The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-02-02
PFiz6-The Bermuda CRse-ActuRI Destt-
nation and Enemy Control as Deter
mining the Character OF II voyage
blockade,

nation and Enemy Control as Deter
mining the Character OF n Voyage
blockade.
The United States u.s. The Steamship Bermuda,
her Claimant and q portion Of her Cdrgo.-In
this case Edwin Haight, q British subject, was
claimant of the steamship, and Fraser, Tren-
holm Co., of Liverpool, were among the
claimants OF the cargo. The bermuda, alleged
to be British owned and registered steamer,
unarmed, on voyage from Bermuda to Nassau
on the 9th Of April, 1862, was captured by the
4 United States steamer MercedHd, while cruising
in the vicinity of Abaco.
When captured she was close on the eastern
coast OF Great Abaco Island, an English colony,
and within sight of land, and the range OF the
Abaco light, about four and a-quarter miles from
shore. She was flying the British flag at the
time of her capture and her colors were not
hauled down, as alleged until she twas taken
twenty or thirty miles further out to sea. She
was taken TO the port OF Philadelphia and there
lbeled and subsequently condemned, as to the
ship and that portion of her cargo consisting OF
munitions OF war.
Upon the trial it was shown that at the time of
the capture her master destroyed a portion of
the ships papers. In entering this decree the
Court said 'that the destination, immediate or
ultimate, of the vessels cargo, was hostile
port, whether it was to have been transported to
such port from Nassau, in the Bermuda, or by
transshipment or landing and reshipment, might
have been determined by orders receivable
there, or by orders which we're among the papers
destroyed at The time of the capture; or, in the
tionary with her navigator; that she was, at
the time of capture, naVigated under in
strdctioDs received at Bermuda from resi-
dents OF the hostile port of destination, and that
they or their agents had control and regulation
OF her ultecior movements, is unquestionable
This renders the immediate destination of such
parts of the cargo as consist of munitions OF war
less important than it otherwise might have
been. Judgment as to these articles may be pro-
nounced independently of any question OF their
hostile ownership. Even if the immediate des-
tinauon was not absolutely. hostile it was con-
trolled by hostile persons, whose purpose clearly
was that it should reach hostile port"
From the decree of condemnation appeal was
taken to this Court, no decree yet having been
made in respect to the balance of the cargo
that portion not contraband of war.
The claimants insist In support OF their appeal
that
l. The Bermuda was not liza BILE to capture, il
at the time she was on voyage from the port oil
Bermuda, q neutral port to Nassau, another
neutral port, and was British vessel, owned by
a British subject. In order to render her so liza.
BILE, under these circumstances, she must have
been actually on voyage to Charleston or some
other blockaded port of the Southern States
with an intent to run the blockade.
2. There can be no legal blockade by bellige
rent Of any other than hostile port. There
can be none OF neutral port and the BsTnlotdC
was therefore, at perfect liberty to navigate tC
and fro from the British West India Islands, 81
far as the blockade was concerned, unless she
was actually on voyage to blockaded port o
our country.
3. There can be no proper legal assertion of q
continued voyage, of which Nassau was but
an intermediate port unless the evidence shows
that the Bermuda was on her way to a block
AIDED port via Nassau.
4. That from a legal construction of all tn,
evidence in the cause, the voyage of the Bermuda
was not intended TO violate any blockade.
s. British merchants, as neutrals in our lat
war, had perfect right to trade, even in mill
tary stores between their own ports, and to sci
at one of them, even to an enemy OF the UniteC
States Goods of all sorts, although with know
ledge that the purchaser bought them with
view of employing them afterwards out OF thu
neutral territery IN war against us: 1egtra
may sell in his own territory to either bellige
rent, munitions OF war; the only exception, 81
far as England and America are concerned
being prohibition against firing out vessels o
war, or warlike expeditions in the neutral coun
Try against one OF the belligerents.
6. The question Of contraoand of war canno
arise with respect to any portion OF the BeT
Tludd's cargo, unless she was on voyage to
blockaded port. If it was the intention to stor
the BeTnIudd's cargo at Nassau and that tn
voyage of the Bermuda should terminate at tina
place, except as regarded her return to England
no question OF contraband can arise in the cause
Z. The control OF the Charleston firm over th
voyage did not clothe them with any "wnershp
even in pTlZe court. Their control must b
treated as confined TO a direction of the shi
within the limits OF her prescribed voyage, an
ii that voyage did not include a trip to an
blockaded port, or to any port Of the enemies G
the United States, it cannot atfectiniuriously tn
neutral owners.
s. Any sale under power of attorney to Mr.
Haght, a claimant, not accompanied with a
interest, must have Deen for the use OF the priI
cipal, and all moneys received under it must b
the funds OF the principal.
g. Spoliation OF papers is cause of condemns
tion only as against the party committing it
interested in the vessel or cargo, and oanno
affect the rights OF the parties not committing i
nor interested in the act where either creun
stance is clear.
10. There is no proof OF spoliatiOn bein
authorized by Mr. Haight, or that it conduce