the awards are expressed in the gold coin of the United States; and in still others, the sums allowed are declared to be in Mexican gold dollars. I call attention also to the fact that in the awards in several claims on the part of citizens of the United States portions of the amounts respectively allowed are expressed to be in the currency of the United States, and other portions are expressed to be in the gold coin of the United States. The tables herewith transmitted, prepared from the records with great care by Mr. Randolph Coyle, the American secretary, and Mr. John H. Ingle, of my office, exhibit the amounts of the respective awards in favor of the citizens of each government, including interest and costs in cases where interest and costs were allowed, in the several kinds of money in which the awards are respectively expressed. I should also mention that the commissioners and the umpire made several declarations or orders for the purpose of interpreting expressions employed in several of their respective awards relative to the currency in which amounts allowed in those awards should be respectively payable, and that those declarations or orders have been considered and applied in the preparation of the statements contained in the tables herewith transmitted. The tables show that the total amount awarded in the currency of the United States, including interest and costs where they were allowed, in all the cases decided in favor of the citizens of the United States against the Mexican Republic, is $402,942.04, and that the total amount awarded in the currency of the United States, including interest and costs where they were allowed, in all the cases decided in favor of the citizens of the Mexican Republic against the United States, is $89,410.17, leaving a balance in the currency of the United States in favor of citizens of the United States of $313,531.87. They also show that the total amount awarded in the gold coin of the United States, including interest and costs where they were allowed, in all the cases decided in favor of citizens of the United States against the Mexican Republic, is $426,624.98; and that the total amount awarded in the gold coin of the United States, including interest and costs where they were allowed, in all the cases decided in favor of the citizens of the Mexican Republic against the United States, is $10,559.67, leaving a balance in the gold coin of the United States in favor of citizens of the United States of $416,065.31. It further appears by the tables transmitted that the total amount awarded in Mexican gold dollars, including interest and costs where they have been allowed, in all the cases decided in favor of the citizens of the United States against the Mexican Republic, is $3,296,055.18, and that the total amount awarded in Mexican gold dollars, including interest and costs where they were allowed, in all the cases decided in favor of citizens of the Mexican Republic against the United States, is $50,528.57, leaving a balance in Mexican gold dollars in favor of citizens of the United States of $3,245,526.61. These several balances make the total balance in the three currencies in favor of citizens of the United States above stated of $3,975,123.79. It has been necessary, for the purpose of ascertaining the total amounts of the awards in a large number of the cases, to calculate the interest allowed upon the principal sums respectively awarded from the several dates fixed in the awards to the time when it was provided that interest should cease. It would have been more satisfactory if the commissioners and the umpires had deemed it convenient to make their awards, in cases in which they allowed interest, definite, by computing the interest and awarding a certain aggregate amount in each such case. The practice, however, was to award interest where it was allowed, in general terms, from some date ascertained or referred to, "to the close of the labors of the commission," or "to the date of the final award," or in words of the same import and effect. The commissioners, on the 25th of January, 1876, before their final adjournment, entered an order declaring that in all cases decided by them wherein interest was allowed "to the close of the labors of the commission," such interest should be calculated to the date of the last decis ion the umpire should make within the time then limited for the com. pletion of his labors by the convention of November 20, 1874. The umpire, Sir Edward Thornton, made a declaration on the 31st of January, 1876, determining that in all cases decided by him wherein interest was allowed "to the date of the final award," that date should be considered to be the date of the last award which the umpire should make in accordance with the terms of the convention of November 20, 1874; that is to say, of the last award which the umpire should sign on or before the 31st of July, 1876. Under date of the 31st of July, 1876, the umpire made a declaration to the effect that his award in the case of Geronimo de la Garza vs. Mexico, No. 993, bearing date the 31st of July, 1876, was the award alluded to in the order of the commissioners of January 25, 1876, and that the date of the 31st of July, 1876, is the "date of the final award" to which he had himself referred in his decisions in which he bad awarded interest from specified dates "to the date of the final award," or had made use of words to the same effect. And finally upon the suggestion of the agents of the two governments that the former umpire, Dr. Francis Lieber, made divers awards with interest from particular dates "to the close of the labors of the commission," or made use of similar terms to fix the limit of time to which interest on those awards should be calculated, and had died without making any declaration as to the meaning of those expressions, the umpire, Sir Edward Thornton, made an order under date of the 17th instant"that in all awards of money made by his predecessor, the late Doctor Lieber, wherein interest is allowed to the close of the labors of the commission,' or other similar terms are employed to fix the date to which interest shall be calculated, the 31st of July, 1876, shall be deemed and taken to be such date.” It appears, therefore, that all uncertainty as to the date to which interest should be calculated on the principal sums respectively awarded in the cases contemplated and embraced by the orders of the commissioners and the umpire which have been recited, has been removed, and that the date of the 31st July, 1876, has been authoritatively fixed as the date to which the interest awarded in those cases respectively should be calculated. The tables here with transmitted contain schedules respectively of the claims on the part of citizens of the United States against the Mexican Republic, and of the claims on the part of citizens of the