The southern press., 1851-12-18
From the 81. augustine Ancient City.

lHe hearing Oh ILLS Gauss came U u UelOTo III
his1Ionor Judge Bfonson, of the district court
of the United States on Monday last
The case first taken up was for a violation OF
the neutrality laws OF the United States, and
was based upon, the Sd section OF the act OF
1918, which reads as follows: ...
SEC. 8. And be IL further enacted, That il
any person shall, within the limits Of the United
States, fit out and arm, or attempt to fit out and
arm, or procure to be fitted out and armed, or
shall knowingly be concerned in the furnishing
fitting out, or arming, Of any ship or vessel
with intent that such ship or vessel shall be
employed in the service of any foreign prince
or State, or OF any colony, district or people To
cruise or commit hostiliies against the subjects,
citizens, or property of any foreign prince or
State, or of any COLONY district, or people with
whom the United States are at peace, or shall
issue or deliver commission within the terri
tory or jurisdiction of the United States, for any
snip or vessel, to the intent that she may be EN-.
ployed as aforesaid, every person SO offending
shall be deemed guilty of high misdemeanor.
and shall be fined not more than ten thousand
dollars, ard imprisoned not more than three
years and every such ship or vessel, with her
tackle, apparel and furniture, together with all
materials, arms, ammunition and stores, which
may have been procured for the building and
equipment thereof, shall be forfeited; one-half
to the use Of the informer, and the other half
to the use of the United States.
The counsel for the United States, Geo. w.
Call esq, opened the case for the government,
and claimed the forfeiture and condemnation Of
the vessel, on the ground that she was fitted ont
with intent to be employed in the service Of GER
tain disloyal inhabitants or people of the Island
of Cuba against the government of Spain, with
which the United States were at peace; and relied
upon the evidence heretofore taken, showing
that the Pampero left New Orleans on the Sd
August with General Lopez and his military
forces, and landed them in Cuba on the ] 1t
August with the intention to wage war with
the government of Spain-that she subsequent
ly went to the st. Johns river and took on board
armed forces and arms for Cuba, to co operate
with Lopez, &c.
therance of that intent, and that she was for
feied .'
Messrs. Putnam and Mcintosh appeared on
behalf of the claimant, Mr. l.. J. Sigur, and
made ingenious and able arguments in defence
of the vessel, and urged in opposition to the ar.
gument of the U. S. attorney, that the object
of the law of 1918 was to prevent one bellige-
rent power making use of our ports to fit out
and arm privateers and letters of marque to
cruise against and carry on hostil ties against
another power with whom we were at peace,
That ii WAS not intended to refer to vessels en-
ployed in mere transport service.
They further commended that, as the libel
charged that the Pampero was intended TO be
employed in the service Of certain disloyal
inhabitants of the Island Of Cuba it was incum
bent upon the United States to show that there
were disloysl inhabitants there, Of which there
was no evidence in the case nor in point of fact.
that consequently, If no disloysl inhabitants ex-
is,ed. m intent could not he inferred
They further contended that the act required
that the employment should be in the service of
some prince, state, colony, distr ct, or people"
and that there was no prince, state. colony, dis.
trict. or people in the Island Of Cuba, in whose
service she could be employed against the Qneen
Of Spain--that "people." "a used in the act is y
generic term, and means a unity or body organ
lied, and not individuals or persons.
They further contendei that il was not
proved that tho Pampero was in any sense Of the
term an armed vessel, or in any manner fitted
out to cruise or commit hostities no ships, can
non, ports, grenades boarding pixies, or other
.imiar munitions Of naval warfare, having beer
found. or proved to have been on board Of her
That her services or employment was a mere
Transport SerNlce' &C. Nc. that no IOrleltuTp
could ncc'ue under such act.
Mr.. Call, U. s. attorney, in reply-reviewed the
variou. points raised by the defence, and with
much force and tact pressed the condemnation
of the vessel. The cause was submitted to the
court on Wednesday, and we learn is still under
Amusement:
On Thursday, the case Of Fontano and Pent
against the Pampero for salvage she having, ~
j. alleged, run on the Florida Keys on her wRv
to Jacksonville and hsving been got off by the
libellsnts. Parties not being prepared, the Gaze
was postponed 10 Tuesday next Mr.. Fraser for
libcllanrs. and Messrs Putnam and Mcintosh
for claimant Sepur and Mr. Call, U. s. attorney
for the United States.
On Friday the case Of the United States
against one Cannon and sundry boxes Of smmuni.
tion, saddles, &c seized on board the schooner Of
Capt. Thompson, ard charged "a being mum.
tons Of war landed from the PAmpero, came up
Mr. Call. IT, s. attorney; for the U. ~. and Gen.
Peden for the claimant, Col. II. 7 Titus The
libellant' failed to identify tho property, and
the libel was dismissed.