The national Republican., 1866-12-21
The coarts. 4 "
SUPREME CopRr OF IHE Uxrr.D srArEs.-

in ths South, a. Afeeting tie Status Of Loyal
Rssidsats M~s-TN Sfussr Parhcf Stephen
ss" Gss s..s ' Rsasoss ss o"s,s s.a g..,s. y " s
mond, Claimant. e Par Of Cargo, AYpsliant.,
W. TIE United Stafss The Pstsrho6, . British
built and registered steamer Of 900 tons burthsn,
was captured ~ prise Of war on the 18th Of Feb.
ruary, 1898, on the Atlantic ocean, o6 tho Island
Of 81. Thomas, BY the United States steamer Van
dsrbiit, and being brought into the port Of New
York was there libsllsd and subsequently, con.
dsmned. E.a .....I
Her documsntsd voyage wss from London, whore
she was laden, to the port Of Matsmoras Mexico.
Jasmsn, the master Of the vessel, intsrvsnsd for
the interest Of his principals. the owners, denying
that the steamer or her cargo were lawful prise. In
the test oath hs asssrs that the vessel and cargo
neither in tie claim norfh he test oath does hs
assert that she was on lawful voyage 10 neutral
i port. = 10 IiC9I1lr .TAyTTEg
The claimant, Rsdgsts, alleging himself to be
'1ats Of Ts1as, and lately political rsfugss from
ain," intsrvsnsd in behalf Of himsslf, % "ownsr.
agent, and oousgnss Of arrs portion Of the cargo,
valued at $S76, 900 or nearly that sum-" He de-
MED that It was lawful prise, and In the test oath
assert. th.. .ths aboy:,n.nsd portion oiths cargo
and still does belong to this dsponsnt ~ owner,
consignss agent, DO, a set forth in the olaim''
but he did not assert, either In the claim the test
oath, that this portion Of the cargo Was owned by
nsutrals, or that II wss on lawful voyage to .
Almond, alleging himself to bs . resident Of
London, and . subject Of Great Britain, claimed as
owner, agent and oonsignss portion Of the cargo.
valued at or nearly $3.50 900, making the same al
legations In the test oath ss those made By the
claimants abovsi be also avoided the assertion Of
neutral ownsrship Of this portion Of the cargo,
cept so far as may be inferred from his allegations
Of residence and citizenship. Nor did he assert
set up that the vessel and cargo were on lawful
I a. kr.I
Robert Mockis Of New York Is agent for the
underwrters, fled claim alleging that the ship and
cargo were fully insured by his prnoipas and that
from circumstancss, they were the true and bona
and In tho test oath alleges the neutral ownership
In August, 1858, tho di,tric. court condemned
the Pstsrhof and her cargo as Lawful prize Of war,
holding that Redgate had no standing In court
being resident of the State Of Texas. then In re-
bsllion.
The case now comes before this court on the ap-
peal Of Jssman, Rsdgats and Almond Mockis not
joining therein.
show that the cargo consisted Of four thousand
four hundred and seventy packages, Of which
two thousand seven hundred and seventy -four con-
tained articles manufactured for army and navy
use and which 1t Is oontendsd, If designed for de-
livery in an ensmy's port. or for enemy use, are
contrabapd Of war The invoices show that these
contraband goods formed part Of the shipments
consigned TO all three Of the passengers he claim.
ants) In charge Of the cargo, and also Of the part
consigned to the captain. It was shown on the
trial that certain paper, and z package Of some
the time Of the capture, BY order Of the captain
The Government contends that the cargo Of the
ship and hs evidence on the trial all tend to show,
and do sh6w conclusivey, that the destination Of
Is claimed, but the enemy country, and that that
portion Of the cargo claimed BY Rsdgate, as we'll as
the balance thereof was enemy property; that the
blockade Of tho mouth Of the Rio Grands made oil
I neutral oeean.born commerce with Matamoras, In
articles Of Q contrabsnd nature, unlawful.
