ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

[131] *In May, 1863, she was admitted into the harbor of Bahia, and coaled there; on the 16th August she arrived at Simon's Bay, in the colony of the Cape of Good Hope, and was allowed to repair and coal; and in October, 1863, she is believed to have touched at Teneriffe and coaled at that place. On or about the 28th October, 1863, she arrived in the roadstead of Cherbourg, and was shortly afterward admitted into the dock-yard for repairs. She was admitted as a man-ofwar, on the order of the minister of marine, and her repairs (which were not extensive) were made by the dock-yard workmen, and are stated to have been paid for at the usual rate of work done on ships of war, which is less than the rate charged for work done on merchant-ships. She remained at Cherbourg during nearly four months. On the 25th March, 1864, she arrived at Pauillac, the boarding station of Bordeaux, and was reported as in want of repairs for her steam-machinery and of provisions. She was allowed to keep her gunpowder on board, on condition of mooring at Lormont, an anchorage a little distance below Bordeaux. Her machinery having been surveyed and certified to require a fortnight for its repair, she was given that time to remain at Lormont. She remained at anchor, however, until the 28th of April.', While the Georgia was at Cherbourg, the Florida being at the same time in the harbor of Brest, it was ascertained that some seamen had been induced to go from Liverpool to France in order to join those vessels. Four of these men were identified, upon inquiry made by order of Her Majesty's government, as belonging to the royal naval reserve, and they were forthwith discharged from the force. One Campbell, a keeper of a sailors' boarding house at Liverpool, was found to have been coucerned in inducing them to go, and was prosecuted and brought to trial and pleaded guilty. It was deemed sufficient by the judge to exact security against a repetition of the offense, by requiring him to enter into recog nizances in the sum of £150 to appear for judgment when called upon. On the 2d May, 1864, the Georgia came into the port of Liverpool. Very soon after her arrival there, her crew were discharged, her warlike stores were lodged in warehouses, (where they remained until after she left Liverpool, as hereinafter mentioned,) and the vessel herself was removed to a dock at Birkenhead, dismantled, and offered for sale by public advertisement in the following terms:

For sale, the splendid screw-steamer Georgia, about 750 tons, builder's measurement; built by Messrs. Denny, of Dumbarton, 1863; has engines of 200 horse-power; speed 12 knots; carries a large cargo; is abundantly found in stores, and ready for immedi ate employment. For specification and further particulars, apply to Curry, Kellock & Co.

The reason given for selling her was that she was deficient in strength and speed, and was, by her construction, unsuitable for a cruiser.

Directions had been given, shortly after her arrival, that, if not bona fide sold, she should be ordered to leave the port as soon as she had received necessary repairs.

With respect to the manner in which these directions should be enforced, and the power to enforce them, the law-officers of the Crown were consulted, and advised as follows:2

Opinion of the attorney and solicitor general.

If the Georgia is still (as has been hitherto assumed) a public ship of war of a bellig; erent power, she is, while within Her Majesty's dominions, exempt from all civil and municipal jurisdiction, and it is not, therefore, upon any civil or municipal law of this realm that Her Majesty's government can act, if they should find it necessary to take

1

Appendix, vol. i, p. 442.

2

* Ibid., p. 456.

any compulsory measures with respect to her; nor will the execution of those measures belong to the commissioners of the customs, or to any other civil authority.

By the universal law of nations, and by the prerogative right of regulating the intercourse between this country and the public ships of war of a foreign government, which belongs to Her Majesty in right of her crown, it is competent for Her Majesty to prohibit the entrance of any foreign public ship of war into Her Majesty's territory, except under such conditions as she may think proper from time to time to impose; and if any such prohibition is not duly obeyed, it is, in our opinion, perfectly within the competency of Her Majesty to enforce its observance by her military or naval officers, and by the use of force, if necessary.

