The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-01-14
Our Neutrality Laws.

1t will doubtless surprise the public to
learn that the recent detention ofthe steamer
Anna, and her seizure by the United States
Marshal, is scarcely sustained by constitu-
tional or legislative authority The whole
arrest, in derogation of common right OF
person and property was based upon the
assumption that the act OF Congress OF 1878
contemplates judicial forfeiture and judicial
process, in rem, by the District Court, in adj
vance OF conviction Of the offence designa-
ted by the act.
a careful perusal of the act will show that
not only is no judicial forfeiture contempla-
ted, in advance of prosecution and convic-
ton, but on the contrary the only forfeiture
is conseqaentupon conviction ofpersons, who
shall found guilty Of attempting "to fit out
"and arm, or procuring to be fitted out and
EARNED, or being knowingly concerned in
''the furnishing &C., of q vessel with in
stent," &c. The I'd section Of the act de-
cares that persons (toanD so offending
shall be deemed guilty Of violating the neu-
trality law, and shall be fined and imprison-
ed and the vessel $50 fitted out) shall be
forfeited.
Clearly the forfeiture contemplated is TO
tollo,r the prosecution trial and conviction
OF persons so charged. Tt is imposed as
part of the punishment. 1t cannot be i'm
posed in adTance, upon the assumption OF
conviction, where no person has been even
accused, arrested or indicted of offence
against the statute.
Moreover, the act provides no judicial
process for securing the vessel in advance,
to await trial of parties charged with arm
ing her. No libel, no proceeding in rem is
mentioned, no warrant Of arrest, nor any
judicial process whatsoever, to provide, be-
forehand, for future possible Indictment, trial
or conviction. The conspicuous fessure OF
the act of 1918 is, that it wholly and ex-
clusively throws the responsibility Of enforc-
ing it roon the Executive Department of the
national government, and not upon the
courts.
The sth section empowers 'he President
''to employ such part of the land and naral
s1orceS of the United States, or the militia,
s'as he deems proper, for tile purpose OF
stalking possession OF and detatning any
..such ship or vessel, in order, to tile e.ceca-
'4ion of the prohibitions and penalties OF
"this act" The 11th section gives to the
Collector power "to detain any vessel mani
'testiy built for warlike purposes, and about
ssto depart the United States of which the
'scargo shall principally consist OF arms and
"munitions of war, and where the number
'of men or other circumstances render ii
'sprobable &c, unM tie decision of the
"PyeSit1ent be had thereon"
In the case OF the Anna, which cleared from
New York as passenger steamer, with no
arms and no capacity or feature Of vessel
built for warlike purposes, there was no
seizure by the Collector or detention by him
under the llth section; no orders from the
President; no person or persons were ar
rested or charged under the act with such
violation of the law as might have led to
conviction and ultimate forfeiture; nothing
in fact whereon to ground a prosecution;
and yet the Marshal is suffered to seize the
vessel and drive off the crew, as if she had
been 'lawful prize" and private individuals,
owners, master, crew and passengers are
molested and injured upon the mere afli-
davit of the Spanish Consul, expressing his
suspicious. Who is to make compensation
for these wrongs? The Marshal, the District
Attorney or the Spanish Consul?