The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1864-03-05
Saturday Morning, March 5, 1864.
From the So. John Courier, Feb. 27.
The Decision in the Chesapeake Case.

The Decision in the Chesapeake Case.
On Wednesday at IL o'clock the Court
Room at the Police Office was crowded with
people, anxious to hear the Judgment in this
long-pending case. The prisoners having
ing taken their seats, the Magistrate, AFTER
reading summary of the evidence on both
sides, gave his decision as follows:
In giving judgment in the case shall first con-
slider the effect of the evidence given on behalf
Of the prosecution, and what it discloses: LIST, 1t
discloses the fact that the prisoners and NUM-
Der Of persons met together in Lower Cove, in
the city Of st. John, without authority from
this or any other government, and came 10 the
conclusion to proceed to New York and take
steamer, the design being that they were to take
passage on board the steamer and capture her
on her voyage.the work. say, of coward
and villain, which ought to be considered as
against all law-Human or Divine. This was
accomplished, and the vessel seized, as appears
by the evidence.
Now upon examination of the law between
a master mariner and his passengers, it will be
found that the grave responsibility of the per-
son TO whose skill and conduct life and property
are entrusted on the ocean, and the situation Of
Unforeseen emergency in which he may be COM
PEELED to exert himself for the passengers pres
ervation, render It necessary that he should be
invested with large, and, for the time at least un
ielieieu authoIl1y. Opeuience 10 TINS authority,
in all matters within its scope, is duty which
should be cheerfully discharged by every pas
senger on board the ship. Whatever is necessa-
ry for the security of the vessel the discipline
of the crew, the safety of all ON board, the mas
ter may require not only of the ships company,
who have expressly contracted to obey him, but
of those also whom he has engaged to carry TO
their destination on the implied condition of
their submission to his rule. Therefore pas
senger who if found on board in time of danger,
is bound, at the masters call, to do works of
necessity in defense of the ship if attacked. and
for the preservation of the lives of all on board
Now shall consider the effect OF the evidence,
and what it discloses, produced on behalf of the
prisoners, touching the seizure of the Chesa-
peake.
LIST Itappeared that the most terrible civil
war was existing between the Federal States and
the revolted Confederate States, and that they
have been recognized by Great Britain as bellig-
erents.
ID That the authority to seize and take the
Chesapeake rests entirely on the authority and
position which John Parker, alias Vernon
u. Locke, held under the authority of the Con-
federate States. Now what was his position
and what authority had he from the Confeder-
ate States to authorize him to commission per-
sons in New Brunswick to commit this act?
Does the talk In the meetings at Lower Cove
about the Confederate service and officers of the
Confederate service, and the presenting the Let
ters of Marque, give Parker, alias Locke, any
power. | apprehend not From the fact Of
Vernon q. Locke having possessed himself of the
Letters of Marque at Nassau, a British port
constituting the vessel "Retributon'' private
not public armed vessel in the Confederate
service, whereof Thomas b. Power was comman-
der, aud there appearing on the back thereof an
endorsement transferring the command of the
Retrbution to John Parker, and he Locke havs
ing assumed the name of John Parker, and
their being no authority shown for making the
tI..&
il was in fact made, does not, apprehend, give
Locke the power on behalf of the Confederate
States, to plan in the province of New Brunswick
the expedition, and create at will officers for the
Confederate service during the pendency of the
war
Now this brings me to the questions which
have to decide. LIST, There are the proceedings
had before his Excellency, and his warrant in
this matter. decide that the jurisdiction given
TO his Excelency under the Imperial Act is not
subject matter for me to inquire into
ID, As TO my own jurisdiction. hold that
under the 10th section OF the Treaty and the I'M
perial Act, have jurisdiction in cases of piracy,
and this jurisdiction extends to piracy commit
ted ON board of American vessels ON the high
seas, well as for piracy committed ag gainst the
municipal laws of the United States. | have
carefully examined the authorities cited upon
this latter point, namely: Piracy by the law of
nations, and piracy by the municipal laws ofthe
United States. ! have carefully examined the
authorities cited upon this latter point namely:
Piracy by the law of nations, and piracy by the
municipal laws of the States. | find it stated in
note in "Wheaton,'' that in the construction
of the British treaty of Extradition, crime
committed at sea on board of an American YES
sci has been considered the same as if commit
ted in the territory of the United States
''Vattel' says that the domain of a nation
extends to all its just possessions, and by its
possessions we are not to understand its terrific
ria nply hu a apia H.
considers the vessels of nation on the high
seas portion of its territories,
The other points raised have carefully con-
sidered, and have endeavored to search out
justification for the act perpetrated by the prs-
oners at the Bar, and the other persons charged.
and must confess can find no justification.
Taking the whole circumstances of the capture
of the Chesapeake, it was not jure 6eiit, but she
was seized and carried away aRimd furaRdi. 1t
was not belligerent capture, but robbery ON
the high seas. Therefore consider-lst, That
this is act of piracy ID, That il is justciable
by the Federal Judiciary. and therefore, Sd,
consider this to be rightfully case of extradi-
tion.
1t now only remains for me to declare to you
David Collins, and to you James NJ Kinney, and
TO you Linus Seely, that shall commit you
the charge of piracy to the Common Gaol of
the city and County of st John, there to remain
until you are handed over TO the United States
authorities, pursuant TO the requisition made to
his Excellency.
The Counsel for the prisoners objected to
the decision of the Magistrate, and applied
for writ of Habeas Corpus, which was is
sued by Judge Richie, and proceedings COM
menced at the Judges Chambers yesterday.
After the committent was read, Mr.. Gray
asked whether the evidence taken before the
Police Magistrate would be produced without
an affadavit being made. The Judge was of
opinion that cause should be shown that the
production of the evidence was necessary.
Mr.. Gray requested that time be allowed to
make out the requisite affidavit, and further
proceedings were adjourned till this day at | l
o'clock. Up to the time OF going to press,
the counsel on both sides were engaged in
arguing the case.
Although the arguments Of the counsel
were not closed as late as Feb. 29, and no re-
port of the decision of the Judge has come 10
han 10 t. ousI h. 4