« EdellinenJatka »
law. They had all beard a good deal within the last three or four years of the foreign enlistment act, the object of which was to enable the government faithfully to fulfil all the duties of a neutral state towards other countries, with whom we were at peace, but who were, unhappily, at war. That act, however, had reference to different things—to equipment and to enlistment—and it was of importance not to confound them. It was one thing to be concerned in the equipment of a ship to prey upon the merchant service of one of the belligerents, and quite another thing to be engaged in endeavoring to procure men for either of the belligerents. There were some matters which might raise a prejudice against the defendant, but which were not at all relevant to the real question at issue. It did not follow that because at one period or point of time the defendant was aware of the destination of the vessel, that, therefore, he was so from the beginning, or that even if he were so he had tried to induce any of the men to enlist. That the vessel did in the result enter into the confederate service was too clear to admit of doubt. Who were the persons by whom the ship was destined for the service was not known. At all events the defendant was not charged with it. If he had been supposed to know of it he could have been indicted for it. And it was fair to assume that he did not know of it, and had no part in it. Whoever it was who had destined and provided the vessel for the service would probably keep it a secret from every one else. It was probable that the young gentleman on board might have been in the secret, and not the defendant. It was proved that he said after reaching Madeira, “I've sold the vessel to the confederates,” and more than one witness for the Crown stated that what he added was only this, " Those who like to join may do so; those who don't may return." The question for the jury would be---are you satisfied that he made use of any persuasions or inducements to procure these men to enlist in the service ? That would in a great degree depend upon whether he knew from the first the real destination of the vessel. But what was there to show that he did? And what was there then to show that when he engaged the men in London he meant that they should enter into the confederate service? Why, there was nothing to show that at that time he knew the destination of the vessel. Very likely he was ready to sell it to some one, and did not know for what purpose. And it would be unfair to in fer, from his subsequent knowledge of it, a previous knowledge of it on his part. And even if he had such knowledge and intention on bis part, was it not necessary that there should be the same knowledge and intention on the part of the seaman engaged? The indictment had been framed, no doubt, with great ingenuity to avoid this and other legal objections on the part of the defendant. No one could say that the government of this country had not done their best to preserve its neutrality in the late war. They bad instituted several prosecutions; whether they had failed or succeeded depended upon the juries who tried the cases, not on the government. They, at all events, bad done their duty in the matter. They bad done their best in this and in other cases to convict. In this, as in other cases, they had the assistance of able and skilful law officers, who had framed an indictment containing a variety of counts, shaping the offence in every possible way so as to meet or avoid all legal objections, as far as possible, on the part of the defendant. The main question, however, would be, did the defendant anywhere do anything in violation of the act ? " There were subordinate points of law or fact arising out of that main question, but the points of law are to be reserved.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. There is the question of fact, whether or not the ship, at the time of the alleged attempt, was a British vessel, or whether she had not already become really a confederate vessel.
Mr. James. No doubt. The main question, however, will be as to the defendant's acts, and whether he did really, in any place, attempt to induce the men to enlist, or whether the real attempts were not made by the American officers.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. "It is of course impossible to exclude the question whether the attempts were not made by the American officers, who certainly were very active and energetic in their endeavors.
Mr. James. Just so. That will be one of the grounds of defence. The evidence for the prosecution has shown that the American officers were very energetic in their endeavors to induce the men to enlist. And taking the version of the defendant's words, which more than one of the crown witnesses gave, was it not more probable that all he said was to state the option which the men had, and that all the attempts to induce the men to enlist were really made by the American officers ? At all events, this was the main question of fact. Did the defendant endeavor to induce the men to enlist in the confederate service, or did he engage men with a view to their being thus enlisted ? He contended that even in the case for the Crown this was far from being established, but that, on the contrary, there was much in it to • raise a probability that the case was otherwise, and he should now supplement this evidence
by calling witnesses on the part of the defendant, who, he believed, would show beyond a doubt the defendant had not known of the ultimate destination of the vessel when he engaged the men for the vessel in this country, and that he had not used any attempts or endeavors abroad to induce the men to enlist in the confederate service.
Evidence was then gone into for the defence.
The first witness called was Hensman, who had been alluded to repeatedly in the crossexamination of the witnesses for the Crown as having engaged them in conversation with regard to the evidence they might give. Having given the particulars of some previous voy
ages in the vessel, which appeared to have been purely mercantile, he proceeded to state his engagement for the voyage now in question, which he said was to Bombay, as first mate, and his sailing to Madeira, where the Laurel was signalled. Being asked when he first heard of the sale of the vessel, he said that about an hour after he left Madeira in company of the Latirel be heard from the purser that he expected it to be sold. The captain of the Laurel Captain Ramsay) told the defendant where to anchor at the Desertas island. When the two Vessels were alongside, Captain Waddell came on board in plain clothes. After this Captain Corbett came and said he had sold the ship.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL submitted whether this sort of evidence would be admissible ; that is, evidence on bebalf of the defendant of things said by himself. In that way it was manifest that any amount of evidence might be made on his behalf.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said he doubted whether strictly the evidence would be admissible; but he thought it would be only right to hear all that the defendant was stated to have said.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said that this being his lordship’s opinion, as he did not desire to put the case upon strict technical grounds, he should not press his objection.
Tbe examination of the witness was then resumed, and he stated that the defendant told him that some time before he had orders from the owners to sell the vessel, and that he had now found a market for her, and that the crew should be told that they might go home in the Laurel, and their luggage had better be removed into that vessel. This was before the preparations were made for loading, and it was after this that some men came from the Laurel to make those preparations. The witness then produced and identified the log-book, in which was the entry signed by himself, by the defendant, by James Smith, second mate, and by J. Elliott, first engineer:
“October 18. The screw steamer Sea King has this day been sold and handed over to James Waddell, her present master.
