suppressing rebellion to all moneys, goods, and treasures which were public property at the time of the outbreak : Republic of Peru v. Peruvian Guano Co. and Republic of Peru v. Dreyfus. The only principle, however, which can be deduced from these cases is that a Government claiming rights of property and rights under a contract cannot enforce those rights in our Courts without fulfilling the terms of the contract as a whole. They have, in our judgment, no bearing upon the propositions which we have been discussing. We are aware that we have not commented upon all the cases which were cited before us-we have not failed to consider them; and any arguments which could be founded upon them seem to us to be covered by the observations already made. We are of opinion, for the reasons given, that no right on the part of the suppliants is disclosed by the petition which can be enforced as against His Majesty in this or in any municipal Court; and we therefore allow the demurrer, with costs.

Judgment for the Crown.

Solicitors for suppliants: Waltons, Johnson, Bubb & Whatton.

Solicitor for the Crown: Solicitor to the Treasury.

F. O. R.

ANNEX 8.

Ministries of the Interior and of Finance versus Commune of Capri.

Joint Divisions.-Hearing of 9th March, 1885. President: Ghiglieri P.; Referee: Bonelli; Public Attorney: De Falco-Ministries of the Interior and of Finance (Treasury Advocate: Tiepolo) versus Commune of Capri (Advocates Mecacci and Quattrofrati).

Competency-Court of Cassation in Rome-Actions against the Public Administration-Question as regards the non-existence of right (Act 12th December, 1875, Section 3). State - Succession from State to StateProvinces of Modena-Provisional Government of 1848Debts contracted towards the Communes--Obligation of the Italian Government-Dictatorial Decrees of 21st July and 20th August, 1859-War damages-Indispensable requirements.

IN matters in which the Public Administration is interested, the question as to the non-existence of right, and the consequent non-existence of the right to take legal action, entails, in the nature of things, incompetence of the Judicial Authority.

They are consequently to be brought before the Court of Cassation in Rome and not before the Local Court of Cassation.

As the Government of Este had declared that it did not acknowledge the right of the Communes of the Ex-Duchy of Modena to be reimbursed for the supplies furnished by them to the volunteers of the Provisional Government of 1848, it cannot be admitted that the Italian Government, which succeeded the Government of Este, should be bound by the said obligation.

Nor, in order to obtain this object, can the annexation of the said Provinces by the Kingdom of Italy be traced back to their subjection to Piemonte in 1848, as the Government of Este, after the popular rising of that year, received the provinces back in virtue of an International Treaty.

For the existence of damages by war it is not necessary that such should have been caused at the place of the action itself, but it suffices, that these damages should be

a consequence of steps taken in the course of war in places

to which the effects of the war are about to extend.

The Dictatorial decrees of 21st July and 20th August 1859, by which the allodial properties of the deposed Princes (properties which had been confiscated and which in virtue of the Peace Treaty were restituted) were destined, for the benefit of the Communes, as compensation for the expenses to which the latter had been subjected by the Princes themselves, did not create a civil title of claim in favour of the Communes and at the charge of the finances of the State, but possess only the character of an equitable and political provision.

The Court, etc. Considering that it is not necessary to dwell on the objection put forward by the Defendant Commune, namely that, in view of the fact that the Treasury disputes the right and action of the Commune to claim from the State for the supplies furnished, the question to be solved was not one of competency but of merit and should, therefore, be discussed before the Local Court of Cassation, because, as has been repeatedly stated by this Supreme Court in other decisions, the absence of right and of the consequent right of judicial action, in questions in which the Public Administration is interested, entails, in the nature of things, the incompetency of the Judicial Authority, whose jurisdiction is limited by Section 2 of the Act of 20th March 1865 to litigious matters which have for object the exercise of a civil or political right.

