stefansson-wrangel-09-37-023

OverviewTranscribeVersionsHelp

Facsimile

Transcription

Status: Needs Review

-22-

part of the territories of a state, the question remains as to
whether it had been abandoned so that the United States could
occupy it without violation of foreign rights.

The Emperor of Hayti claimed the island, as can be seen
by the letter quoted from Mr. Clark to Mr. Cass, on the ground
that it had been part of French St. Domingo when that territory
had been made independent by France. The act giving independence
to the French part of St. Domingo is non-coramital on the question.
It says: ”3. Nous concedons, a ces conditions, par la presente
ordonnance aux habitants actuels de la partie francaise de l'ile
de Saint-Doraingue, 1’independence pleine et entiere de leur
gouvernement. ” If Navasa Island was ever administered as a part
of St. Domingo, this grant would, it seems, operate on such in-
habitants of Navasa as there might be; if not, then Hayti never
got any right to the island from France. The act cited above
may be found in 25 Duvergier's Collection Complete des Lois,
etc. (France) 318, 1825. Too much reliance, however, must not
be placed on it, for such a state of anarchy existed on the
island that it can be said that France had no control over it
whatsoever, and that the decree quoted above was rather an
acknowledgement of an already existing fact than a gift of in-
dependence. Moreover, all the islands mentioned In the letter
of Mr. Clark, with the sole exception of Navasa, are situated
within a few miles of the coast, and generally within the em-
brasure of a bay. That Navasa was ever administered as a part
of French St. Domingo is doubtful. The Haytien government claimed

Notes and Questions

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page