The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-05-11

WASHINGTON, May 10, 1878
THE NEUTRALITY ACT or 1878 AND 1HE
RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS
UNDER IT AS INTERPRETED DY AN EMINENT
LAwYER-sECRETAEY EvARTs RETIcENT.
The meaning and scope OF tho statute OF 1sls known
as the Neutrality act and how lar it operates pre-
vent Americans sciiiug ships, arms and munitions Of
to Russia at this time, has discussed by
eminent lawyers since tho HERALD began the discus
sion some days ago One OF these, gentleman whose
opinion II his name given would have much
weight, remarked to-day
ii Russia should In OF our ports IT OUT, arm,
man and prepare Tor war operations u vesscl-o-war,
with the IDEA that war being Declared, she shou d
then and not before I've sent TO sea, and getting out
side OF our port hoist tho Russian flag and begin her
career as Russian war ship, my belief Is that those
concernel II helping forward Inns enterprise would
have violated tue Neutrality act and Russia herself
would be held 10 have violated our neutral position.
But II Is delicate question when the violation
OF law would begin, and whether the offence
would not DO committed Dy Russia rather
tnan By our own people. The intention OF tho law
clearly Is that foreign Powers being ut war shall
be allowed TO usc our ports AS places IN which to So
curey III out their war vessels or tor any 9th enter
prises against their enemies. But IL Is a mistake to
hold tnat IN time OF peace, The statute Iorods our
Citizens 10 sell sn.p-, supplies OF any kind
anySody. we may sell them even IN time OF War 10 y
beilise and NAV contract deliver then
cizsns only taking thu risk OF loss by capture against
which the government VIII not protect them. Ihcy
may carry the trailic, but their risk. At
present no war exists between Russia anu England,
and no one knows that war Will break out rnc con-
dition OF peace ana either Power has the right
10 come here and buy ships or anything else needs
TINS Is too clear To need discussion. IL has been
universal practice. Mr. Webb built and tlod the war
ship General Admra aud sod her 10 Russia, ana no
one supposed he had violated the act oil 1878. New
York shipwrghts IN 1869 buili, lifted anu equipped
ment, and when friends OF Cuba asked that this DO
prevented, as IN violation OF the act OF
lois. Attorney General hoar wrote:-"ro pro-
vent our mechanics and merchants IRON building
SHIPS OF war ana selling them IN the markets OF this
world Is an interference with their private rights
which only he Justified on the ground OF q para.
mount duty In our international relationan Aud he
hed and the President with him, that AS Spain was
not at war with any Power within the moaning OF
statute, tho building and 1tng OF gunboats Tor her
was \ lawful enterprise OF our pcope. Finally, you
must remember that alter the close OF war
our government sold at auction to whoever would
buy them large part Of our own navy, and several
Of these SHIPS wcro bought by South Ameri
can governments. II dii not, OF course, Ia this
vioate the statute. Moreover, ~ to the very time
when Russia and Turkey dciared war; Turkish officers
were IN this country engaged In tho inspection and
forwarding OF rifles and other arms made hero for
turkey ny our citizens.
Bear that Russia and Great Britain arc at
peace. They are not bcliigcrents; they may not be.
You viii nnd that all The opinions ana decisions rest
that point. For Instance, Legarc, Attorney Gen.
eral IN the case OF two scnooners built and lifted
.or sse Mss,siss' a ~ New YORK u is4 held
Tor tho service OF Mcxico, which Is waging
war against rexas recognized by the United
States an independent Stale, tho persons
are liable 10 the penalties OF tho and the vessels
TO forfeiture" And, no added, .sali trading with
bcigcrenl ships war already equipped for ser.
vicc repugnant 10 the settled policy OF the United
states anu to tho solemn declaration OF Congress
the act oi 1875" You SEQ the purchaser must be u
beigerent Again, In 1872 tho Attorney General held
"hs purchase aud lifting out OF war steamer by tho
German government Ia the port OF New York. while
state ofwr exists 0etwesn that government and Den
mark, adapted Tor cruising aud committing hostilies
against tnc property or subjects OF tho latter Is
uary TO the provisions Ok the third section OF
the act vi 1851 Again you notice that III.
violation Of the act consists IN selling TO bcgcrcn
the supreme Court held Sd Dallas, tho case OF
Noodle against the Phoebe Ann :aIl 1, OF violation
OF tho noutranty laws vi the United States TO sell
foreigner weasel built III this country, though suited
to be privateer and having some equipments CAL
cuatod Tor war, Dut frequently used ny merchant
ships"
There is such thing constructive war, and
until there Is declaration OF war or an actual out
break OF hosttics the condition Is one OF peace, aud
may clearly soil ships, however fitted to either Of
the Powers or 10 any otucr No DOUBT II such q
ship, sold 10 Russia, khouiJ happen to lie In
our ports when war was declared she would
be prevented from sailing because Russia would not
DO allowed 10 thus use our ports hcr own The TACT
that the Cnbra rs hoverlng on our coast makes all
Russian operations here suspicious. II Is blunder
ior ner, II she really wants 10 boy ships borc. hat
That ought not 10 DO used 10 prevent or iutmidate
citizens from selling To Russia or to Great Britain
any ships We have 10 sell which either OF thcm wants
TO buy, or from loading on such ships any arms or
Munitions which Tho owner purchaser Our INDUS
tries anu commerce ~ stop or TO DO checked
because two distant nations growing at eacn
olhcr Tho duties of neu,rals arc sufficiently burden
some without making them begin boiore war breaks
out and while II Is AL open question whether thefo
VIII be a war.
Secretary Evarts was asked this afternoon what In
depreciation no put upon tho statute OF 1878 He
clincd to say anything on tho subject tho ground
that whom It became the government would
have to speak by public proclamation, and that eau.
time tho law Is clear ana open TO every one