This abdication of authority, on the part of those states, has been effected gradually, and the usurpation on the part of Christian powers has only been perfected and secured by treaty in our own day. Great Britain, in her treaty with the emperor of Morocco (1760), agreed that 'if there shall happen any quarrel or dispute between an Englishman and a Mussulman, by which any of them shall receive detriment, the same shall be heard and determined by the emperor _alone_.' In the following year we find the sublime Porte, in a treaty with Prussia, jealously guarding Turkish interterritorial rights, stipulating that the Ottoman tribunals should take cognizance of cases arising between Prussian subjects and those of the Porte. All that the Porte was then willing to concede, was the presence of the Prussian consul at such trials, and the privilege of adjudicating in disputes arising between his countrymen. In the treaty between France and Algiers (1764), it was agreed that offences occurring at _sea_, should be tried by the French consul, when the offender was a Frenchman; and by the dey, when the offender was an Algerine. And, at the same time, in her treaty with Morocco, France merely secured the stipulation that 'if a Frenchman should strike a subject of Morocco, he shall be tried only in presence of his consul, who shall defend his cause, and he shall be judged impartially.' A French edict of 1778, in reference to the duties of consuls, alludes to trials occurring in Constantinople, which clearly admit interterritorial jurisdiction. The Republic, in 1801, also admitted that right on the part of Moslem states. Algiers, in her treaty with Denmark (1792), expressly provides for jurisdiction over the Danes in her dominion. Russia negotiated a treaty, in 1783, with the Porte, stipulating only for the privilege of exercising jurisdiction through her ministers or consuls, in cases of quarrels between Russians. Spain was content, in 1784, to secure from Tripoli the presence in a Tripolitan court of a Spanish consul on the trial of a Spaniard. Our own country uniformly conceded to Barbary powers entire jurisdiction over our resident citizens. The treaty with Morocco (1787) reads: 'When a citizen of the United States kills or wounds a subject of Morocco, or if a subject of Morocco kills or wounds a citizen of the United States, the laws of the country are to be followed; equal justice, and the presence of the consul, being alone stipulated for.' And in the treaty with Algiers (1816), we merely require that the 'sentence of punishment of an American citizen shall not be greater, or more severe, than it would be against a Turk in the same predicament.'