generally sustained the negative; and the utterances of the executive department, even down to 1853, were by no means consistent. Mr. Buchanan, however, as Secretary of State, under the administration of Polk, broadly maintained the affirmative; and Mr. Cass in 1859 asserted that "the moment a foreigner becomes naturalized his allegiance to his native country is severed forever. He experiences a new political birth. *** Should he return to his native country he returns as an American citizen, and in no other character." Congress in 1868 declared "the right of expatriation" to be “a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,' and pronounced "any declaration, instruction, opinion, order or decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation," to be "inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government." Prior to the passage of this act, George Bancroft concluded with the North German Union the first treaty of naturalization." He made similar treaties with Baden,* Bavaria, and Hesse." Before the end of 1872, treaties on the same subject were entered into with Austria-Hungary,7 Belgium, Denmark," Ecuador," Great Britain," Mexico, and Sweden and Norway. No treaty has since been added to the

8

13

12 Kent's Com. 49; Inglis v. The Trustees of the Sailor's Snug Harbour, 3 Pet. 99; Shanks v. Dupont, 3 Pet. 242; The Santissima Trinidad, 7 Wheat. 283; Talbot v. Janson, 3 Dall. 133; Portier v. Le Roy, 1 Yeates

(Penn.) 371. Contra, Alsberry v. Hawkins, 9 Dana 178.

2 Act of July 27, 1868, 15 Stats. at L. 223; R. S. Sec. 1999.

list. This fact may be explained not only by an unreadiness on the part of various governments to accept a compliance with the naturalization laws of the United States as a sufficient act of expatriation, but also by the exigencies of military service and the numerous cases in which it has been alleged that the treaties were abused for the purpose of evading military duty.

In the development of the modern process of extradition, the credit of the initiative belongs to France. But, beginning with the Webster-Ashburton treaty, the United States, at an important stage in the history of the system, actively contributed to its growth by the conclusion of numerous conventions.' We cannot afford, however, to rest on our laurels. In recent times other nations, and particularly Great Britain since 1870, observing the propensity of criminals to utilize improved facilities of travel, have, by legislation as well as negotiation, vastly increased the efficiency of the system. It will therefore be necessary, if we would fulfill the promise of our past and retain a place in the front rank, steadily to multiply our treaties and enlarge their scope. No innovation in the practice of nations has ever more completely discredited the direful predictions of its adversaries than that of surrendering fugitives from justice.

The United States, acknowledging the force and supremacy of law, has given the weight of its example to the employment of arbitration as a means of settling international disputes not only as to the rights of individuals but also as to the rights of nations. If asked for a proof of this statement, we may point to the fifty-three executed arbitral agreements to which,

1 Art. XXVII. of the treaty with Great Britain of 1794, commonly called the Jay treaty, required the surrender of fugitives charged with murder or forgery, but it was for the most part ineffective and expired by limitation in 1808. The Webster-Ashburton treaty, signed Aug. 9, 1842, provided (Art. X.) for extradition for any of seven offences. Treaties with other countries were soon afterwards made, ten being concluded while William L. Marcy was Secretary of State, during the administration of Pierce.

during the past hundred years, the United States has been a party; to the twelve cases in which the President, or some one appointed or approved by him, has acted as arbitrator or umpire; and to the five pending proceedings in which the government is now directly concerned. In many of these arbitrations questions of national right of the highest moment, sometimes expressed in the terms of the agreement, but often lurking in the general phrases of a claims convention, have been submitted to judgment. The opinion of the world as to the general result is attested by recent efforts to establish a permanent system of arbitration, as proposed in the plan of the International American Conference, in the unratified treaty between the United States and Great Britain, and in the pending agreement lately adopted at the Hague.

We speak of the United States; and in its original design and purpose it still endures, and so may it endure forever! But, in the history of its diplomacy during the past hundred years, there is nothing more striking than the record of the national expansion. First Louisiana," then the Floridas, then Texas, next a half of Oregon, soon afterwards California and New Mexico," and later the Gadsden purchase, it was no mere figment of the poetic fancy that depicted the nation's pioneer as going

*

5

*joyful on his way,

To wed Penobscot's waters to San Francisco's bay."

