
    (4 Court of Claims R., p. 543; 12 Wallace R., p. 315.)
    Marie Louise Perrin et ux., Appellants, v. The United States, Appelleet.
    
      On the claimants’ Appeal.
    
    
      The claimant (Mrs. Perrin) seeks to recover for properly destroyed, in the bombardment of Qreytoivn by the United States ship of war Cyane, the 13th of July, 1854. At the time of the bombardment, she teas a French subject, but has since become a naturalized citizen of the United States. The defendants demur. The Court of Claims decides: 1st, that her claim must be against the government of the country where she chose to reside; 2d, that it is political, to be settled by the Fxeautive with Nicaragua. Judgment for the defendants. The claimants appeal.
    
    A claim for property destroyed in. the bombardment of G-reytown by the United States ship of war Cyane is not a claim “founded upon any lani ■ of Congress, or upon any regulation of an Executive Department or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Government,” and cannot be maintained in the Court of Claims under the Court of Claims Act, (10 Stat. L. p. 612, § 1.)
    
      Mr. W. W. Boyce for the appellants.
    
      Mr. Attorney-General Akerman and Mr. Assistant Attorney-•General Sill opposed.
   Mr. Justice Clifford

delivered the opinion of the court:

The petitioners alleged in the court below that they were naturalized citizens of the United States; that just before the 13th of July, 1854, they arrived at San Juau del Norte, or Grey-town, possessed of a valuable invoice of merchandise, with the intention of establishing a commercial house in some part of Central America; that on that day the town of San Juan was bombarded and burned by the United States sloop-of-war Cyane, and all the merchandise, books, and papers of the petitioners, together with their personal effects. Appearance was entered by the Assistant-Attorney General, and he demurred to the petition because it did not set forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and the court below sustained the demurrer and dismissed the petition. Whereupon the petitioners appealed, to this court and alleged that the decision sustaining the demurrer was erroneous, but the court here, inasmuch as the claim is not one a founded upon any law of Congress, or upon any regulation of an Executive Department, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Government of the United States,concurs in opinion with the Court of Claims, and

Affirms the decree dismissing the petition.  