Considering that it is of no avail to discuss, as is done in the judgment appealed from, the obligation imposed upon the present Government to satisfy the charges assumed by it, which were imposed upon it by the necessity of its own preservation. Seeing that the reinstated Government of Este declared that it did not recognise that the Commune of Capri was entitled to be compensated for the supplies furnished by it to the volunteers of the Provisional Government, it will be clear to everyone that, by the annexation of the Duchy of Este by the Italian State, an obligation, to which even the late preceding Government was not subject in civil law, could not be transmitted to that State. There cannot be any doubt that the Government of Este, being eminently absolute and despotic, by the fact of not acknowledging that it was bound us against the Commune with respect to the above-mentioned claim, established in a judicial manner

ANNEX 8.

Ministries of the Interior and of Finance versus Commune of Capri.

Joint Divisions.-Hearing of 9th March, 1885. President: Ghiglieri P.; Referee: Bonelli; Public Attorney De Falco-Ministries of the Interior and of Finance (Treasury Advocate: Tiepolo) versus Commune of Capri (Advocates Mecacci and Quattrofrati).

Competency-Court of Cassation in Rome-Actions against the Public Administration-Question as regards the non-existence of right (Act 12th December, 1875, Section 3). State - Succession from State to StateProvinces of Modena-Provisional Government of 1848Debts contracted towards the Communes--Obligation of the Italian Government-Dictatorial Decrees of 21st July and 20th August, 1859-War damages-Indispensable requirements.

IN matters in which the Public Administration is interested, the question as to the non-existence of right, and the consequent non-existence of the right to take legal action, entails, in the nature of things, incompetence of the Judicial Authority.

They are consequently to be brought before the Court of Cassation in Rome and not before the Local Court of Cassation.

As the Government of Este had declared that it did not acknowledge the right of the Communes of the Ex-Duchy of Modena to be reimbursed for the supplies furnished by them to the volunteers of the Provisional Government of 1848, it cannot be admitted that the Italian Government, which succeeded the Government of Este, should be bound by the said obligation.

Nor, in order to obtain this object, can the annexation of the said Provinces by the Kingdom of Italy be traced back to their subjection to Piemonte in 1848, as the Government of Este, after the popular rising of that year, received the provinces back in virtue of an International Treaty.

For the existence of damages by war it is not necessary that such should have been caused at the place of the action itself, but it suffices, that these damages should be

a consequence of steps taken in the course of war in places to which the effects of the war are about to extend.

The Dictatorial decrees of 21st July and 20th August 1859, by which the allodial properties of the deposed Princes (properties which had been confiscated and which in virtue of the Peace Treaty were restituted) were destined, for the benefit of the Communes, as compensation for the expenses to which the latter had been subjected by the Princes themselves, did not create a civil title of claim in favour of the Communes and at the charge of the finances of the State, but possess only the character of an equitable and political provision.

The Court, etc. Considering that it is not necessary to dwell on the objection put forward by the Defendant Commune, namely that, in view of the fact that the Treasury disputes the right and action of the Commune to claim from the State for the supplies furnished, the question to be solved was not one of competency but of merit and should, therefore, be discussed before the Local Court of Cassation, because, as has been repeatedly stated by this Supreme Court in other decisions, the absence of right and of the consequent right of judicial action, in questions in which the Public Administration is interested, entails, in the nature of things, the incompetency of the Judicial Authority, whose jurisdiction is limited by Section 2 of the Act of 20th March 1865 to litigious matters which have for object the exercise of a civil or political right.

Considering that it is of no avail to discuss, as is done in the judgment appealed from, the obligation imposed upon the present Government to satisfy the charges assumed by it, which were imposed upon it by the necessity of its own preservation. Seeing that the reinstated Government of Este declared that it did not recognise that the Commune of Capri was entitled to be compensated for the supplies furnished by it to the volunteers of the Provisional Government, it will be clear to everyone that, by the annexation of the Duchy of Este by the Italian State, an obligation, to which even the late preceding Government was not subject in civil law, could not be transmitted to that State. There cannot be any doubt that the Government of Este, being eminently absolute and despotic, by the fact of not acknowledging that it was bound as against the Commune with respect to the above-mentioned claim, established in a judicial manner