If the Georgia has ceased to be a public ship of war of the Confederate States, and has been sold to and become the private property of any of Her Majesty's sub[132] jects, the case is different. Under these circumstances, Her Majesty's orders would no longer be applicable to this ship; and, of course, no forcible or other means could be used for the purpose of compelling their observance in a case to which they would not apply. The Georgia, after such a sale, would be exactly in the same situation as the Gibraltar (formerly called the Sumter) was last year; she would be governed by the ordinary municipal law of this country, like any other private ship, the property of British subjects.

(Signed)

LINCOLN'S INN, May 23, 1864.

ROUNDELL PALMER.
R. P. COLLIER.

The vessel was sold to Mr. Edward Bates, a ship-owner carrying on a very extensive business at Liverpool.

Mr. Adams, on being informed of the sale, wrote to Earl Russell, stating that, on behalf of his Government, he must decline to recognize the validity of it, and must claim the right to capture the vessel wherever she might be found on the high seas.

On the 27th July he again wrote to Earl Russell, suggesting that there was reason to suspect that the sale was fictitious, and the vessel intended to be again employed in the confederate service.

To this letter Earl Russell replied as follows:1

Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.

FOREIGN OFFICE, August 8, 1864.

SIR: With reference to my letter of the 28th ultimo, I have the honor to state to you that Her Majesty's government do not see sufficient grounds for coming to the conclusion upon the statements contained in your letter of the 27th ultimo, that the steamer fieorgia is about to be again used for belligerent purposes. With a view, however, to prevent the recurrence of any question such as that which has arisen in the case of the Georgia, Her Majesty's government have given directions that, in future, no ship of war of either belligerent shall be allowed to be brought to any of Her Majesty's ports for the purpose of being dismantled or sold.

I am, &c.,

(Signed)

RUSSELL.

The directions mentioned in the above letter were issued accordingly, and were notified in the London Gazette as follows:

Extract from the London Gazette of September 8, 1864.

FOREIGN OFFICE, September 8, 1864.

It is hereby notified that. Her Majesty has been pleased to order, that for the future no ship of war belonging to either of the belligerent powers of North America shall be allowed to enter, or to remain, or be, in any of Her Majesty's ports for the purpose of being dismantled or sold; and Her Majesty has been pleased to give directions to the commissioners of Her Majesty's customs and to the governors of Her Majesty's colonies and foreign possessions to see that this order is properly carried into effect.

On the 8th August, 1863, the Georgia, being then registered in the name of the said Edward Bates, sailed from Liverpool for Lisbon. Off Lisbon, and while on the high seas, she was captured by the United States war-steamer Niagara, and was sent to Boston for adjudication.

1 Appendix, vol. i, p. 459.

Mr. Bates, her owner, thereupon wrote to Earl Russell as follows, complaining of the seizure of his ship:

Mr. Bates to Earl Russell.1

LIVERPOOL, August 27, 1864.

MY LORD: I beg to call your lordship's attention to a very serions outrage which has been committed upon me by the United States man-of-war Niagara, in having forcibly seized and sent to the United States my screw-steamer Georgia.

This vessel was, in the month of May last, lying in the Birkenhead dock, and was offered for sale by public advertisement by the well-known ship-brokers, Messrs. Curry, Kellock & Co., of this town.

I had her examined, and, thinking her a suitable vessel, I entertained an intention to purchase her. I knew she was the property of the confederate government, and thereupon, before completing a purchase, I communicated with the custom-house authorities at Liverpool, in order to ascertain whether the authorities would grant me a British register, withont which I should not have bought her.

The customs authorities took some time to consider, and during all this period [133] the advertisement *continued in the public papers, and I have no doubt that this public announcement was seen and well known to the American consul at this port.

Eventually I was informed that a British register would be granted to me if I bought her. I concluded a purchase of her, and paid for her on the 13th June last. The purchase-money I paid to Messrs. Curry, Kellock & Co., and received a bill of sale signed by James D. Bullock. This document I presented at the custom-house, where I made the usual declaration of ownership, and the ship was thereupon duly registered in my

name.

During the whole of this period she was in a public dock open to the inspection of the public, and where I dismantled her and proceeded to alter and repair her. All this time I did not receive any intimation from either my government or from the American consul or other authorities that my purchase was invalid.

