The national Republican., 1867-02-20
THI COURTS.
SUPREME Cornr OF TIE UNrrp srArrs


TUESDAY, February 10, 1857.
On motion Of Mr. Carlisle, James W. Moore,
Esq, of virginis, was admitted an attorney and
counsellor OF this court.
The Chief Justice announced TO the bar that the
court will cit usual this week, but will hear ar.
guments only on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thurs.
day Of next week.
No. 1IO. Lessee Of R. NJ. crorali plaintiff in
error, vs. John NJ. Sherrerd The argument Of
this cause was continued by Mr.. Frelinghuysen
and Mr.. Bradley, Of counsel for tho defendant In
error.
Adjourned TIL tomorrow at II o'clock n. m.
The Prise LdU,-Ths Lat Of the Rio Grdnds
Case'--B Blockade BredktHg as Cums-Mna The
Intention Be Proven The Prise Volam and
Cargo dppsiiantS, Us. The United StdteS-This
vessel and cargo were captured while lying at
anchor Of the mouth Of the Rio Grande on Novem
Der 8, 1858 She had on board and was about dis.
charging cargo Of boots, brandy and cloth,
valued at $l06, ,32sj shipped at London and con.
signed, by the papers, to Wolf Hildeshein, Mata.
moras. She was taken to tho port Of New Orleans
and there hbelled, the master filing claim for
the sessel and cargo on behalf Of their respective
owners, and who never otherwise appeared TO make
their claims.
Tho volant was British owned, and was char.
tered by Bennett 4 Wake, Of London, (the char
terors Of the Science, before reported, and the
agents who projected the voyage Of the Peterhoh,l
back to England. Her cargo consisted, as stated
in the manifest Of mixed blue cloth, for confeder
ate uniforms It Is alleged boots, socks brandies
&c,, as above given. One truss Is also mentioned
as being on board. This cargo, shipped in the bill
Of ladng by Bennett Wake, rs agents, " Is con.
signed In the invoices by N p. Nathans 4 Co., Of
Leeds on their account and risk, as expressed to
| tho consignees named above. Bennett Wake
wrote the letter to the oonsgnees, a circumstance
claimed by the Government to show that the con.
sgnment was probably not made account Of Ma.
thans Co. A letter on board showed that Ben.
| nett, Of the above firm, was personally at Matamo.
ras In August, 1868, 10 connection with the "Mat.
| amoras trnde' Of his house. The consignee letter
contains instructions as to the disposition Of the
cargo at its destination, and gives no idea Of the
nature or object Of the transaction. Ono bill Of
lading covered the whole cargo.
Tho master In his claim gave no account Of the
| ownership, character or destination Of the cargo
and the other examinants were equally reticent on
those points The master declared there were no
| contraband articles on board, but stated, at tho
same time that ho was ignorant Of "what Is called
contraband here, and seemel to believe that pow.
der, balls shells and tho like were alone Of that
| character.
Upon the trial in the district court the vessel
and cargo were condemned, and the claimants ap.
pealed, and now contend that as the breaking or
attempting to break blockade, or to carry contra
band Of war 10 tho enemy, Is crimc-nn offence
against international law-consisting OF intention
and aot, II Is not to bo presumed from crcum-
stances, but must bo prOved, like all other crimes
and offences.
Inc o1lsteu NJ tno moulin OIL tue
Rio Grande-a copterminous river between neutral
Mexico and belligerant TeIas-if not absolute
nullity, ought not to be enforced In such manner
as to prevent the free and common use ofwAters on
either side Of the month Of the river by all neutral
vessels trading with Mexico, either to navigate or
anchor In. The Government did not at the time
consider that river to be blockaded to prevent
trade by our own people, or by neutrals with Mex.
leo. On the contrary, vessels of all nations during
| the whole period Of the war, were cleared from
| N..u Va.L I,Nk Ill lal Cf.Naa r.. NJ.
mOras; and largo quantities Of cotton were i'm.
ported from Matamoras into the United States
| All the papers, II is contended, show that tho
property was neutral, and had other destination
than the legal indcated and the court will not
assume that IL was otherwise
| The Government submits that no sane mind can
for a moment entertain doubt that this cargo was
on its way to Texas and the rebel region beyond,
via MatRmoras, If indeed II intended ii should
pass through Matamoras ut all. If Texas was its
ultimate destination, the carge is confscable as
contraband OF war, Independently Of any question
as to the blockade Of Brownsville. That the ICON
federato uniform woollen cloth" was destined and
exclusively fitted, perhaps, for the military of
tho enemy, must be conceded. Many of the other
articles, such as the stockings, the boots, the
blankets the brandy, were an cepitis HguS But
as they undoubtedly had the same destination as
the military cloth, thoy wore equally noxious. The
truss, which seems to have been part Of the cargo
would indicate that II is in the highest degree prob
able that the $500 cases Of Cognac brandy were
hospital supplies for the enemy
The fact that the owners Of this valuable cargo
have fled no claim, and havo not appeared save by
the master, is a circumstance which will strengthen
the conviction that there Is an enemy ownership
behind the transaction. Bennett and Wake were
unquestionAble, directly or indirectly the agents
the rebel authorities for the shipment of property
intended for their use from England. The court
will take notice of what appears in the Of the
Peterho in regard to those men, and consider It In
connection with the present case.
The misconduct Of the master in denying the
presence Of any contraband in the cargo in giving
account Of its ownership, and in suppressing tho
place of Its intended destination, shows that he
was desirous Of promoting the unlawful designs Of
tho shippers of the cargo and this is sufficient to
affect the vessel with the guilt Of the cargo. The
persons who shipped this cargo might have dIssi.
pated somewhat the cloud which the contents oil
the record throws over tho case by producing the
instructions given to the consgnees In reference to
the property but that they have not done. There
is, Of course, but explanation of this and that
Is as indicated.
Henry Stanbery and J. Hubley Ashton for the
United States c. Eames for captorsi VIM. Marvin
for claimants