The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1863-01-22
CASE os THE BRITISH STEAMSHIP rIacsssas.
4 Important Decision or the Engissh
| Crown OIicers Against Her Cendsn ma


non Lushngton Esq OF the Court a. Admiralty NJ xlRna
10 relation 10 the Crcassan cond, Inea the stct
Court Of the United States, southern division q fe
rida.-
OPINION
We have carefully psrused the judgment delivered N
states southern Division Il FerIds and the documents
referred 10 IA mat Judgment
We are Of opinion that hs learned Judge was right n
deciding that the capture Of the to place
the high and further Of opinioc that he
reey sfpoend LED ,ns applied NE snsrs sg
down and acted upon, both In the prxe evwtx ~ Great
Britain and Of the United States q North America.
There can be no doubt that The Nrcsssian was anCn
these principles and apart from other eousderatss,
Liable 70 condemnation, for sailing with an nisnnn 10
violate the blockade, and that the criminal hsei, AZ
aching TO that intention Mt removed by the iGicn
ton TO touch also at an intcrmefiaie port
But II appears to US clear thai the attention ~ the
learned Judge directed mporta~i facts
the case either of which taken INTO mis- consaeratu,
that at which no arrived and have prevented the
domination OF the ship.
These two important facts are as follows
1.-The government Of the United states has slnce the
commencement OF this war, issued procamsiios AZ TO
the rules Of prize Jaw relating 10 blockade, which M
tends 70 apply TO vessels OF neutral States. and that
clamaton has been duly notlacd 10 foreign states.
1t Is clear that Is competent 10 bcligerent 70 reax
or mitigate against himself the rles VI nternst nal
law II is equally clear that n be duly notifies ~ fore
States his intention TO make such re,axston m On.
that he is bound to administer IN his prize courts hS as
with this qualification until he notifies his he ni,oa
abandon it as formally as he has notified his ttcain 10
On the 10th or April 1861 the government at Washing
ton issued proclamation In which the following pas
sageS.-
rn Now sssefes abraham N. L,nson rrs.ass ., ne
onei, ana to the OF the public peare TIE
.Ssir awful sntl coas1e. hal sss
until tho shall have erased have urther deemed
Ssaoe g set foot bocksdc Of NE port, Hiihig @.
States such provided; FOR Ibis purpose competent
3 t q
10 se 81 @ sa % w % ay Ss II
he coy@aader Of one e the SooEadns vessels whovi
AID 4 the said vessel shall again attempt to en,er o. leave
est for such her ana her
cargo as prize as may be deemed advisable.
subsequent proclamation, daioi April 90 IN the
same year Incorporated the former proclamation, and
extended 1t to the ports Of Virginia and North Carolina
These procamations not in any way referred 10
the judgment against the Circassa ian
II Is not pretended the Circassan was duly warned by
the commander Of Of the bockang vessels. that
the sacf and date of such warning" duly endorsed
her register that after such endorsement she did
again attempt TO enter the blotk.ded port.
1t seems to us manifest, therefore, that the condition
which according to the proclamation lprccede the
capture and condemnation Of n neutral vessel, did
exist in this case aud follows that she was improperly
condemned.
This would appear the plain, literal nevita
BILE construction q the proclamation. are .orti
fed in opinion upon this point by the cdgncn. the
United States District Court delivered in the Of the
Hawaha, which was condemned during the present year
The learned judge in that case commented upon the rro
camation ns follows:-
II proclamation
ora blockade unless there previous Warming
sS;sa 81 % sss:$"s
n n ss rss4a o oh the he
not % eon:!aed sonton sSsolas toSern!ns ali
stances Of an sort By neutral. to break but
attempting TO do the forbidden act and viii apply
purpose had been accomplished.
is clear that the crcassian category Of
aosc cases 70 wnom she uass refuses tns oens
prohibited attempt by enecting an entrance into block
We also think that the decision of the Supreme Court
OF the United states, when Great Britain helge.
rent in 1870 supports II further support be necessary
had notified to the OF the United
States that orders had been given TO British cruisers not
ticuar ports which may be actually invested and then
capture vessels bound to such ports unless they
The Supreme Court Of the United States decided that
he words OF tho order not satisfied by any previous
than by her being warned On. This is technical torn
which Is well understood. IL s not satisfied by notice
n any one. manner The effect o. this order
having notice OF the blockade until she is warned Of
II gives her right to inquire Of tho blockading
squadron, II she shall not previously receive this
warning from capable Of giving it, and, conse-
quently, dispense with her making the inquiry else.
might lawfully sail for bockadod port knowing II to be
bockaded, and being found sailing towards such port
until should be warned on (The Mary Insurance
Company vs.. Woods 8 Cranch Rep. p. 20. C. 7. Mar
We cannot doubt that IL the case OF the Circassan be
appealed to the Supreme Court that justice will DO done
upon the principles laid down in TINS case and upon the
obvious meaning Of the plain language Of the procama
tion.
attention OF the learned judge does not appear TO have
The Circassian was condemned on the ground OF her
intending enter the bockaded port Of New Orleans.
Now at the time OF the capture Of the CircaAsan the
blockade Of Now Orleans had foe and de je ceased
The vessel therefore, could not be condemned in
tenon to do that thing which, IL she had done IT, would
have been awulvz. to enter the port Of New Orleans
The principle ceart The exposition OF it is
given by Lord stowel-
There ia doubt, then, that this vessel must Ia been
ppn ne s h ese 0e s %
law TO which the Court strongly disposed 70 adhere It's
ceased II Is said Ina; the offence BY the
ns "a ss hs
70 me in which the Court has prSnoapced an
know Of no such and certainly the same
9, H the Ss S 5s sna ore
which my opinion formed in restoring sh though
s ns s on E he % s
ting y Is true as has been observed tina. the offence
aarps the ey vcyass But
when hs e. sGSs that rs.s s' ss q s
s. has been Sons ana The mo-
psed a one period but Sy a.. en-. done
(rhe Lisettc, Rol 39t, 395)
We Of opinion, therefore both these grounds,
that the Circassan illegally condemned We advise
Mr.. Pearson TO prosecute an appeal to the Supreme
Court Of the United States and bearing mind the high
and great repute Of that tribunal entertain
. confident hope that he will do so with succcss
The British government could certainly not interfere,
with proprcty effect till the last court OF appeal in
the United States had been resored 70 in vain and
must NOT be- understood expressing any opinion
in that case the duties Of the British government
ROBERT PHllLIMORE,
VERNON LUSIIlNGTON.
Such IL the construction upon by the United
States In their with TING Britain
government This been printed and laid
before Parliament
Nos-Soia obsia'o In causa est con pihr subvehere
ceat aive eoutrabandum set sve ST. Bynkershoeck
IPl AC.&l)
THE AMERICAN QUESTION.