62 AVES ISLAND. 



XXVin. INSULTS TO THE UNITED STATES BY VENEZUELA, AND OUTRAGES UPON 

 OUR PERSONS AND PROPERTY, IN THIS CASE, A JUST CASUS BELLI. 



It is forbidden by the laws of nations for one State to attempt to 

 tamper with the citizens or subjects of another, not authorized by their 

 State to do the act sought to be obtained. — (See Vattel, lib. 1, c. 4, 

 § 75, p. 33 ; lb. lib., 2, c. 4. § 54, p. 154 ; Thompson vs. Powells, 2 

 Simon's Rep., p. 294; Taylor vs. Barclay, lb. p. 213 ; United States 

 vs. Palmer, 3 Wheat. Rep., p. 610; " Santisima Trinidad," 7 Wheat., 

 p. 283.) 



Especially is it an affront to the United States, and an act forbid- 

 den by the jus gentium, for a State to arrange with a private subject 

 or citizen in respect of his possession of discovered territory, or his 

 rights thereto, in order to impair or defeat the rights of the United 

 States so acquired and vested. It is seeking to withdraw them from 

 their rightful allegiance and loyal duty. (See Vattel, lib. 2, c. 4, 

 pp. 160-1, §§ 71-2, &c; lb., lib. 2, c. 4, p. 154, § 54 and supra; lb., 

 lib. — , c. 18, p. 374, § 332, &c.) 



The resort by Venezuela, without notice to the United States, to 

 armed force, to oust us from the peaceful possession of Shelton's Isle, 

 assumed peacefully and enjoyed uninterruptedly by us, after the dis- 

 covery of guano thereon, and the hauling down the United States 

 flag, without having previously applied to the federal government, 

 was an outrage upon and an insult to the United States, and it should 

 demand prompt reparation and atonement ; and this demand should 

 be made, and compliance with it insisted upon, as a preliminary or 

 proemial condition, before considering the question of title. (Vattel, 

 pp. 575-6, before cited.) 



This atonement and reparation should be — 1. Restoration of isle to 

 status quo ante the eviction; 2. Indemnity to us for our damages; 

 and 3. Apology to the United States, and saluting our dishonored 

 flag, as we did the Spanish consul's at New Orleans, and as France 

 insists we shall do to the French consul's at San Francisco. [This is 

 the precise course of the British government in the case of Mears at 

 Nootka Sound, and to which Spain was constrained to accede, to 

 avoid war.'] 



And in Mears' s case, too, it is questionable if the ships seized by 

 Spain were not Portuguese, though the British flag was used ; and in 

 that case, also, the ships had been given up by the Mexican Viceroy 

 on the Pacific coast before the demand was made. (See Greenhow's 

 Oregon, p. 466 and app. ; see British An. Reg., 1790; "G-entleman's 

 Magazine," 1790; "British State Papers.") 



Many similar instances can be referred to in the history of nations 

 within the past century. 



See the case of the Falkland Islands;* its seizure by England 



*Discovered by Davis, Hawkins, et al., about the close of the 16th century. English, 

 French, and Spanish settlements made simultaneously in 1763. Spain then purchased French 

 claim and dispossessed England forcibly from port, and afterwards abandoned the island. 

 English flag rehoisted, but subsequently abandoned. France and Spain acknowledged her 

 right of sovereignty in 1774. In 1825, Buenos Ayres founded a colony under Durbein Vernd, 

 who seized two American schooners sealing. His settlement destroyed by United States 

 Bhip Lexington. The British government resumed possession in 1833, contending it had 

 only been suspended. In 1845 incorporated by royal charter as British colony. 



