The New York herald., 1863-07-10
The Alexandra Case.
THE RULING OF THE CHIEF BARON ON THE FOREIG,

THE RULING OF THE CHIEF BARON ON THE FOREIGN
ENLISTMENT ACT.
From the London Post Government organ), June 251
The trial which occupied the Court of Exchequer during
the past three days involved the importance Of
point left for the decision Of the jury was whether the
Crown firm Of Liverpool merchants were the right
for adjudication whether the shipbuoers OF
this country precuded from constructing ships which
may eventually be devoted to warlike purposes against
State with which We are at present at peace one
side exists the obligations TO intact
cial rights. and on the other those which make it
yards being made available for the eauippng and
fitting out Of ships or ornaments for the pur-
poses of aggression against a friendly Power.
Passing from the purely legal consideration Of the
case, manifest that grounds Of expediency ma
rme nation like Great Britain possessing commercial
relations with quarter Of the globe bound faith.
fully and strictly tofu the duties appertanng to strict
neutrality We neutrals to-day; may be bellce
and do Others so ave must cpec 10
be dane by The issue raised the Of Alexandra
consequently not less important in its conse
quences ourselves than those Immediately ip
terested in the result We hare estabshed precedent
y appeal 1t is thus that we accept the law as laid down
by the Lord Chief Baron and confirmed by the verdict
aass ss Sy n,snaea Tho m Judge the particular
the equipment Of ships for the purposes aggression
has a1S the jury the
dence, decided. without moments hesitation that the
act had not been nfrnged In this verdict entirely
concur.
s~s America has for upvards Of half a century had
Foreign Enlistment act similar to own and the de.
Of the United states great fist Mr. Justice
Foreign Enlistment act the SUBJECTS Of neutral State
were precluded from equipping arming vessels
Power, they were not prscluded from eqaippins
and .rming them FOR the purposes Of sale 70 any
% or r.,s who snS: 70
just a. M may constrncs conNon. II he tend 10
As s: . sas ssg ss Sas s s;o. ~ Id , e s.xn ~
thaS British subject might equip shib-ofwar With
view % sslsrg z 70 sec os;eeyea waAoa f.fnon0 Ae
course Of the trial the learned Judge asked the Attorney
General whether such would NOT be legal and
The Chief Baron went far a to say that the
object Of the Foreign Enlistment could mot have been
OF oontrsbrand Of equally have been pro
hibited and that consequently English shpbuders
much right to sell armed ships 20 either begerent
they had to sell gunpowner or cannon or other
munitions Of In the case, however before the
Pies in their fullest ssnaca,on The Chief Baron lefs
TO the jury whether tho Alexandra was equipped arm
on Of the defendants 70 equip arm furnish or az her
out within her Maestys domnions for purposes Of az
no ns ns "a the y ed
description; and was shown that she not at the
time Of seizure, equipped or armed and there was
equipped within her Majesys domnioBs, the defend
ants entitled TO verdict The Alabama was fro
quenty referred In the OF the trial. and may
possibly illustrate the Interpretation which he put
the Foreign Enlistment act when that the Chief
~,
not inringed. She was built In Eng
| lsh port, but she was equipped and armed in
Portuguese waters, where OF the English
Crown possessed jurisdiction u may be said that
corpg 10 this Interpretation the Foreign Enlistment act
win prove dead letter II the Chief Barons views Of
the object with which that act framed-namely; not
protect bcligcrents but 10 prevent vesses equipped
for the rival Powers In neighboring docks fighting whilst
stil In our harbors IN waters-is correct Il will
not IT, the other hand hs object was the projection
OF the commerce OF friendly Power II certainly seems
10 say the least Of ~ that Its provisions be
| easily cvadcd However,, with consequences neither
judges urcs have nythng 10 do II II, at all events,
satisfaction 10 feel that the Lord Chief Baron has acted
In accordance with high American authority IN his in.
terpreation Of the law, and viii be Impossible
American government 10 question the Of his
opinion without also impugnng that the greatest OF
| their lawyers. Mr.. Justice story
fFrom the London Times. June rs
| Had the Foreign Enlistment mentioned
rifles gunpowder or shot and SHE'LL instead Of ships Of
spared pains TO intercept the conUgnments Of
tngham Hardware For the purpose OF watching ques
tionable proceedings agents must be employed, and
agents employed neither less than spies
Work OF this kind In dstasteful to very scrupuous
men, and 10 follows that II viii generally be carried
by persons OF easy conscience and unenvi liable cha
racter In this case perhaps, such extreme vigilance
was hardly requisite, for there seems to have bees
tho defendants, because they did not rely their gno
but the character Of the transacon proved
by witnesses for the Crown IL the latter that
the burden of proof lay and the result shows not that
courts Disposed 10 favor illegal but
that law against equippng privatesrs IN this country
must be dead letter long they be bull, bers
and equipped at sea or elsewhere This result which
Mr.. sdams' representations have been the means OF
bringing into strong relief not altogether saiac-
terry and leaves the morality Of aiding either side In
civil exactly whore found H. but IL could have
been avoided without importing into iureprudeEce
prncps which the Americans, Of all nations, have the
AZ. AArRA