The New York herald., 1851-11-01

ssoa;.ing license. but he did not then know whsrsit
w. ny presence, Mr.. Segur said to Dr. Hol-
land, surrender % to you this boat; MI. Seeur IL.
Se Do not iSr the port of Jackson
she had coasting license, but certsinlv thst shS
had license; Joined Mr. Segur, at his rsousst
Jacks0pyiS and " went up to Pisolst.
be intended to surrender her; Mr. Segur proceeded
up to Palatka with DIR. Holland; proceeded up to
Palatks in the st. Mathew; and then all proceeded
up in her TO Dunns creek, and there occurred what
before stated.
Question by Major Putnam, claimant t's Council
You were on board the Pampero, at Jacksonville Z
A. went on board after the boat had been in the
stream at Jacksonville, perhaps the second day.
was on board twice.
Q. state whether the vessel was armed and
equipped, &c, as if for foreign expedition, or
was she in condition to 60 on q cruise or to COM
init hostilities against any people A. DO not
think she was in condition to have been used, by
any possibility, for any such purpose.
q she was not armed ndequipped as q cruiser!
q w as there any cannon on her! A. think
not; saw no other cannon except some put on
board by Lieutenant Merchant, after her surrender.
had no coal
G. State whether, instead Of the word license, in
the conversation with DR.. Holland the boat, Mr..
Segur did not say proper papers? A. did not
hear him use those words.
Question by District Attorney-You state the
u
what do you mean by hostilities! A. Iunder s,and
by that, vessel capable Of committing overt acts
OF violence, and making captures at sea-
O. You went on board at Jacksonyille; with
whom did you converse on board! A. With eeve-
raj; with the engineers; they were repairing the
engine
@ Did you come down the river in that boat
A.. came down to Picolata.
q What motive power did she use A. Steam;
che then used wood; think saw the men firing
with wood; | think they took in wood at Picolsta;
lido not think she had any coal on board
O. Do you understand what naval vessel is?
Did this vessel have ports? A. (Witness described
naval vessel) think she had no ports
u Was there anything to prevent the Pampero
from oyerbaullng aud robbng small vessel q. sea!
A. There was not; it might depend upon the re-
latve speed Of the vessels the Atlantic steamers
not unirequently run down small vessels, and yet
they are not vessels of war.
District Attorney stated he had evidence that the
Pampero had overhauled suall vessel at sea- He
wished to know whether she was in q condition to do
the same thing.
q. By the Court When the Pampero went to
Thunderbolt, if she had hadsutcisnt coal on board
would she be in Il condition to land body of men
in foreign country! A. know Of no impodi-
ment.
Court-State whether the steamer did not 70 at
pretty good rate by burning wood. A. / think
she did; think her speed was about eight or ten
miles an hour; the officers on board stated that
she was not adapted to burn wood that she con-
sumed SO much wood she could no. carry enough.
Ike evidence on the part of the libellant here
Court adjourned until next dag OF 10 O'clock
OCTOBER Is, 1851.
On this day the counsel for claimant presented
his answers TO the and the lbels and to the
interr gatories filed by libellant. The Court then
Adjourned and set down the case for further hear
ing on the first Monday ia December. Messrs.
Charlton and Ward, of Georgia, and Putnam AMI
Mclntesh, of Florida, will appear as proctors for
claimant.
There were two Ibels. cne for violation Of the
Revenue law Of 1913, sections and %, and The
other fer violation OF the Neutrality act o; 1918,
section 3. The libel under the Revenue act charges
that the steamship Pampsro left New ORLEANS with
q coasting license, ard without giving y her
rolment and license, preceded on reign voy-
age 10 the island Of Cuba
To the counts in this libel, claimant, IN his al
swer, alleges that the Pampcro did not, on tho
fourth day of August last past, as alleged il tho
ibel proceed from the port Of New Orleans with
int.nt to make foreign voyage, bat that her i'm
mediate destination, on leaving New Orleans, vas
the port of Jacksonville, ia the State OF Florida;
and says that he does not know. of his own kn) =
ledge, whether tie said steamship did, or did aot,
make foreign voyage Further, claimant says
that the Pam fero was duly registered at tbs p1rs
Of New Orleans, and not licensed an onrol ll5d az
alleged, and that she was daily rsgistere iyessei
when the lett New Orleans. IL Il b. true lat taa
PsmGoro did proceed on foreign voysge ias,sad
ofgong to Jacksonville. which respondent 100 nos
admit, but puts tie libclaet upon PROOF h.seo.,
he ssys she was still duly reg gistesed.
The libel, under the Neutrality oct chlrges
thSt certain perons we're concerned in . si0g out
s'mies, and furnishing the Steamship Pau srl, with
TIE inttnt that said vessel should be n "A ,yed In
The service Of the dsloysl Inhabitants OF tae island
a Cuba, TO commit hostil.ies against tAs Subjects
ard property Of the q leen Of Spain
i ne answer simply negatives tho allegations
cLs-gtd in tbislibeI.
In answer TO the interroIatories, responder. sub
mits eert acate Of registry, granted on the ID Of
June, 1851.
Respondent states that he is the sole owner CT the
said Painpero, and that other peri has an in
teIest in her, direct indirect or otherwise; that
no part OF said vessel las been sold by him any
other person, conditionslly otherwise, since his
purchase thereof
Respondent has rot The log book in his posses.
scn, her any other papers, except the certificate Of
registry exhibited. To the best Of his knowledge
and belief, no addition made TO the crew and
equip ImeIt OF the vessel Respondent declines an
sweiing several interrogatlops, being apprehonsve
bis answers may subject him to some penalty or
forfeiture: states that one Lewis, whose Christian
Lame be does not know, was master Of said ship