Not only extensive provinces, which had "languished for three centuries under the leaden sway of a stationary system,' but also vast regions in whose wild solitudes the voices of nature spoke only to barbarian ears, were rescued from the

1 See International Arbitrations, 6 vols. ; also, the note at the end of this address.

4 Joint Resolutions of March 1 and December 29, 1845.

5 Treaty with Great Britain, June 15, 1846.

6 Treaty with Mexico, February 2, 1848.

7 Treaty with Mexico, December 30, 1853.

dominion of misfortune and neglect, and dedicated to liberty and law and progress. And still the national advance continued. Distant Alaska, far reaching in its continental and insular dimensions, was added to the national domain; the Hawaiian Islands, long an object of special protection, were at length annexed; and Cuba, as the events of a century had foreshadowed, was detached from the Spanish crown, while by the same act all other Spanish islands in the West Indies, together with the Philippines and Guam in the Pacific, were ceded to the United States. By a treaty since made, Germany and Great Britain renounce in favor of the United States all their rights of possession or jurisdiction as to Tutuila and certain other islands in Samoa.1

The record of the century lies before us. We survey it perhaps with exultation, but we should not forget its graver meaning. With the growth of power and the extension of boundaries, there has come an increase of national responsibilities. The manner in which we shall discharge them will be the test of our virtue. To-day, reviewing the achievements of a hundred years, we pay our tribute to the wisdom, the foresight, the lofty conceptions and generous policies of the men who gave to our diplomacy its first impulse. It remains for us to carry forward, as our predecessors have carried forward, the great work thus begun, so that at the close of another century the cause of free government, free commerce and free seas may still find in the United States a champion.

1 Treaty with Russia, March 30, 1867.

2 Joint Resolution, July 7, 1898.

3 Treaty with Spain, December 10, 1898.

4 December 2, 1899.

NOTE ON INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATIONS.

-The arbitrations of the

United States, the dates, unless otherwise stated, being those of the arbitral agreements, are as follows:

Brazil, Whale Ship Canada, 1870-Chile: Case of the "Macedonian,” 1858; c'aims, 1892; total, 2.—China, the Ashmore Fishery, 1884.— Colombia: Panama Riot and other claims, 1857; same subject, 1864;

Montijo case, 1874; total, 3.-Costa Rica, claims, 1860. Denmark, Carlos Butterfield claims, 1888.-Ecuador: claims, 1862; Santos case, 1893; total, 2.-France, claims, 1880.-Great Britain: St. Croix River, 1794; Islands in Bay of Fundy, 1814; N. E. Boundary, 1814; same subject, 1827; River and Lake boundary, 1814; Lake and Land boundary, 1814; San Juan boundary, 1871; Hudson's Bay Co. claims, 1863; Impediments to Recovery of Debts, 1794; Neutral Rights and Duties, 1794; Compensation for Slaves, 1818; same subject, 1822; same subject, 1822; claims, 1853; Reserved Fisheries, 1854; Alabama claims, 1871; Civil War claims, 1871; Fisheries, 1871; Fur Seals, 1892; Bering Sea Damage claims, 1896; total, 20.-Hayti: Pelletier and Lazare cases, 1884; claims, 1885; Van Bokkelen case, 1888; total, 3.-Mexico: claims, 1839; claims, 1868; Oberlander case, 1897; total, 3.-Nicaragua, claims, 1900.-Paraguay, United States and Paraguay Navigation Co., 1859. - Peru: cases of the Georgianna and Lizzie Thompson, 1862; claims, 1863; claims, 1868; MacCord case, 1898; total, 4.-Portugal: Brig "General Armstrong," 1851; Delagoa Bay Railway, 1891; total, 2.-Salvador, Savage claim, 1864.San Domingo, Ozama Bridge case, 1897.-Siam: Kellett case, 1897; Cheek case, 1897; total, 2. Spain: Spoliations, 1795; Case of the "Colonel Lloyd Aspinwall," 1870; Cuban claims, 1871; case of the Masonic, 1880; total, 4. - Venezuela: claims, 1866; claims, 1885; Venezuela Steam Transportation Co., 1892; total, 3.-Grand total, 57, all but 4 since 1800.

The President of the United States has acted as arbitrator in the following cases: Argentine Republic and Brazil, Misiones boundary, 1889; Argentine Republic and Paraguay, Middle Chaco territory, 1876; Colombia and Italy, Cerruti case, 1894; Costa Rica and Nicaragua, boundary, 1886; Great Britain and Portugal, Island of Bulama, 1869.-Total, 5.

Ministers of the United States have acted as arbitrator or umpire in the following cases: Argentine Republic and Chile, boundary, 1896; Chile and Peru, disputed accounts, 1874; Great Britain and Brazil, Dundonald claim, 1873; Great Britain and Colombia, Cotesworth and Powell claim, 1872; Great Britain and Honduras, claims, 1859; Italy and Switzerland, Cravairola boundary, 1873.-Total, 6.

Under the treaty between Costa Rica and Nicaragua of 1896, for the final settlement of their boundary, the President of the United States appointed Gen. E. P. Alexander, a citizen of the United States, as engineer-umpire.

Arbitrations are now pending between the United States and other powers as follows: Chile, claims, 1897; Germany and Great Britain, Samoan claims, 1899; Guatemala, May claim, 1900; Hayti, Metzger case, 1899; Russia, Bering Sea seizures, 1900.—Total, 5.

The treaty between the United States and Mexico of Feb. 2, 1848, contains (Art. xxi) a general clause as to arbitration; and the same principle