New-York tribune., 1874-01-15

THE 1FFIDAVTTS ~ the ViRGiNIES CASE.
The testimony as to the nationality of the
Virginius laid before the United States Gov
ernment seems certainly to warrant the de-
cision of the Attorney General that the ship
was not entitled to the flag she carried; but
it raises also "A serious question for the con-
sideration of Congress and the people. The
affidavit of Capt. Shepperd, who commanded
the Virginius when she sailed from Newly Ork
in September. 1870. and that of Bowen, who
was her captain III 1872, make 1T very clear
that the real owners were Manuel Quesada
and his associates. Quesada gave all the or
ders to Shepperd and Bowen, sailed with thcm
directed the movements of the vessel. and
authorized Bowen to sign b0ttOmry bond at
Aspinwall for the payment OF her debts at
that port. IL appears also that the ownership
character, and business OF the Virgnlus
were we'll known to the United States
consuls at the various ports which she
visited but those officers held-nO doubt cor
rectly-that while her papers were prinsa tacie
regular they had no right to assume them "
be fraudulent, but were bound, in the absence
of instructions from their Government, to
treat her as an American vessel, and protect
her from mOlestaton. 1t furthermore appears
that these facts were brought out as long ago
IA May, 1873-that is to say, few weeks
after the Kansas conveyed the Virginus to
sea from the port of Aspinwall, where a Span
ish gunboat was waiting to seize her. The
Spanish commander at that time requested
that the Virginus might be sent to the United
States, and offered to furnish proof that she
was engaged in an unlawful enterprise but his
demands and protests were disregarded. There
is some testimony also relating TO the employ
ment of the NirgiBius in the Venezuelan ser
vice, and to an attempt on the part of her
Cuban owners to use her as a privateer but
the proof on these points is not clear. 1t is
enough that in May, 1872, the representatives
of the Spanish Government collected evidence
as to her character almost identical with that
which Attorney General Williams has just
aceepted as conclusive. The depOsitiOps were
undoubtedly submitted to the United States
Government. Why was no action taken upon
them
The position assumed by the United States
in the recent controversy is that the possession
of flag and regular papers Is conclusive as
to the character of vessel so far the cruisers
OF another nation are concerned. The Spanish
naval 0ihcers may have had the best evidence
that the Virginius was owned and controlled
by Spanish subjects, and was systematically
violating Spanish laws; yet they were bound
to respect the register she had obtained by
perjury and the American flag which she
fraudulently displayed. If she had induced
the United States To afford her protection to
which she was not entitled, that was an
oflense against our statutes. which we could
punish; but we would not allow anybody
else to punish it.
OF course it follows, if this position is sound,
that we have a duty TO perform correspond
ing with the privileges which We claim for
our flag We do not assert that iilibusters
and insurgents may roam the seas at Will,
protected by any flag they may choose to as-
sume; but we maintain that after our Govern
ment has granted papers "a thom, 1t ia the
business Of our Government iloGo 10 hold