CO885-(10-11) — Page 369

377.

PUBLIC RECORD

OFFICE

C.O.

Reference :-

885

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

J

*No. 299.

(BAHAMAB.)

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

MY LORD,

Lincoln's Inn, January 12, 1865. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Hammond's letter of the 9th instant, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the accompanying letter from the Colonial Office, and its enclosures, respecting the seizure of the steamer "Mary" (formerly called the "Alexandra ") on the ground that she was being equipped as a vessel of war for the service of the so-styled Confederate States; and to request that we would take the same into consideration, and furnish your Lordship with our opinion thereupon as soon as we conveniently can, and, at all events, before Saturday next, when the mail is despatched for the Bahamas.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands, we have taken this matter into con- sideration, and have the honour to

Report

That we think the Governor of the Bahamas has acted properly in seizing the "Mary" or "Alexandra" which we understand to be a vessel still navigated under British papers. There seems little, if any room, for doubt that the seventh section of the Foreign Enlistment Act has been violated by the shipment of arms, &c. in this vessel at Bermuda; and we incline to agree with the Attorney General of the Bahamas that oven if the only act of equipment or fitting out, done in that Colony, should prove to be the preparation of additional sleeping berths for the crew (the United States Consul, in his letter of December 5, 1864, alleged that several boxes of shell had been put on board in the harbour of Nassau, but of this we do not at present find any evidence) such preparation of sleeping berths ought to be held a further violation of the Statute in the Bahamas. The vessel, both when she left Bermuda and when at Nassau, was (as we understand the facts) so equipped and armed as to be capable of cruizing with effect against merchant vessels; and the Confederate flags, &c. and the commission in blank, and forms of seamen's pay, receipt and muster rolls, &c. found on board-her, with the card and effects of Lieutenant Hamilton, appears to us to be quite sufficient (unless otherwise explained, which we think most improbable,) to prove an actual destination for the war service of the Confederate States.

We think it will be proper to allege and prove as a distinct and separate charge ** equipment," 'fitting out," and arming within Her Majesty's dominions at Bermuda as well as further equipment, &c. in the Bahamas. The ruling of Judge Lees, in the case of the "Oreto,' that no evidence could be given of acts done elsewhere than in the Bahamas, except for the purpose of explaining acts done within that Colony, seems to us to be incorrect, and to have arisen from a confusion between a cri- minal proceeding in personam (which under the fourth section of the Act must be taken before a court having local jurisdiction where the offence was committed) and a proceeding for condemnation in rem, which under the seventh section seems to us to be competent, wherever the ship previously forfeited by any Act working a forfeiture under that section may happen to be found within Her Majesty's dominions. The question to be tried in such a case is the title of the Crown by forfeiture, which under the Imperial Statute is perfect, if the prohibited act has been done in any part of Her Majesty's dominions. It is not said in the seventh section (and we think it would be unreasonable to imply) that the subsequent seizure, &c. must take place in the same part of Her Majesty's dominions in which the act making the forfeiture was done; and still less that the court which has to try the question of title to the vessel between the Crown and any claimant who may come forward is not at liberty to receive allegations or evidence of such acts wherever dono, as under the Imperial Statute would vest in the Crown an actual title by forfeiture at the time of seizure. The effect of such a construction would be, that a ship forfeited in law to the Crown, would be delivered for ever from all the effects of that forfeiture, if she could once pass from ono part of Her Majesty's dominions to another without afterwards

0 10278.-960. 83.-2,86.

2