New-York tribune., 1896-05-26
THE HORSA A FILIBUSTER.
CAPTAIN WIBORG'S SENTENCE AFFIRMED
BY THE SUPREME COURT.
THE EXPEDITION DECLARED HOSTILE AND MILL
TARY WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE
sTATUTE-No EVIDENCE TO SHOW
THAT THE MATES KNEW


THAT THE MATES KNEW
ITS PURPOSE.
Washington, May 25.-Chief Justice Fuller an
nounced the opinion of 5he Supreme Court Of the
United States to-day in the Horsa filibusterng
expedition case deciding that it was military en-
terprise in violation Of the neutrality laws or the
United States The judgment Of the Distrct
Court OF the United States for the Eastern Dis
trict of Pennsylvania. sentencing Captain WI
borg to fine and imprisonment was affirmed,
but as to Petersen and Johansen. mates OF the
vessel the judgment was reversed, on the ground
that the record did not disclose testimony to
show that when the vessel left Philadelphia they
had sufficient knowledge of the errand of the
Horsa to warrant conviction. and new trial
was ordered for them. The facts In the case
were reviewed. and the laws set forth In the
opinion and the Court concluded:
II does not admit Of serious question that pro-
viding or preparing the means Of transportation
for such military expedition or enterprise as Is
referred to in the statute is one or the forrns OF
provision or prepare ton therein denounced. Nor
can there be any doubt that a hostile expedition
dispatched frtm our ports Is within the words
carried from thence" The officers or the
Horsa were concerned in providing the means
of transportation.
The first and main question OF the case was
What constitutes military expe iltlon or en-
terprise under the statutc?" This the Court
said Of municipal law. and the statute
was to be construed as other domestic iegiSia-
tion. In It's instructions TO the jury the Court
below said For the purposes of this case IL
Is sufficient to say that any combination or men
organized to 80 - Cuba to make war upon us
government provided with arms and ammuni-
ton, constitutes military expedition. III IL not
necessary that the men shall be drilled, put IN
uniform or prepared for efficient service. nor
that they shall have been organized as or ac-
cordlng to the tactics or rules when relate 10
what s known as infantry, cavalry or artiiiery
1t is sufficient that they shall have combined ana
organized here to go there and make war on a
foreign Government and To- have provided then-
selves with the means OF doing So whether
such provision. as by arming, etc. s necessai!
need not be decided In this case. Nor is IL I'M
portant that they intended to make war as an
indcpendent body or In connection with o'h'rs
Where men go without such combination ana
crganization to enlist individuals In Tor
eign army. they do not constitute sucn HriltaIy
expedition, and the fact that the vessel car ryiiS
them might carry arms aS ihei'""''"~ "
rot be important
rbeso ,-ou,s said the Chief Justice. were cor
roc, s anpIled 10 the evidence before the District
Court This body II men. ne said. went on board
n tuq loaded with arms were taken by IL tmrty
or forty miles out to sea; met steamer ou'S'ue
the tnree-mile limit by prior arrangement BOARD
cd her with the arms opened the boxes anu uiS
,r,hu,ed the arms among themselves drilled 10
Gonna extent. were apparently differed; ana then
az preconcerted disembarked TO erect an ar"cu
landing on the coast Of Cuba. The men anu arms
and ammunition came together; the arms anu
ammunition we're under the control OF the men
ho Elements ~ the expedition were not only ca
nahIe NJ proximpte combination into an orgah'heu
who'll. but were combined or in process OF com
htra,,on. there was concert Of action: they had
,ho,- oun nilot TO the common destination they
,o,ae, themselves and their munitions or war TO-
o,ho- hv their own efforts. From the evidence
,ho ,urv had n right 10 ind that this was mill
,arv exneditlon or enterprise under the STATUTE
and the Court properly instructed them on Ihe
subject.
-rb. case ~ 10 the mates the Chief Justice said,
o.,o, ,,ror different ground from thnt OF Captain
Wlb,rg and the Court felt that II was their du'y
70 take notice OF a plain error. altnough " ha'
not been excepted TO by their counsel Ihese me"
we're under the captains orders ana adequate
,roo, ., conv,c, them OF guilty knowledge Of or
nar,lclpation on their part In a military eXpeul-
ton or enterprise when they left Philadelphia
- ,o, shovn nv the record. Therefore. as to
,,e,, the Judgment Of the District Court was re-
,.orsoa and a new trial ordered: TO Wiborg. 1t
was affirmed.
Tho Court devoted some attention 10 the origin
and hiatory OF the neutrality laws They were
ors, enacted as Section = OK an act approved
June ; 1894 which closely followed the recon-
mendation OF President Washington IN MS ahnuai
address on December 3. 1i93: where lndlVio-
nails shall enter upon military expeditions ana en-
terprises within the Jurisdiction OF the united
s,,tes these offences cannot receive
too early and close an attention. and require
prompt and decisive remedies The Dill was
passed in the Senate by the decisive vote OF Presi-
dent Adams and the leaders OF Congress wer'
divided upon the question. The Court said IN
conclusion
II ,s not necessary to enlarge upon the public
importance OF neutrality laws. we dispose OF
mis- case on what deem 10 be the proper con-
struction OF the statutes. ana atter suoJe'tine
IN. correctness II the rulings OF the Court below
To that careful examination which the uischdrse
of duty required
Justice Harlan dissente1 from so much OF
the Judgment as affirmed the sentence against
Captaln Wiborg He Of opinion Cd that
what was done did not constitute. within the
meaning Of that statute a military expedition or
enterprise TO be carried on from this country
against the territory and government OF SPAIN III
Cuba; q, when the Cubans were received on
board the Horss that vessel was outside OF the
three-rnil- limit and beyond the jurisdiction or
the United States and the evidence wholly tailed
TO show that the captain had any knowledge OF
their plans purposes or destination until they
got aboard his vessel. and therefore ne could not
be said to have knowingly provided. within the
territory or jurisdiction or the ohiteu otates'
means for the transportation OF the alleged mill
tary expedition or enterprise. The Horsa was
where II was pursuant to orders given by the
charterer who did not inform the captain when
the vessel left Philadelphia why such orders
were given. nor inform him that after his vessel
got ont into the ocean beyond the Jurisdiction OF
tho Tinted States persons could come aboard |
who were en- route to Cuba to engage In the war
going in that island
Iar tO-da
cunreme Courts decision In the Horsa case sus- |
,ained the position Of the Government In every
detail and therefore, II would not be necessary
IN issue any further instructions or to modify
those now In effect.