Mexican Republic against the United States, in which awards of money were made by the commissioners or the umpires, and statements of the amounts of the respective awards in the several kinds of money in which they are respectively expressed, according to the terms of the decisions respectively, or the declarations or orders to which I have referred, explaining or interpreting those decisions. The statement of the total amount awarded in each case includes the interest and costs where they were allowed. I have called attention to the fact that in several of the American cases portions of the amounts respectively awarded are expressed in the currency of the United Slates, and other portions of those amounts are expressed in the gold coin of the United States. In all the cases of this class, with one exception, the sums respectively awarded in the currency of the United States were allowed for costs. In numerous instances interest was allowed upon particular amounts awarded, while it was expressly disallowed upon other amounts awarded in the same cases. In several cases awards were made of particular sums bearing interest from different dates, subject to certain deductions or credits, with interest from various dates; and the liquidation of the items of the awards with the view of arriving at the proper total awards in this class of cases has been a matter of no little nicety of calculation. Calculations of the interest in the cases in which interest was allowed were made independently of each other by Mr. Coyle and Mr. Ingle, who are expert arithmeticians, and I find that in every instance their separate computations produce the same result. I am informed that the calculations of interest which have been made on the Mexican side agree with those made on the American side of the commission; and that the several balances in favor of citizens of the United States in the three kinds of money in which the awards are respectively made, as furnished to Mr. Marescal by the gentlemen on the Mexican side, are the same amounts as those herein reported from the statement furnished me by the American secretary. The statements in the tables herewith transmitted are, therefore, of the total amounts of the awards in the respective cases therein mentioned, including the principal sums respectively awarded and the interest and costs awarded, where interest and costs were allowed as ascer tained by the calculations to which I have referred. It has not been the practice of the commissioners or the umpires to formulate and sign awards separate from their opinions. The opinions both upon claims allowed and claims dismissed or disallowed, contain in most instances full and sometimes lengthy expositions of the grounds of the decisions. The opinions are not in print. I think, however, the Department will find it convenient to possess printed copies, at least of so much of the opinions as constitute the awards of money in the claims allowed by the commissioners or the umpires, and of the various declarations and orders to which I have referred explanatory of the decisions. I suppose they would make a pamphlet of about two hundred pages. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. HAMILTON FISH, Secretary of State. 17 13 321 refused by the United States minister in Bolivia in the case of Mr. Suariz.. proposed abolition or modification of the practice of granting asylum in Hayti.. same subject; correspondence between the Secretary of State and the Haytian minister... 338-344 legislation respecting religious communities in the empire...... military budget compared with the budgets of France, Russia, and Germany.. cordial addresses between the government and the Delegations.. Bianchi, Albert: B. is sentenced to imprisonment, without trial, for the publication of attacks upon the Mex- Bolivia: change of government in....... Bonin Islands: report respecting, made by the British consul at Kanagawa .... Borrero, Dr. Antonio : elected President of Ecuador his proclamation Brazil: law for the punishment of foreign subjects for crimes committed out of Brazil .................. Brenk, Rev. Julius D.: letter addressed to him by Archbishop Ledochowski and his reply thereto........ Brent: applies for a writ of habeas corpus Burley, Bennet: 408 19 354-357 101 101 25 26 26 164 250 his case cited in support of the position of the United States in the case of Winslow...... 201-264 his letter to the Revue des Deux Mondes.... the minister at Madrid instructed to inquire into the truth of General Burriel's statements, correspondence between Mr. Cushing and the minister of state on the above subject; disa- .......... further correspondence respecting proceedings against him... 488-493 49 494-498 500 his promotion; the Spanish government is asked to explain the circumstance....... 501-514 ....... further correspondence between Mr. Cushing and the minister of state respecting the stip- 517 521-525 525-529 further correspondence resulting in an assurance that Burriel would be brought to trial... 529-535 Caldwell, Richard B. : C. Page. his case cited in connection with the position of the United States in the case of Winslow. 265-268 report made to the Colombian congress by a commission upon an interoceanic canal ...... Canal, Boisrond: forms a provisional government in Hayti.. his character.................. Carlos, Don: his reception in Mexico..... Centenary: 76-82 87-93 330 334 405 of American independence, proclamation of the President respecting the same.. 23 10 letter of congratulation on the occasion from the Emperor of Austria-Hungary to the 16 congratulations by telegraph from the Princess Regent of Brazil, and reply of the Presi- congratulatory letter from the central committee of the Israelite Alliance to the President. 119 120, 12 letter of congratulation to the President from the Emperor of Germany, and reply of the 13 anniversary celebrated in Hayti..... congratulatory letter addressed to the President by the Emperor of Russia; reply of the Central America: synoptical report upon the republics of....... Chili: dispute with the Argentine Republic respecting boundary.. review of recent political history of... wool exported free of duty China proclamation issued at Peking against assaulting and posting offensive placards respecting replies of Dr. Williams to inquiries respecting the Chinese, addressed to him by a commit- opening of the first railroad in China... proposal to adjust the Lekin question contemplated by the British minister.... negotiations respecting the attack on Mr. Margary and the Brown party.. indemnity to be paid by China Coinage : laws of the German Empire respecting the same.. Collisions at sea: report of a committee in Great Britain respecting regulations for preventing the same.... 189-202 instructions to the minister of the United States at London, in accordance with a joint reso |