254 AVES ISLAND. 



VIII. As a State is in nowise liable for tlie debts of its individual 

 citizens, except in so far as it denies a creditor justice against such, 

 debtors, it follows that a resort must first have been had by a creditor 

 to all such remedies as are allowed him by the State complained of 

 before applying to his own government for special reprisals, and the 

 amount of debt claimed must be shown to be clearly due in re minime 

 duhia. (See authorities above referred to.) 



IX. It will be noticed that in the points preceding this argument 

 it is conceded that if satisfaction is not accorded agreeably to the 

 requirements of the lettre de requite, in a case of damages for a tort, the 

 complaining State, before it issues letters of special reprisal, ought, 

 for the prevention of injustice ex ahundante cautela, for its own satis- 

 faction, direct an inquisition of a judicial character, if practicable, for 

 the ascertainment of the true damages. There is a similar require- 

 ment in the ancient ordinances of marine in France, and most other 

 States pursue an analogous practice in relation to special reprisals. 

 (See article 1, Ordinances, page 1681, referring such preliminary in- 

 vestigation to the courts of admiralty on petition. See Sea Laws.) 

 No one can question the power of any government to direct such 

 inquisition for its own satisfaction before it will act by granting the 

 letters demanded. Nor can the competency of the executive of a 

 government be questioned to indicate a form of such procedure assimi- 

 lating (cy pres) to the proceedings of a judicial tribunal. Similar 

 directions are constantly made by this government in various cases, as 

 necessary to effect the purposes of justice, and to prevent those who 

 administer the government from being misled. 



It is not contended that such inquest of damages is conclusive ; it is 

 a precautionary measure to prevent injustice, and for the satisfaction 

 of the government itself, and neither the claimant nor the government 

 complained of can except to it, for it is a measure of prudence with 

 reference to one and of security with regard to both. 



The true amount of damages is subsequently, upon the execution of 

 the letters of reprisal, judicially determined, and adjudged upon judi- 

 cial proofs and investigations, and before this appointed tribunal all 

 parties can be heard. The question of the right to issue reprisals, of 

 the proper and legitimate exercise of the executive function, in re- 

 sorting to that remedy on behalf of claimants, is the only question 

 which is not permitted to be contested in such court. The question of 

 damages, and all questions as to any alleged abuse of the letters, are 

 rightful subjects for its investigation and decision; and, under the 

 law of nations and under the practice of nations, the admiralty or 

 prize courts of the State giving such letters of special reprisal, are the 

 proper tribunals to make such decision. When property is seized by 

 virtue of the letters of reprisal, it must be brought infra prcesidia so 

 soon as possible, according to the rules observed with respect to cap- 

 tures in time of war by public ships or by private armed ships with 

 commissions of general . reprisal or letters of marque. (See 1 Kent, 

 p. 62 ; Wheaton's Hist., § 12, p. 108 ; Valin's Comm. on Arts^ 1 and 5, 

 Tit. X, of Ord. of 1681. See, also, Molloy, before cited. Form of Letters 

 of Reprisal, &c., p. 53, also § 21.) 



