Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1897-03-02

Washington. March 1.-The United
States Supreme Court to-day rendered
an opinion in the case of the steamer
Three Friends. siezed November 7th las
by the collector of customs for the dis
rict of ST. Johns, Fla, as forfeited TO
the United States under section 5,2S3
of the revised statutes, known as the
neutrality act. The opinion fully sus-
tanned the position of the government
reversing the jurgment of the district
court for the southern district of Flori-
da.
Chief Justice Fuller delivered the op-
inion of the court He defined
neutrality to mean abstinence from
any participation in a public, private
or civil war and in impartiality of con-
duct toward both parties, but the main
tenance unbroken of peaceful relations
between the two powers when the do
nestle peace of one Of them is dis
turbed. is not neutrality in the sense
in which the word is used when the
disturbance has acquired such head as
to have demanded the recognition of
billigerency."
To this he added the remark: CAS-
mere matter of municipal administrs-
tion no nation can permit unauthorized
acts of war within its territory in in
fraction of its sovereignty while good
faith toward friendly nations requires
their prevention"
Hence the court held that while the
act was intended to secure neutral
action. it was nevertheless an act to
punish certain offenses against the
United States by fines. etc. defining the
precise nature of these offenses. The
Chief Justice reviewed the origin Of
the statute in question. saying it was
brought forward from the laws Of 1918,
1917 and 1894. He held that the law
had originally been drafted at Wash
ington's instigation and that the words
colony. district or people" on the pro-
per construction of which the case
hinged. were inserted in 1918 at the in
stance of the Spanish minister, who
suggested that the South American col
onies in revolt and not recognized as in
dependent, might be included in the
word state"
The court held that the words must
necessarily be held applicable to
body of insurgents associated together
i'm a common political enterprise and
carrying on hostilities against the par
ent country. in the effort to achieve in
dependence. although recognition OF
belligereucy had not been accorded.
Neither Of the words, the opinion
continued. is used as equivalent to the
word word State" and the word 'peo-
nle" in the connection in which it is
used must apply to body OF persons
less than state or nation, and this
meaning would be satisfied by consid-
ering it as applicable to any consol-
idated political party
Chief Justice Fuller continued by
saving il belonged to the political de-
p9rtment to determine when belliger-
ency should be recognized. but that
there was sharp distinction between
the recognition of beiligerency and the
recognition of political revolt as was
shown in this case, in which, while
there had been no recognition OF bel
Iigerercv. there had still been many
Droclamations and messages by the
President recognizing the Cuban in
slrrection as an actual conflict OF arms
i'm resistance Of the authority OF a gov
ernment with which the United States
are on terms of peace and amity, al
though acknowledgement OF DeIllger-
encv had not taken place.
Continuing with this branch OF the
case he said. we see no justification
for importing into section 92S" WORDS
If does not contain and when Woula
make its operation depend upon the
RECOGNITION of belligerency. and Whlle
the Iibel might have been drawn with
s~mowhat greater precision, we are oil
o,inicn that il should not have been
dismissed. a-.-.-. c.,,.+
The Judgment of the District Court
of Florida was reversed and the cause
raranded with directions to resume
crsto6v of the vessel which had peen
released on bond.