Brownsville and Matamoras, the one enemy and
the other neutral, opposite sides Of the Rio
] Grande, forty miles above its mouth and the
blockade Of Brownsville and the Texan side Of that
river 90 far as II could be reached from the ocean,
was, Of necessity. enforced at the mouth Of ths
river To allow vessels and their cargoss to oross
tho bar and pass up the river under the pretext Of
going to Matamoras was to render the blockade Of
the Texan side absolutely nugstory. No watohful.
0 ness or energy In the blockading squadron could
, prevent unlimited supplies from reaching Browns
. Vile, md through It the whole Confsdsrsey, II thsy
!, might with impunity be carried up to Matamoras
only few yards distant from Brownsville. and fa
beyond the reach of the blockaders The necessary
result was that for the time, trade with Mstsmo.
ras was pursued under peril Of capture for breach
Of tho blockade. Under like circumstances the
British prize court, cosroed by the necessity,
c0ndemnou vessels Hhulng Win neutrh p0ru.
The claimants appear by different COUNSEL and
, make lengthy arguments to show that the libel
should be dismissed and the ship and cargo restored
As to Rsdgate It Is claimed that the fact that
he was . citizen Of the enemy country, did not do
prive him Of bis standing In court a held below
portion Of the cargo to condemnation. He nc
longer resided there, and the attempt at revolution
In the South did not alter the status Of citsenshiI
to impair the rights Of the loyal portion Of the
Ill. f.NtA 49, L. Hall
ground Of condemnation In q prize court, but only
, an awakening circumstance calculated to excite
the vigilance and justify the suspicious Of the court
Tho onus probandi to prove the offence Of breaking
the blockade or carrying contraband Of war to ths
enemy rests with the esptor. II the ship was nsu
trsl owned at the time Of her capture, and had
sailed from neutral port to . neutral port, ther
q she cannot be condemned, whatever may have beer
: ths character Of her cargo.
The proximity Of neutral port Of delivery to th,
enemy country, In whatever degree, cannot change
the rule by law, or expand or contract the right
Of neutrals or belligerents Trade Is lawful one
side Of line, however inconvsnisnt It may be to
bslligsrent; unlawful on the other, however inoon
venient 1t may be to the neutral nor would the in
tsntion Of the shippers to tranship the cargo and
n thus get 1t into the enemy country affect the right
Of the shpownsr. unless that fact had been brought
: : to his knowledge.
- But the mouth of the Rio Grande was not block
aided. We at times had cruisers there but they
h did not claim to blockade o river which was
half Mexican; while on the other hand, vessels al
q most daily cleared from Northern ports for Mata
n moras, with the consent Of the Government.
Mr.. Stanbsry, Attorney General, for Govern
mont Msssrs. W. Marvin, A. F. Smith and s
. On motion Of Mr.. Carlisle, Col. F. Clark
!. ESQ, Of Arkansas, was admitted an attorney ant
counsellor of this court.
No. 70. The steamer Petsrhoa, &C., appellant
, vs. The United States. Tho argument Of this caus
= was concluded BY Mr. Sherwood for appellant.
Nos. SOL, 3O2, 303, 304, 305, 800, 307, 308, 800
$40, 8ll. Tho people Of the State Of Now York. ca
rel, D. Duer. aud Others plaintiffs in error, vs. th'
commissioner of taxes and assessments for the city
and county Of New York. The arguments in thes'
cases were commenced by Mr. Silliman for tn,
plaintiffs In error In numbers SOL 302 and $685. ant
continued by Mr.. Burrill iu numbers 305 800, S07
!: 30s, and by Mr.. 0'Gorman for the defendant il
d error. Adjourned.
n Mr.. 0'Connor will argue tho case in behalf o
d the Commissioner tomorrow.
4 Rsadsnees Of tho Judge, Of tie Supreme Court o
y tho United States
Mr. Chief Justice Chase, Z street north, corne
y Of Sixth street west.
'f Mr.. Justice Wayne, No. 2 Franklin Place,
atreet