AVES ISLAND. 261 



page or detainer, and does not, of itself, till adjudicated by the court 

 of admiralty, change the property. This is the well-settled rule, 

 according to all the authorities. 



XI. It is conceded that a State granting special letters of reprisal, 

 may require such reasonable conditions and restrictions necessary to 

 prevent the improper use thereof, not in derogation of the rights of its 

 citizens to such full remedy according to the jus gentium, and not of a 

 character rendering it ineffectual. The consuetudinary law of nations, 

 and the practice under it, requires that in all cases a caution and surety 

 should be exacted from the party demanding such letters, to respond 

 in damages to any person illegally damnified by the abuse of such 

 letters, and also to all persons injured thereby in any manner what- 

 ever, if it should be subsequently made to appear that the claimants 

 fraudulently made a false and exaggerated statement of their claim, 

 and misled the authorities of their State into granting such letters. 



This stipulation is an ample guarantee to the whole world against 

 illegal damnification by the issuance of such letters, or the proceed- 

 ings under them. It deprives the State, whose property, or the prop- 

 erty of whose subjects or citizens, is seized under such letters, of all 

 pretext for resisting their execution. It takes away from the letters 

 everything like a belligerent character, and makes them mere judicial 

 process for the enforcement of just indemnity for a wrong, or collection 

 of a just debt. 



The authorities show that all States, within the last six centuries at 

 least, have exacted such caution. 



Among the restrictions and conditions that a State issuing such 

 letters may rightfully exact of its citizens demanding them^ is the 

 preliminary investigation before alluded to, to ascertain, for its own 

 satisfaction, the» amount of damages or debt justly due from the delin- 

 quent State ; though, as we have before stated, such preliminary inves- 

 tigation was not required either by England or any of the continental 

 States, except France, by Art. 1, of Tit., 10, of Or-d. of Marine, 1681, 

 and prior ordinances, in cases • of letters of special reprisal. (See 

 Cleirac, Valin, and Pardessus before cited ut passim in notice on said 

 article.) Such course is now suggested as a wise and precautionary 

 measure to avoid subsequent contest on that point, to prevent an abuse 

 of the letters, and injustice and injury to the State complained of, and 

 all other parties. 



Anciently, special letters of reprisal were issued to the individuals 

 complaining, and who also executed them by vessels armed by them- 

 selves. It is not questioned that a State may, for its own security, 

 and to prevent an abuse of its writ and injustice being done, direct, at 

 its option, that the letters be executed by the individual claimants, as 

 according to past practice, or that they be executed under the super- 

 vision of its naval or other officers, or such letters may be issued im- 

 mediately to such officers, and the execution thereof- directed to be 

 made by them, and in a public ship-of-war. 



Doubless no departure from the rules and usages of t\iejus gentium, 

 having in view the security of the alleged delinquent State, and third 

 parties, would be justified on the part of the State issuing such letters, 

 but the prescribing of regulations and restraints by sucli State upon 



