Page images
PDF
EPUB

of the Treasury:

belligerent parties in the same port, roadstead, or waters within Earl Russell's the territorial jurisdiction of Her Majesty, there shall be an Letter to Lords interval of not less than twenty-four hours between the departure t'ier from of any such vessel (whether a ship of war, a privateer, or a merchant ship) of the one belligerent, and the subsequent departure therefrom of any ship of war or privateer of the other belligerent; and the times hereby limited for the departure of such ships of war and privateers respectively shall always, in case of necessity, be extended, so far as may be requisite for giving effect to this proviso, but not further or otherwise.

IV. No ship of war or privateer of either belligerent shall hereafter be permitted, while in any port, roadstead, or waters subject to the territorial jurisdiction of Her Majesty to take in any supplies, except provisions and such other things as may be requisite for the subsistence of her crew; and except so much coal only as may be sufficient to carry such vessel to the nearest port of her own country, or to some nearer destination ; and no coal shall be again supplied to any such ship of war or privateer in the same or any other port, roadstead, or waters subject to the territorial jurisdiction of Her Majesty, without special permission, until after the expiration of three months from the time when such coal may have been last supplied to her within British waters as aforesaid.

I have, &c.

(Signed) RUSSELL. To the Lords Commissioners of

Her Majesty's Treasury,

&c. &c. &c.

The Case of the “Oreto," vide Report, page 273.

IN THE VICE-ADMIRALTY COURT OF THE

BAHAMAS.
OUR SOVEREIGN LADY THE QUEEN

Versus
The BRITISH STEAMSHIP “ORETO,” her Tackle, &c.,
Seized by Commander Henry Dennis Hickley, Esq., commanding H.M.S. “Grey-

hound,” for an alleged Breach of Foreign Enlistment Act.

DECREE
Of his Honour the Judge, pronounced in the above Case on the

2nd day of August, A.D. 1862.

The Advocate General, the Hon. G. C. Anderson, on behalf of the

Crown.
Bruce L. Burnside, Esquire, on behalf of the Claimant.

The “ ORETO."

or

The British steamship “Oreto” has been seized by the

“ commander of H.M.S. “Greyhound” on the alleged ground, as appears by the libel, that James Alexander Duguid, now lately master of the said ship, and others exercising authority over her, have, without leave of Her Majesty the Queen, and within the jurisdiction of the Bahamas, attempted to equip, furnish, and fit out the said steamship “ Oreto," with intent that she should be employed in the service of certain persons exercising or assuming to exercise the powers of government in certain States claiming to be designated and known as the Confederate States of America, to cruize and commit hostilities against the citizens of the United States of America, Her Majesty the Queen, being at the time at peace with the said United States, and have thereby acted in violation of the Act 59 Geo. 3. c. 69. commonly known as the Foreign Enlistment Act.

Now, to support the libel it is necessary that proof should be given,

1st, that the aforesaid parties having charge of the “Oreto" while the vessel was within the jurisdiction of the Vice-Admiralty Court of the Bahamas, attempted to equip, furnish, and fit her out as a vessel of war;

2dly, that such attempt was made with the intent that she should be employed in the service of the Confederated States of America ; and,

3dly, that such service was to cruize and commit hostilities against the citizens of the United States of America. Witnesses have accordingly been produced to prove that the “ Oreto” is constructed for and fitted as a war vessel ; that acts have been done in her, since she came to Nassau, which constitute an attempt to equip, fit, and arm her as a vessel of war. That from certain

The “ ORETO.”

conversations which were overheard between the master of the vessel and a person who came out passenger in her, and from certain acts done by this person, there is proof that she was intended for the service of the Confederate States of America, and to cruize against the citizens of the United States.

It has been contended by the Proctor for the respondents that proof ought also to have been given that Her Majesty the Queen was at peace with the United States of America, as the Court cannot take judicial notice of that fact. That it ought to have been proved that there is such a place as the Confederated States of America, and that proof should have been given that no leave had been obtained to fit the “ Oreto ” as a vessel of war. Without entering further into the subject, I will dismiss these points by stating my opinion, that the Court is bound to take judicial notice of Her Majesty's proclamations, and that in the proclamation of the 13th of May 1862, the Confederated States of America are named, and it is also alleged that Her Majesty is at peace with the United States of America, and that as the allegation in the libel, that there was no licence from Her Majesty to fit the “Oreto” as a vessel of war, has not been traversed, the Court has a right to assume that it is admitted.

A responsive plea has been put in by the defendants.

1st. Denying that there was any agent of the owners or persons interested in the Oreto of the name of John Lowe, on board of her, as affirmed in the libel, that the said Lowe was merely a passenger, and never exercised any power or control over the vessel.

2dly. Denying that James Alexander Duguid, the captain, or any person exercising authority over the said steamship, attempted to equip, furnish, or fit out the said ship with intent that she should be employed in the service of the Confederated States of America, to cruize and commit hostilities against the citizens of the United States.

3dly. That while the “Oreto” lay in the river Mersey, immediately previous to her sailing for this port, British men-of-war frequently passed and repassed her, and that she was at all times in a conspicuous and public position without having been seized or arrested, or subjected to detention, and that she quitted Liverpool in the open day without any manner of haste or secrecy; that the master, while she was so lying in the Mersey waiting instructions froin the owner, directed the mate to employ the crew during their leisure hours in doing ordinary ship's work, fitting gear, stropping blocks, &c., during which time, as well as after she sailed, certain spare blocks which were then on board, and which were intended solely for the use of the ship as part and parcel of her rigging, and not in any way whatever as blocks for gun tackles, or as part of the furniture of guns, were stropped by the said crew, and the said blocks were never known or called as gun-tackle blocks, until a certain Edward Jones, a man of infamous and abandoned character, who had been shipped on board in the capacity of boatswain, called them gun-tackle blocks. That neither the said Alexander Duguid, nor any person what

8341.