In July I received overtures from Messrs. Bennett, of London, through Messrs. Meacock, of Liverpool, as brokers for the Portuguese consul in London, for a charter of the Georgia on time to the Portuguese government. I eventually accepted this charter, and then proceeded to fit her up in accordance therewith as a mail and passenger boat.

While she was being thus fitted up the Niagara visited the Mersey. The vessel was still open to inspection, and I have reason to believe that the officers of that vessel did inspect her, but no intimation was made to me of the intention, to seize my property as soon as she should get into open waters.

So secure did I feel in the possession of my property, that, although the consul-general for Portugal conveyed to me his feeling of apprehension of the Niagara, I sconted the idea as something unworthy of credence, and on the 8th August she sailed from the Queen's dock in Liverpool for Lisbon, there to run in the service of the Portuguese government, from that place to the coast of Africa and back, with mails, goods, and passengers. On the completion of this service the Portuguese government covenanted and agreed to deliver my ship to me in the port of Liverpool.

Your lordship may therefore conceive the astonishment and indignation with which I received the intelligence on my return to Liverpool of the vessel having been seized off Lisbon by the United States steamer Niagara and sent to Boston.

I am well known in Liverpool as an extensive ship-owner.

I have no connection with the confederate government or their agents, and never have had, directly or indirectly.

I bought the vessel for the purpose of my own business, on an arrangement with the custom-house authorities that I should receive for her a British register, and in the belief that a British register would protect my property from the outrage which has been practiced upon me.

I respectfully submit these facts to your lordship's consideration, and trust that Her Majesty's government will forthwith take such steps as they may deem necessary in order to procure for me a restitution of my ship and compensation for the injury I have sustained.

I have, &c.,
(Signed)

EDWARD BATES.

Mr. Bates was informed in reply that the question must go before a prize-court in the United States, and that he must be prepared to defend his interest therein. The view entertained of the case by Her

'Appendix, vol. i, p. 464.

Majesty's government was afterward more fully explained to him in. the following letter:1

Mr. Hammond to Mr. Bates.

FOREIGN OFFICE, September 19, 1864. SIR: I acquainted you shortly, by Lord Russell's direction, in my letter of the 9th instant, that the case of the Georgia must go before the prize-court in the United States, and that you must be prepared to defend your interest therein.

I am now further to acquaint you, in reply to your letter of the 27th ultimo, that having consulted the law-officers of the Crown, Lord Russell desires me to state to you that the Niagara, in capturing the Georgia and sending her into a prize-court for adjudication, which it is to be assumed will be the course she will pursue, has not exceeded the limits of her belligerent rights.

If the Georgia had formerly belonged to the mercantile marine of the Confederate States, and been the property of a private subject of the Confederate States, the United States cruiser would have been justified in seizing her upon the high seas, and in taking her into a prize-court for the purpose of submitting to proper judicial investigation the question whether the transfer of an enemy's vessel to a neutral flagrante bello had been bona fide, and executed in the manner and in the circumstances which international law requires. But it is a fact beyond the reach of controversy or denial that the Georgia had formed, till a very recent period, part of the confederate navy. The belligerent, therefore, had, a fortiori, the right to seize her and endeavor to obtain her condemnation in a prize-court. That court will have to determine, not only the question whether the transfer of the Georgia to a neutral owner was real, and accompanied by an entire extinction of all the interests and rights of the former hostile owner, but the much graver preliminary question whether (as against the right of capture of the other belligerent) a ship of war can be lawfully transferred by a belligerent flagrante bello in a neutral port to a neutral, with whatever publicity and however completely the transfer may have been actually made, and whatever alterations the structure, equipment, or employment of the vessel so de facto transferred may have undergone while in the possession of the neutral.

