On the 13th May, 1861, a Royal Proclamation issued VICTORIA R. Whereas we are happily at peace with all Sovereigns, Powers, and States: And whereas hostilities have unhappily commenced between the Government of the United States of America and certain States styling themselves "The Confederate States of America:" And whereas we, being at peace with the Government of the United States, have declared our Royal determination to maintain a strict and impartial neutrality in the contest between the said contending parties: We therefore have thought fit, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, to issue this our Royal Proclamation : And we do hereby strictly charge and command all our loving subjects to observe a strict neutrality in and during the aforesaid hostilities, and to abstain from violating or contravening either the laws and statutes of the realm in this behalf, or the law of nations in relation thereto, as they will answer to the contrary at their peril. [The Proclamation here recited the Act.] Now, in order that none of our subjects may unwarily render themselves liable to the penalties imposed by the said statute, we do hereby strictly command, that no person or persons whatsoever do commit any act, matter, or thing whatsoever contrary to the provisions of the said statute, upon pain of the several penalties by the said statute imposed, and of our high displeasure. And we do hereby further warn all our loving subjects, and all persons whatsoever entitled to our protection, that if any of them shall presume, in contempt of this our Royal Proclamation, and of our high displeasure, to do any acts in derogation of their duty, as subjects of a neutral Sovereign, in the said contest, or in violation or contravention of the law of nations in that behalf-as, for example and more especially, by entering into the military service of either of the said contending parties as commissioned or non-commissioned officers or soldiers; or by serving as officers, sailors, or marines on board any ship or vessel of war or transport of or in the service of either of the said contending parties; or by serving as officers, sailors, or marines, on board any privateer bearing letters of marque of or from either of the said contending parties; or by engaging to go or going to any place beyond the seas with intent to enlist or engage in any such service, or by procuring, or attempting to procure, within her Majesty's dominions, at home or abroad, others to do so; or by fitting out, arming, or equipping any ship or vessel to be employed as a ship of war or privateer or transport, by either of the said contending parties; or by breaking, or endeavouring to break, any blockade lawfully and actually established by or on behalf of either of the said contending parties; or by carrying officers, soldiers, despatches, arms, military stores, or materials, or any article or articles considered and deemed to be con 1863. ATTORNEY- V. SILLIM and Others. 1863. ATTORNEY- v. SILLIM Confederate cruiser, had been In June, 1861, war broke out be and Others. of the United States and several of the Union, called the Confederate recognized by the British Governm ficers' rooms. osed to ask the witness, as an d. question inadmissible (a). of the Royal Navy, who also there was no differ That, however, apthe effect of the eviand the next witness. v. Langton, vide ante, held that the mere ship might be sufunderwriters that meant for ocean urely the hold of that its builders is to be equipbuilding it for Is not that to equip❞ her tent, &c.? 1863. ATTORNEY- v. SILLIM and Others. 1863. traband of war according to the law or modern usage of nations, for the use or service of either of the said contending parties, all persons so offendATTORNEY- ing will incur and be liable to the several penalties and penal consequences by the said statute, or by the law of nations, in that behalf imposed or denounced. GENERAL บ. SILLIM and Others. And we do hereby declare that all our subjects and persons entitled to our protection who may misconduct themselves in the premises will do so at their peril and of their own wrong, and that they will in nowise obtain any protection from us against any liabilities or penal consequences, but will, on the contrary, incur our high displeasure by such misconduct (a). The ship was built by the defendants Millers, at Liverpool, launched in March last, and was then taken into a yard of theirs to be fitted up, where she was in course of being fitted when she was seized, having already had her boilers put on board by the co-defendants Fawcett, Preston & Co. The evidence may be divided into two heads : First, to show that the vessel was being built for the purpose of warlike equipment. Secondly, to show that she was, at some stage or other of her construction, meant for the Confederate States. On the first head of evidence, Mr. Green, an eminent ship builder, who had seen the ship since seizure, gave evidence that her bulwarks were formed differently from any vessel other than a vessel of war. The rudder was unusually strong, and arrangements had been made for several hammock racks for hammocks-unusual in merchant ships. Some were on the bulwarks, where they were never put but to resist shot. The hatchways were not suited for a merchant vessel. They were such as you would find in a small class man-of-war. There was a considerable space before the boiler. It was not fitted for carrying cargo. The forecastle was such as you see on yachts and small vessels of war. There was a cooking apparatus on the forecastle, sufficient for 150 or 200 men. A common merchantman of the same size would have no such accommodation. There were also places fitted up (a) As to the effect of this, vide ante, p. 650. like pursers' or medical officers' rooms. The deck beams were closer together than is usual in merchant vessels. Sir R. Phillimore proposed to ask the witness, as an expert, for what purpose the ship seemed to be intended. Sir Hugh Cairns objected. POLLOCK, C. B., held the question inadmissible (a). Captain E. A. Englefield, of the Royal Navy, who also had examined the Alexandra since her seizure stated, that she was strongly built, certainly not for mercantile purposes. She would be usable for a yacht, and easily convertible for the purposes of war. She had accommodation for men and officers such as would be required in war. Her stowage was only sufficient for provisions for her crew, assuming a crew of thirty-two. Her build was quite capable of being converted into a man-of-war, but when he saw her she had no appearance of preparations for guns. There would, however, he said, be no difficulty in adding those preparations; they could be easily added. She might be fitted with two or three pivot guns. She would probably carry three guns, differing in size. The bulwarks were not of the same description as those in the British service. With certain kinds of guns the bulwarks would allow of being fired over. Cross-examined: the witness said there was no differ (a) In Reg. v. Bernard, 1 F. & F. 247, POLLOCK, C. B., suggested that scientific witnesses might be asked as to the character of the grenades, whether adapted to kill, &c. That, probably, was what was meant as the gist of the question in the present case, though its form might be questionable. The witness, having stated specific facts tending to a conclusion, might be asked, was the vessel, in your opinion, built as a ship of war is built? or "built for warlike equipment, or was to be fitted for such equipment." That, however, ap- In Clapham v. Langton, vide ante, 1863. ATTORNEY- v. SILLIM and Others. |