60 AVES ISLAND. 



being signed by any person but bimself, tbougb written as if Gribbs's 

 and Lang's signatures were to be affixed — and all the circumstances 

 about it, indicate fraud, if we had not produced this direct and un- 

 equivocal proof by a respectable and impartial witness. 



The character of the stipulation is, of itself, evidence of fraud or of 

 force being used, or of both combined^ to procure the signatures of 

 Gibbs and Lang. Gibbs did not understand Spanish ; and if others 

 besides Dias, deceived him as to the contents of the paper, it does not 

 strengthen its validity. 



It may be observed that the inconsistency of this document with 

 Captain Gibbs's instructions, and with his bounden duty, and with his 

 fidelity, which is unquestioned, are strong circumstances, if not suf- 

 ficient of themselves to justify the charge of fraud, to corroborate and 

 confirm the direct testimony on that point. 



2. Constraint and force, or duress. — The testimony of Captain 

 Safford is equally conclusive on this point. Duress, according to the 

 common law definition — that is, threats of imprisonment or other 

 bodily harm, or putting a party in fear, &c., may not be proved, nor 

 is it necessary that it should be, as we have shown, (see xxi, supra,) 

 but that constraint was induced by Dias being the officer and repre- 

 sentative of a government. 



XXV. THE ONUS PROBANDI AS TO THE TITLE RESTS ON VENEZUELA. 



We were in peaceable possession, and the isle was invaded, and we 

 were ejected by armed force whilst in the enjoyment of that occupation. 

 We had been notoriously in possession for several months, the Amer- 

 ican flag had been flying there during all that time, American vessels 

 had been continually there, lading guano, and voyaging from thence 

 to the United States and elsewhere. 



Eight of possession is sacred. — (See Vattel, p. 168, §§ 88, 90 ; 1 

 Phill.,p. 272, §'253.) 



No admissions or acknowledgments of agents without authority to 

 make them, or relinquishments, equally invalid for the same cause, 

 as well as others, should not exonerate Venezuela from the duty of 

 producing, on demand by the United States, the full original proofs 

 of her title, upon which she tortuously assumed such possession, and 

 evicted us. If those admissions are of any validity, the rule is the 

 same ; and, indeed, between sovereign States, the honor of the State, 

 outraged by such forcible invasion, demands that the statu quo ante 

 helium (for it was an act of war) should be restored, and indemnity 

 made, and apology given, before any discussion of title can be enter- 

 tained.— (See Vat., lib. 2_,.c. 18, § 337.)_ 



Possession ib prima facie evidence of title. 



XXVI. VENEZUELA BOUND BY THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE FEAUD AND MALCON- 

 DUCT OF HER OFFICERS, AND, HAVING AVOWED THEM, CANNOT HEREAFTER 

 CHANGE THE ISSUE. 



Venezuela is estopped by the acts of her officers, having adopted 

 them. She adopted them by producing the agreement or capitulation 

 of Dias.— (See Vattel, p. 160 to 163, lib. 2, c. 4.) 



She is responsible for the deceit, misrepresentation, falsehood, and 