[134] *Lord Russell is further advised that the officers of the custom-house at Liverpool, in granting to this vessel, upon the production of proper documents, a British register, merely acted in conformity with the municipal laws of this country, which neither undertakes to assist and facilitate, nor pretends upon the higli seas to overrule or supersede the right of maritime capture belonging to a belligerent under the law of nations as administered in prize-courts; and that it was certainly no part of the duty of Her Majesty's government to inform a private individual who might entertain the idea of purchasing this vessel of any risk which he might incur by so doing. Nor is Lord Russell aware of any obligation imposed by international law and comity upon the representatives or agents of the United States in this country, or upon the officers of the Niagara when at Liverpool, to give any notice or intimation whatever that the Niagara or any other cruiser of the United States might still consider the vessel a proper subject of capture, whether transferred or not to a neutral, and under whatever register or flag she might sail.

I am to add that the application contained in your letter of the 10th instant for documents in the case is now under consideration, and that an answer will be returned to you as soon as possible.

I am, &c., (Signed)

E. HAMMOND.

SUMMARY.

The Georgia was a vessel built at Dumbarton, in Scotland, and sent to sea from the port of Greenock. For whom she was built and by whom and under what circumstances she was sent to sea are matters as to which Her Majesty's government has no information beyond what has appeared in the foregoing statement.

The Georgia neither appeared to be nor was, up to the time when she sailed from the port of Greenock, fitted out, armed, or equipped for war, nor especially adapted to warlike use. She appeared to be constructed and intended for a ship of commerce. She proved, in fact, to be not fitted for employment as a cruiser, and for this reason she was dismantled and sold after having been at sea for about nine months altogether, exAppendix, vol. i, p. 468.

1

clusive of the time during which she remained in the harbors of Cherbourg and Bordeaux.

She was registered under the name of the Japan, in the name of a Liverpool merchant, and was entered outward and cleared in the customary way for a port of destination in the East Indies. She was advertised at the Sailors' Home, in Liverpool, as about to sail for Singapore, and her crew were hired for a voyage to Singapore or some intermediate port, and for a period of two years. The men when they were hired believed this to be the true destination of the ship, and her voyage to be a commercial one, and they appear to have continued under this belief until after the vessel had arrived off the coast of France.

She was armed and equipped for war in the waters of France; she there took on board her commander and officers, and her crew were enlisted there; the crew who had shipped at Greenock having been released from their agreement and provided with the means of returning if they chose to do so.

Her officers and armament appear to have been conveyed to the French coast or its immediate vicinity, in a steamer which had cleared from Newhaven in ballast for Alderney and St. Malo, and which was stated to be a regular trader between Newhaven and the Channel Islands. The master of the steamer stated that the persons whom she conveyed were taken on board as passengers.

Her Britannic Majesty's government had no reasonable grounds to believe that the vessel was intended to cruise or carry on war against the United States until after she had departed from the waters of Great Britain and arrived in the waters of France. The government had indeed no knowledge or information whatever about her previous to the receipt by Earl Russell of Mr. Adams's note of 8th April, 1863.

Information about the constru tion and outfit of the vessel had for a long time before her departure been in the possession of Mr. Adams; and Mr. Dudley, who was (as it was his duty to be) in constant communication with Mr. Adams, knew of the hiring of seamen for her and had her examined by a man sent on board by him for that purpose. The information possessed by Mr. Adams was not, however, in his opinion. such that proceedings could be founded upon it; and no communication was made by him to Her Majesty's government on the subject until six days after the ship had sailed. At that time Mr. Adams had received further information (which proved to be erroneous) that the vessel was to receive her armament at Alderney, within the Queen's dominions, and he then made up his mind to "send notice of it to the British government, and leave it to them to act in the case as they might think fit." The vessel did not go to Alderney, and Mr. Adams's communication was (in his own words)" too late for effective interposition."

[135] *The Georgia, after having been armed for war in French waters, was commanded by an officer commissioned as such by the gov ernment of the Confederate States. Her officers were, as Her Majes ty's government believes, Americans belonging to those States. Of the composition of her crew, Her Majesty's government knows nothing, except that it appears to have consisted, in part at any rate, of British subjects, who were induced by the persuasion and promises of her commander to take service in her while she was in French waters.

The Georgia was received as a ship of war of the Confederate States in the neutral ports visited by her, particularly in those of Brazil and France. On the same footing, and in the same manner, without favor

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »