuelan soil with which to oppose the United States,' and it appears that as a result of your representations the ministry of foreign affairs issued on the 1st of June a decree in which attention is called to various provisions of the penal code of Venezuela by which it is forbidden to anyone, without authority of the national government, to make levies or to arm and equip Venezuelans or foreigners on Venezuelan soil destined for the service of another nation, or to arrogate to himself illegal functions, and, without authority, to open an office for making subscriptions or enlistments.' "Upon your report of the matter by cable, with the inquiry whether you should demand the dismissal of the Spanish minister at Caracas, the Department, in its telegraphic reply, instructed you to lay such evidences as you possessed of the minister's offenses before the Venezuelan Government, with an expression of confidence that it would take appropriate measures for the vindication of its sovereignty. The Department deemed it proper, after the proofs should be presented to the minister of foreign affairs, to afford the Venezuelan Government an opportunity to investigate the matter, and of its own motion to take such further action as the facts should require. It is assumed that the Venezuelan Government, especially in view of what you say of its friendly disposition toward the United States, will not be disinclined to signify in a substantial way its displeasure at what seems to have been a flagrant attempt to disregard its laws and its neutrality." Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Mr. Loomis, min. to Venezuela, June 20, 1898, In a report of the chief of the Bureau of Navigation of the Navy Department, communicated by the Acting Secretary of the Navy to the Secretary of State, June 1, 1898, it is said to be "the opinion of the Bureau that not even a citizen of the United States residing abroad can enlist in time of war without coming to the United States, unless neutrality laws are violated." For. Rel. 1898, 1175. 3. FITTING OUT OR ARMING OF VESSELS. (1) STATUTORY PROVISIONS. § 1294. "Every person who, within the limits of the United States, fits out and arms, or attempts to fit out and arm, or procures to be fitted out and armed, or knowingly is concerned in the furnishing, fitting out, or arming, of any vessel, with intent that such vessel shall be employed in the service of any foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district, or people, to cruise or commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens, or property of any foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district, or people with whom the United States are at peace, or who issues or delivers a commission within the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, for any vessel, to the intent that she may be so employed, shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars, and imprisoned not more than three years. And every such vessel, her tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with all materials, arms, ammunition, and stores, which may have been procured for the building and equipment thereof, shall be forfeited; one-half to the use of the informer, and the other half to the use of the United States." "Every citizen of the United States who, without the limits thereof, fits out and arms, or attempts to fit out and arm, or pro cures to be fitted out and armed, or knowingly aids or is concerned in furnishing, fitting out, or arming any private vessel of war, or privateer, with intent that such vessel shall be employed to cruise, or commit hostilities, upon the citizens of the United States, or their property, or who takes the command of, or enters on board. of any such vessel, for such intent, or who purchases any interest in any such vessel, with a view to share in the profits thereof, shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and fined not more than ten thousand dollars, and imprisoned not more than ten years. And the trial for such offense, if committed without the limits of the United States, shall be in the district in which the offender shall be apprehended or first brought." Sec. 5284, Revised Statutes. The half of the proceeds of a vessel, forfeited and sold for violation of the neutrality laws, belonging, under section 5233, Revised Statutes, to the informer, does not by lapse of time become the property of the United States, even if no one appears to claim it. United States v. The Resolute, 40 Fed. Rep. 543. (2) ORIGIN OF INHIBITION. $1295. When M. Genet came to the United States as French minister in 1793, he brought with him a quantity of blank commissions, and after his arrival proceeded to fit out and commission privateers. Referring to this fact, and particularly to the capture and bringing into Philadelphia of a ship by one of these cruisers, Mr. Jefferson, on June 5, 1793, wrote to M. Genet that, as it was "the right of every nation to prohibit acts of sovereignty from being exercised by any other within its limits, and the duty of a neutral nation to prohibit such as would injure one of the warring powers," so " the granting military commissions, within the United States, by any other authority than their own," was "an infringement on their sovereignty, and particularly so when granted to their own citizens, to lead them to commit acts contrary to the duties they owe their own country." The departure of the vessels, so illegally equipped, from the ports of the United States was therefore requested. This request was not complied with, and captures continued, together with the sale of prizes in the ports of the United States. Accordingly, on August 7, 1793, Mr. Jefferson informed M. Genet that the President considered the United States "as bound, pursuant to positive assurances, given in conformity to the