00

The

ever.

soever, having authority over the said steamship during the time “ORETO." she was at the port of Nassau ever gave any orders or directions

to strop blocks as gun-tackle blocks, or to strop any blocks what

But any blocks which may have been stropped on board the said ship was done by the seamen of the “Oreto,” in their ordinary avocations, and is always done on board merchant ships in order that they might have employment on board, and not for the purpose of fitting the “ Oreto” as a vessel of war.

4thly. That no faith or credit ought to be given to the depositions of Charles Ward, a witness for the party proponent, that he is a man of abandoned character, and is actuated by malicious and vindictive feelings against the said James Alexander Duguid, and has sworn falsely for the purpose of carrying out an avowed intention of doing an injury to the said J. A. Duguid.

On the evidence given in support of this plea, I shall remark as I proceed.

The evidence which has been produced in support of the prosecution may be classed into two parts :

1st. That which relates to circumstances which occurred before the vessel arrived within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court of this colony.

2dly. That which applies to facts done subsequently to such arrival.

To the first division belong the construction and fitting of the vessel before she left England, the flags or other materials which she had on board when she sailed and the conversations or remarks of the parties in charge of her while on her passage from England.

To the second division belong the proceedings on board the vessel after her arrival within the jurisdiction of the Bahamas Vice-Admiralty Court.

From the evidence appertaining to the first division I abstract the following, which is all that I think in any degree material :

Mr. Wynne Fitzjames Duggan, the chief mate of the “Oreto," says, “I am chief officer of the Oreto. The number of men,

all “ told, on board was 52 or 53. I believe that was an ordinary crew. We had not too many.

We had no cargo.
« Oreto' was fitted (when she left England) as she is now. All
vessels are not fitted alike. I have seen some ships fitted with
regard to bolts in ports as she is. I have seen vessels intended
“ to carry cargo fitted as she is. Some of Green's and Wigram's

ships are so fitted. There was a passenger on board whose
name was Lowe. He did not, to my knowledge, exercise any
authority over the ship."
In the cross-examination, Mr. Duggan says, “I had access to

every part of the ‘Oreto. I have gone right through the “ vessel. I have never seen any implements of war or any am“ munition on board of her. The shot boxes were full of cab

bages, turnips, and potatoes.”
William Porter, a seaman of the “Oreto,” deposes that the vessel

[ocr errors]

The

The “ORETO."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

6

[ocr errors]

had no stowage room for cargo. She was not fitted as merchant vessels usually are. She had a magazine. He says, “I believe there were

shell rooms. I was in a room where shells were stowed. “ She had light rooms. They are not usual in merchant vessels. “ She had boxes for shot. She had two gigs, a life-boat, pinnace " and dingey. I took her to be a gun-boat.

“We had a passenger named Lowe on board. As far as I could see, Mr. Lowe had a little authority on board. On one of the mess kids being broken, I heard Mr. Lowe say to Captain

Duguid, he ought to take better care of the things. Mr. Lowe “ has given me different orders, and told me to steer different

courses when I was at the helm.”

Cross-examined. I cannot say whether Captain Duguid knew it; I might have been reprimanded if he had. Peter Hanson, a seaman of the “

Oreto,” says:

“ The Oreto? (meaning when she sailed from England) was fitted just as she “ is at the present time. I have not been in steam boats before. “ I have been in sailing vessels. I have never been on board

one fitted like the · Oreto. There is no place for cargo.Walter Irving, a fireman of the “Oreto,” states: “I have served on board steamships before; I have been so serving six or seven

years. The 'Oreto' was not fitted like steamships I have “ been serving in before, they were merchant ships and passenger vessels. I did not see any cargo on board the 'Oreto,' there

were shot and shell boxes, and a place which the crew called a magazine. I know a flag they call the Confederate fag, I

saw one on board the “Oreto;' I saw it on the quarter-deck “ before we came in here; I saw it among other flags. There

was an American and a French flag.”

There was a passenger on board named Mr. Lowe, he seemed to have great interest in the ship.

With respect to the flag mentioned by this man, I will observe that had there been a Confederate flag on board the “ Oreto,” I should not consider it as very powerful evidence, inasmuch as it was with American, French, and other flags, and might have been sent on board with a general assortment of flags which many merchant vessels have. But it will be seen that Captain Duguid in his examination swears that there was no Confederate flag on board. He states, that when the flags were sent on board the ship at Liverpool, they were wrapped up in separate papers, and marked with their respective names. That seeing one marked "Confederate flag,” he immediately sent it ashore, fearing that the possession of such a flag might involve them in some trouble should they be boarded by an American vessel of war. Drawing my conclusions from the manner in which his evidence was given, and all the accompanying circumstances, I cannot but be of opinion that there was no Confederate flag on board after the ship left Liverpool, and, consequently, that the witness Walter Irving, and the man Ward, who gives evidence to the same effect, have stated as far as regards the Confederate flag what is not true. Thomas Robinson, a fireman of the “Oreto," states : “I have

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« EelmineJätka »