The New York herald., 1869-01-15


The Celebrated Case Of the steamship
Georgia on Arsunest-Purchase or Rebel
War ships by British Subjects In Their Home
Pests-Did They Acquire Title M Against the
United States s-Ncw Quessisn Of Prize.
The Steamship Georgia, EdtUard Bates, Claimant,
Us. The United States.--Appeal from the District
Court for the district OF Massachusetts This Is the
case OF the Confederate steamer Japan, formerly
vessel Of war OF the Confederate States and after
wards sold TO the present claimant while In the port
Of Liverpool by an agent Of the rebel government,
under the name Of the Georgia While lying in that
port correspondence passed between Minister
Adams ana Lord Russell touching the transfer, in
which Mr.. Adams took occasion to say, "On behalf
OF my government feel 1t my duty, in conso-
nance with the practice heretofore adopted by Great
Britain, to decline TO recognize the validity OF the
sale Of this armed vessel heretofore engaged in
rytng on war against the people OF the United
States, IN neutral port. and to claim the right Of
selling 1t wherever it may be found on the high
seas" The sale was made In June. 1864, and sub
chaser to the Portuguese government came TO the
knowledge OF the United States legation and mea~
wsre Th s r. e ior ass capture upon
the Portuguese Minister at London, and he inter-
posed no objection to the proceeding buf SIMPLY ex
pressed hope that II captured 40 all, the vessel
might be taken while on her voyage to Lisbon to en-
ter upon her engagement with his government. Ac-
I,
voyage to Lisbon and while or tho coast OF Portu-
gal, and about twenty-five miles from that city, the
Niagara Commodore Craven commanding, and the
vessel was sent 70 New Bedford for adjudication as
British owner setns 10 tSe PURCHASE ~ e
Confederate government through the agency OF one
Bullock. and the fact Of tho chartsr to the Portu
gucse government and the nature Of the voyage al
the time Of capture. The decree below was for con-
demnation. Il appearing to the Court that the
vessel OF war and used as such by enemies OF the
United States and had been the property OF certain
Inhabitants and residents In part Of the territory
OF the enemies Of the United States, and who were
acting as the government and public authorities OF
decreed and held to have been at the time of her
capture still the property Of enemies Of the United
SUCH" Appeal was taken to this Court. The quess
ton presented is new one and in which the two
from the following reply Of Mr.. Adams to e ! note
from Lord RUSSELL dated the 9th Of September last:
ux LONDON, Sept. g. 1863
your lordhip Of the 9Th instant relation cap
% believe that The sronss. disposition already exists on the
sy T %
validity capture according the recognized principles
i copy Of mote the
. Rs o as S
consideration with have the honor to be, my
-. - oHAkLEs FRANCIS ADAMS
~
covers the case. After arguing certain technical OBJ
jections, counsel for appellants contend, first, that
no principle Of International law prohibits neutral
in his home port, from buying or selling to any per-
son any and every species OF property. In home
international interdicts nor does International law
invalidate any sales made In such port. In the case
now before the court the claimant did not buy
man-Of-war, with her guns and ammunition but
vessel disarmed and dismantled OF her guns and no
munitions Of war. He bought the vesselfor CON-
value thereof (f15 00O and there not the slight
est probability that she would again become part
enemy should be allowed and, indeed, encouraged
to sell his naval as well as his merchant ships.
The enemy's vessels cannot pc blockaded IN
such port when they will The right TO the du-
bious and uncertain chances Of capturing
and consequence to belligerent tnan their absence
from the ocean could be. The validity OF the pur-
even where the purchase and transfer have been ef
fected In the enemys port under blockade. has been
II the sale Shall be sustained ana the Court Is not
satsed Of the authority Of the agent Of the Confed
crate government TO sell y s within its competency
the government It Is maintained that, It appearing
that this steamer was public vessel.of-war OF the
ants' purchase In the neutral port Of Liverpool was
illegal and he acquired thereby no title to the vessel
public law and perhaps that Of other nations Of Con-
tlnentel Europe treats every purchase 10 time q
wass pubic neutral cr p9vas Of s illegal
the general rule OF prize law as admins
tered In the English courts Is admitted to be
that the title OF neutral vendee to vessel sold by
the enemy In time Of war s valid where the property
s bona de and absolutely transferred, so as TO al
vest the enemy OF all future interest In It. The Eng
lsh decisions as to the rule and exceptions here
cited considerable length; and In The Of the
Minerva 10 Rob- 3g6 1t Is maintained that tho opinion
Of Lord etowell substantially covers this case But
is submitted that independent OF any supposed or
actual authoritative adjudication OF the question In
volved In the case, II rule OF decision Is for
the 1rst time to be made touching the validity OF
such sale this In view Of the character and his
tory Of this vessel-the circumstances which sur
rounded her In the port OF Liverpool and The rea-
tions OF that port and other British ports to the
maritime beIlgerency Of the late insurgent States
the court should, upon principle, pronounce tine pur-
chase OF the Georgia by this British claimant aDso-
The able and accomplished statesman, 1t Is
remarked, who conducted the correspondence with
the British government relative to this vessel ana
who, fortunately, represented this government at
was firmly OF opinion, and upon this assumption car
RED on his negotiations that every sale In British
port OF rebel war vessel was Invalid and incapable
Of transferring the title Of the property the neu
ceivlng information OF the sale OF the Georgia,
addressed communication to the respective com.
manders OF the three United States vessels, then
cruising In the Channel-the Niagara, the kearsarRe
and the Sacramenio-advsing them OF his opinion,
that the Georgia might be made lawful prize wher
ever and under whatever c0lors she should be- found
sailing on the high In conclusion, il is said
thar II the Court hold that the claimant could acquire
valid title by such purchase Il II stil his duty to
show aiirmattvcy that the agent was authorized by
the Confederate government to make the SALE which
has not becu done. For claimant, WIN. Marvin and
A. \. Smith; for the government Mr.. Evarts and Mr
Ashton.