laws of neutrality, to effectuate the restoration of, or to make compensation for, prizes which shall have been made, of any of the parties at war with France, subsequent to the 5th day of June last, by privateers fitted out of our ports;" that it was consequently expected that he would “cause restitution to be made " of all prizes so taken and brought in subsequent to that day, "in defect of which, the President considers it as incumbent upon the United States to indemnify the owners of those prizes, the indemnification to be reimbursed by the French nation;" and that, "besides taking efficacious measures to prevent the future fitting out privateers in the ports of the United States, they will not give asylum therein to any which shall have been at any time so fitted out, and will cause restitution of all such prizes as shall be hereafter brought within their ports, by any of the said privateers." A similar note was addressed to the British minister, and this was followed up, on September 5, 1793, by another, in which Mr. Jefferson comprehensively defined the position of the United States. Referring to the treaties of the United States with France, the Netherlands, and Prussia, by which the contracting parties were bound to endeavor, "by all the means in their power," each to protect and defend in its ports or waters, or the seas near its coasts, vessels and effects belonging to citizens of the other, and to recover and cause to be restored to the right owners any such vessels or effects as should there be taken from them, Mr. Jefferson said: 66 "Though we have no similar treaty with Great Britain, it was the opinion of the President that we should use towards that nation the same rule, which, under this article, was to govern us with the other nations, and even to extend it to captures made on the high seas, and brought into our ports, if done by vessels which had been armed within them. Having, for particular reasons, forborne to use all the means in our power for the restitution of the three vessels mentioned in my letter of August 7th, the President thought it incumbent on the United States to make compensation for them; and though nothing was said in that letter of other vessels taken under like circumstances, and brought in after the 5th June, and before the date of that letter, yet, where the same forbearance had taken place, it was, and is his opinion, that compensation would be equally due. As to prizes made under the same circumstances, and brought in after the date of that letter, the President determined, that all the means in our power should be used for their restitution. If these fail, as we should not be bound by our treaties to make compensation to the other powers, in the analogous case, he did not mean to give an opinion, that it ought to be done to Great Britain. But still, if any cases shall arise subsequent to that date, the circumstances of which shall place them on similar ground with those before it, the President would think compensation equally incumbent on the United States. Instructions are given to the governors of the H. Doc. 551-vol 7---57 different States, to use all the means in their power for restoring prizes of this last description, found within their ports. Though they will, of course, take measures to be informed of them, and the General Government has given them the aid of the custom-house officers for this purpose, yet you will be sensible of the importance of multiplying the channels of their information, as far as shall depends on yourself, or any persons under your direction, in order that the governors may use the means in their power for making restitution. Without knowledge of the capture, they can not restore it. It will always be best to give the notice to them directly; but any information, which you shall be pleased to send me also, at any time, shall be forwarded to them, as quickly as distance will permit. Hence you will perceive, sir, that the President contemplates restitution or compensation, in the cases before the 7th of August, and after that date, restitution, if it can be effected by any means in our power. And that it will be important, that you should substantiate the fact that such prizes are in our ports or waters. "Your list of the privateers illicitly armed in our ports is, I believe, correct. With respect to losses by detention, waste, spoliation, sustained by vessels taken as before mentioned, between the dates of June 5th, and August 7th, it is proposed, as a provisional measure, that the collector of the customs of the district, and the British consul, or any other person you please, shall appoint persons to establish the value of the vessel and cargo, at the times of her capture, and of her arrival in the port into which she is brought, according to their value in that port. If this shall be agreeable, and you will be pleased to signify it to me, with the names of the prizes understood to be of this description, instructions will be given accordingly to the collectors of the customs where the respective vessels are.” Referring to this letter, Hall says: "The policy of the United States in 1793 constitutes an epoch in the development of the usages of neutrality. There can be no doubt that it was intended and believed to give effect to the obligations then incumbent upon neutrals. But it represented by far the most advanced existing opinions as to what those obligations were; and in some points it even went further than authoritative international custom has up to the present time advanced. In the main however it is identical with the standard of conduct which is now adopted by the community of nations." Mr. Jefferson, Sec. of State, to M. Genet, June 5, 1793, Am. State Papers, See, also, Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Madison, May 13, 1793, 2 Randall's Jeffer- |