Los Angeles herald., 1891-12-10
Harrison Sadly Mixed Up
About the Itata Case.
His Remarkable Ignorance
Shown in His Message.
He Asserts q Decision Has Been
Given on Case Still Pending.
A Clear Statement of His Egregious
Blunders His Reasoning All
Based Upon Misunder-
standing.

Hon. s. M. White yesterday discov-
cred remarkable blunder in the pres
ident's message. A statement OF the
matter is as follows:
In his message President Harrison
says: "a trial in the district court OF
California has recently resulted in a
decision holding among other things,
that inasmuch as the Congressional
party had not been recognized as bellig-
erent, the acts done in its interest
could not be violation of our neutrality
laws. From this judgment the United
States has appealed, not that the con-
domination of the vessel is matter OF
Importance, but that we may know
what is the present state OF our law for,
if this construction OF the statute is
correct, there is obvious necessity for
revision and amendment"
This statement evinces the most re-
markable ignorance of the Itata case.
No decision has been rendered by Judge
Ross as to the Itata or her cargo. The only
decisions rendered on the subject have
been those fled in the Robert and Min
ME matter and in the criminal prosecu-
ton against Trumbull & Burt. 1t is
probable that Mr.. Harrison refers to the
opinion in the Trumbull case but even
there Judge Ross, while expressing
doubt as to whether mere insurgent
could be prosecuted under the neutral
ity statute, expressly declined to decide
the motion made upon the ground;
but based his judgment upon the
merits and settled the issue in
accordance with uniform line of adju-
dications, commencing before the close
of the last century, and continuing un-
broken to date. AS to the assertion that
an appeal has been taken, it need only
be said that not only has no appeal been
perfected or attempted in the Trumbull
case, but no such proceeding can ever be
had. The defendants having been ac-
quilted, the government cannot appeal.
1t is probable that Mr.. Harrison
means that he will order an ap-
peal when the court decides against
the views of Mr.. Miller. AS
to the necessity for an amendment of
the neutrality laws, 1t need only be said
that the statute as now existing, and
the Interpretation placed upon it by
Judge Ross, are in harmony with the
views of the Judiciary from the days of
Judge Story, and with the opinions of
our state department from Mr.. Jeffer-
sons incumbency to that of Mr.. Evarts.
The extract given from the communi-
cation made by the Chilean government.
cannot be understood until the whole
correspondence is made public. 1t needs
but little proof to show the sympathy
of this administration with Balmace-
da's tyranny, and the presidents
chagrin at the triumph OF the Con-
gressional forces. His attempt to
compare the Chilean contro-
versy with our civil war is
ridiculous. In the former instance the
action of the executive was declared
illegal by the judiciary, and congress
with practical unanimity followed the
supreme court. Balmac eda not only
attempted to override CO ngress, but act
ually closed the courts by formal
edict to that effect. He did not pretend
to obey the constitution. but acted as
an absolute dictator. He took no pris-
oners, but murdered every person be-
longing to the opposition who came into
his hands. In the case of the Confed-
eracy. minority OF congress withdrew
and attempted to set up government
separate from that provided for in the
constitution; but even then the United
States supreme court in the Prize cases,
Blacks Rep. 635, treated Confederate
states as belligerents.