case the Treaty of Ghent established peace and amity between Great Britain and ourselves, but dealt with little else except various boundary questions which were of no particular importance as causes of the war or of its prolongation.

The Constitution of the United States in vesting in the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, the authority to make treaties constitutes him, with that body, the peace-making power of the Republic so far as foreign nations are concerned. Under the circumstances of his position he generally takes the initiative, though Congress can compel him to act for peace by refusing the means of carrying on war.

The war status in foreign wars is held to end with the date of the treaty or agreement, formally entered upon, with the opposing belligerent. The date is generally announced in a public manner by a proclamation by the President.

In the case of civil wars, rebellions, etc., in the absence of any legislative provision upon the subject, a proclamation by the President to the effect that hostilities have come to an end or that the rebellion has been suppressed is ordinarily accepted as fixing an authoritative date for the discontinuance of the status belli.

In our Civil War different states of the Union were named in different proclamations, and hence the Civil War closed at different dates in different states.

A treaty of peace has been well defined as an act by which the belligerent governments, taking into consideration the state of their forces and the results of the war, determine their respective pretensions and convert them into rights and obligations.

As soon as peace is established all acts must cease which are permitted only in time of war.

"Thus," says Hall, "if an army is in occupation of hostile territory when peace is made, not only can it levy no more

contributions or requisitions during such time as may elapse before it evacuates the country, but it cannot demand arrears of those of which the payment has been already ordered. It is obviously not an exception to this rule that an enemy may be authorized by the treaty of peace itself to do certain acts which, apart from agreement, would be acts of war, such as to remain in occupation of territory until specific stipulations have been fulfilled, or to levy contributions or requisitions if the subsistence of the troops in occupation is not provided for by the government of the occupied district."

Preliminaries of peace are arrangements intended to put an end to hostilities without waiting for the delays incident to the discussions preceding the establishment of a regular and definite treaty of peace. In the Chino-Japanese War an armistice was agreed to on March 30, the actual treaty of peace not being ratified and effective until the 8th of the following May.

Very often the preliminaries provide for more than a cessation of hostilities, containing stipulations which are afterwards, with changes of detail, incorporated into the treaty of peace.

Commencement of peace.-When a treaty fixes a date in the future for the commencement of peace, which is very exceptional in practice, it is done on account of the delay in notifying regions in which hostilities are still going on. This is, of course, a rare instance in these days of quick communication. It may happen, however, even now in distant seas or in inland territories, and it may happen also that official information reaches such vessels or such forces before the time designated as the commencement of peace. Under such circumstances it is considered proper if the news is official and well authenticated to have hostilities stop and the state of peace begin.

A naval or military commander is not obliged, however, to

accept any information as to peace which is not duly authenticated by his own government. The consequences of suspending hostilities upon false news may be very serious, and if it were once established that commanders were bound to act upon information obtained otherwise than by official sources from their own government it might be difficult to prevent them from being misled by intentional deceit.

Captures with respect to period of peace. In the Treaty of Ghent it was provided that hostilities were to cease upon the ratification of the treaty, and prizes taken after that date were to be restored, but with a time allowance for the intelligence of the peace to reach the various parts of the seas of the world. An American cruiser captured a British vessel before the period fixed for the cessation of hostilities, and in ignorance of the fact, but before the prize had been condemned, it was recaptured at sea by a British ship of war after the period fixed for the cessation of hostilities, but also without knowledge of the peace. It was judicially determined that the capture by the American was lawful, but the recapture, after the peace, was not lawful.

Uti possidetis.—The commencement of peace put an end to all force, and then the general principle is in force that things acquired in war remain, as to title and possession, as they stood when the peace began. This general principle is known as the uti possidetis, and is the basis of every treaty of peace unless the contrary is expressly stipulated. "Peace," says Wheaton, "gives a final and perfect title to captures without condemnation, and as it forbids all force it destroys all hope of recovery as much as if the captured vessel was judiciously condemned."

Case of the "Mentor."-In the case of the "Mentor," an American vessel captured by British ships off the Capes of the Delaware after the cessation of hostilities, though in ignorance of the fact, it was held in the British Admiralty Court by

Sir William Scott that the capture was illegal, and that as the hostile acts were illegal the officer committing the acts was liable for damages; but if the officer committed such acts in ignorance of the conclusion of the war his own government should protect him, as it was the duty of the government to have given him notice of the ending of the war.

The restoration of peace carries with it the revival of cer-. tain private as well as public rights and obligations. Debts can be again sued for, contracts again enforced between the subjects of the late belligerent powers. Performance of acts rendered impossible by the war cannot, of course, be claimed. A man cannot be required to sell a house or live stock destroyed by war, and the time named for obligations does not include the period of war.

Treaties of peace are valid whether made with the authority that declared the war or de facto governments that have arisen since, so long as the authorities are those entrusted with this duty by the constitutional law.

Conquest of territory invests the conquering state with title to all the state property in that territory, and with all the rights and obligations that pertain to that territory.

Sovereignty over inhabitants of acquired territory.—The conquering state obtains sovereignty over all the subjects of the acquired territory, and the inhabitants become citizens or subjects by acquisition. They may or may not be given full political rights. It is usual, however, to insert a stipulation in modern treaties giving liberty of choice to the inhabitants of the conquered territory to remain citizens of the original country. Sometimes this liberty of choice is fettered with the condition that they must leave the conquered territory if they elect to go with their former state. In the cession of Alsace and Lorraine it was provided that those who wished. to retain their French nationality must emigrate, but they

were allowed to retain the ownership of their real estate within the ceded territory.

Administrative and similar acts not of a political or military nature remain good, such for example as the sentences on ordinary criminals, the payment of taxes, etc.

Conquest is distinguished from military occupation in that it is the completed and final status of the acquired territory recognized by treaty or otherwise.

With respect to the legitimacy of conquest on the part of the United States the following opinion of Chief Justice Marshall upon the subject is herewith given: "The constitution confers on the government of the Union the power of making war and of making treaties, consequently that government possesses the power of acquiring territory either by conquest or treaty.'

3 وو

3 American Ins. Co. vs. Carter 1 Peters Report, pp. 511-542.