New Britain herald. [microfilm reel] (New Britain, Conn.) 1890-1976, 1915-03-11

commenced, is al loeIly 10 purchase
either goods or ships (not being ships
of war; from either belligerent, and
the purchase is valid, whether the
subject Of it being lying in neutral
port, or in an enemy's port. During
time of peace without prospect Of
war, any transfer which is suffi-
cient to transfer the property between
the vendor and vendee, is good also
against the captOr, If war after
wards Unexpectedly breaks out. But
in case Of war, either actual or i'm
minent, this rule is subject to quail
hcatior, and it is settled that in such
a case a mere transfer by documents
which would be sufficient to bind the
parties, is not sufficient to change
the property as against captors, so
long as the ship or goods remain in
transit. While the ship is on the
sea, the title Of the vendee cannot be
completed by actual delivery of the
vessel or goods"
The facts in the case were that q
Russian vessel was sold bona -fide by
an enemy to a neutral when the war
then between Russia and Great Brit
ain was imminent The vessel was
at the time Of the sale in the prosecu-
ton of voyage from Libau, an en-
envy port, to Copenhagen, a neutral
port. On arrival in Copenhagen. in
March, 1854, she was delivered to
the agent of the buyer; admeasured
by the custom house officers there,
and branded as Danish property. Her
Tag was also there changed for the
Danish flag, and a Danish master and
crew engaged to navigate her. She
sailed from Copenhagen with cargo
of linseed May 21, 1854, arrived at
Leith, Scotland, May 20, and was
seized by the British custom autho ORR
ties May 81 on suspicion of being
Russian vessel. The lower admiral
ty court ordered the ship condemned
as prize; but the court of appeals
ruled that the transitus of the YES
sci had ceased when it came into the
possession of the agent of the pur-
chaser which occurred before the
seizure, and, therefore, the sale
was valid, and in the course of the
decision set forth the well recognized
rule of law in the words above
quoted.
In communication designed for
general public perusal, there is no
need of citing the names of the
many British cases in which the
above rule Of law has time and time
again been reiterated. AS early as
1898 the court announced the law to
be that according to the British and
American practice, enemy vessels
could be transferred to a neutral flag
before, or after the outbreak of war,
and thereby lose their enemy charac-
ter, provided the sale was bona-fide;
was not made in a blockaded port;
not made While the vessel was in
transit; that the vendor did not re-
tain an interest in the vessel; or did
not stipulate for right to recover or
repurchase the vessel at the conclu-
sion of the war. ...
1t will be noticed that by the well
recognized British law, a vessel at the
time of it's purchase may be either in
a neutral or enemy port. Mr..
Breitung, or any other neutral, could
go even to any port in Germany, pur-
chase there vessel or any number
of vessels, load them with cargoes
and sail for America in full view Of
the entire British war fleet, and it is
the duty Of the United States govern
ment to see that they are not mo-
Tested on the voyage by any power
which may in its own interest seek
to injure the other belligerent, by
trying to establish a rule of law
which is contrary to the practice of
that government as to the sale of
ships. 'r
While the broad claim is made by
of any of the German vessels now
interned is void, and that it will re-
solutely refuse to recognize any such
sale, there is not lawyer in that
l.; 1,o
to displace his ignorance of interna-
tional law by making such a claim in
a court of justice. The position to
be taken will be found to be a claim
that the sale was not bona-fide. AS
to that question it can be incontest-
ably shown by Mr.. Breitung that he
purchased the Dacia for the purpose
Of engaging the vessel in a business
venture of carrying cotton to Rotter-
dam, and bringing a cargo of other
merchandise on the return trip to
the United States.
The purchase of the Dacia was
made by Mr.. Breitung December 16,
1914 for s165,OoO The first payment
of s16,500 was made on that day, and
the balance S14s,500 was paid on De-
cember 81. The checks drawn on
the Guaranty Trust company of New
York, which were paid in the usual
course of business, are ready to be
produced. He has furnished the state
department with abundant proof that
the transfer was bona-fide; was in
tended to, and did convey, complete
and unconditional ownership to him.
that there was no agreement or un-
derstanding reserving to the vendor,
or for his benefit, any interest in the
vessel or it's operation, or right or
voice of control therein; that the
transfer was intended To be Marina