The witness further stated that just after the conversation with the defendant he told the ETEw what he bad heard, and desired them to assist in getting the luggage in, in order to get bome sooner. The men worked (he said) until near one in the morning.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. With what object ?
The witness said it was to get the deck clear as soon as they could ; he had no express orders as to the hours of work, and gave none: but the general orders from the captain were to get it over as soon as possible. In the morning the defendant told him to see that the men packed up quickly and got on board the Laurel. He accordingly told the men so, but they med reluctant to leave the ship until they had some explanation from the captain, i. e., the defendant, and witness reported this to the defendant, who then crdered them to be called together.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL observed that the Crown witnesses had not been asked any. thing as to all this.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said he should allow them to be recalled to be asked about it, but this was a most inconvenient course.
The witness's examination was continued. He said when the men were together the delendaut said, "I told the mate to tell you all to go on board the Laurel;' then he said something about their wanting an explanation, and then went on to say, “I've sold the ship, and tbere's a steamer alongside in which I'll take you all home.” Some of the men asked for three months' pay. The defendant said he had no money to pay them with ere, but be would take them home, and pay them all off at home. This was all the defendant said then, bar chen Captain Waddell came up and said, “Now, men, give me your attention. I've beugbt this ship, and I hold in my hand a commission as lieutenant in the confederate serrice. I am going to put the vessel in commission for a cruise for fifteen months as a vessel of the Confederate States navy, and I'm in want of men. If any of you prefer to remain with me, instead of going home with Captain Corbett, I'll give you double the wages you tal from him." There was then a confusion among the men, who said they had had quite esough of her; and they reproached Captain Corbett with having brought them out there on false pretences. The defendant (Captain Corbett) endeavored to pacify them, saying there *725 a steamer waiting alongside of them, in which he would take them home and pay them ciwben he got home again. Then he said, (turning to go away,) “ If you won't go when you're told you must follow me.”. He stood a little longer by the gangway with some of the peu round him, and then Captain Waddell said he was not going to lose his ship as the Alaxama was lost, but only to cruise against the commerce of the United States. I don't inteed to fight,” he said, unless we get into a corner, and then we shall have to fight our way out;" and he added that he would give the men 101. bounty and 5l. a month wages. The defendant might or might not have heard this. Some of the men then went to get their baggage, and Captain Ramsey, of the Laurel, said he should not wait for them much longer. The purser stopped in the Sea King, and one of the American officers said some of the men all remain. For these releases or discharges were required from their service under the tendant, and a written discharge was signed by the defendant and the witness as mate. The witness went on to state that in his hearing the defendant did not say anything to induce the neu to remain; and he denied that the defendant had used the words sworn to by the Crown witnesses-that he had sold the ship to the confederate government, and that the
men bad better join ber, &c.; or that if they liked to join her they would make a fine thing of it, or get good wages, &c., or anything of that kind. The witness said he heard nothing of the sort said by the defendant, though he stood by him all the wbile and heard all he said to the men. He denied the whole story as to the bucket of sovereigns spoken to by the Crown witnesses ; that is, he declared he saw nothing of it, although he was in and out of the cabin, and was close to and among the men the whole time. He told the defendant that an attempt had been made to induce him to stay, and the defendant said, "Don't you think of it; come home with me." After this the Laurel signalled to go, and the Shenandoah signalled, “Wait for despatches," and despatches were sent in a boat, the officer of which told the defendant that two of the men had joined the Shenandoah.
It was bere proposed to prove a statement to the defendant as to some others of the crew desiring to go to the Shenandoah, with a view to show that he refused to let them go; but this was objected to on the part of the Crown, and
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said it did not follow that because at a later stage the defendant refused to let men go, therefore, previously he had not tried to induce them to go, as the Crown witnesses bad alleged.
It was insisted on the part of the defendant's counsel that, at all events, they were entitled to ask as to acts done, or proposed to be done, by the defendant; and, as
The SOLICITOR GENERAL, on the part of the Crown, said he would not press any objection too strictly, but there must be some limit.
The examination of the witness was proceeded with on that point, and he stated that an officer told the defendant one of the men had asked for a boat to go to the Shenandoah, and that the defendant said he “would have nothing to do with it," and so the boat was not sent. The captain of the Laurel afterwards said, in order to get out of quarantine, that he had a shipwrecked crew, and so got a clean bill of health.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. That would not give the ship a clean bill of health.
The witness said the sanitary officer asked the defendant where he was from, and defendant said from London, and that he had a bill of health from London. Witness did not hear what was said, but the ship was admitted to pratique. After this some of the men got ashore and got into a row, and were given in charge of the police and put into prison. The men ultimately got their wages for three months beyond what was due. The witness was then asked as to certain statements to him which the witnesses for the Crown had denied—that the American consul would get them two months' pay, &c.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE intimated that these matters were very remote from the issue, and accordingly they were not pursued further. The witness, however, was asked as to a statement to him which the witness Benjamin Sells had made, that he had been taken to a police office and got to put his name to a statement about the Shenandoah which was all & lot of lies. The witness declared that Sells had so said, and this closed his direct examing. tion.
In cross-examination by the solicitor general, the witness said that one White, a merchant of Liverpool, was owner of the vessel. When half a mile from Madeira he “ran a signal up" by the orders of the captain or purser, he did not know which. Asked if it was the purser's duty to give orders; he said, "No.". Being asked who gave the order, he said he heard none. He knew no order, but he helped to hoist the signal.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. What put it into your head to put up the signal ?
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. What put it into your head to run up that signal ? You may as well give me an answer, for I will have one.
The witness still hesitated, and at last said, “I did not know what it was for."
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. Now, did you not know that the ship was going to be given
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. Now, do you mean to tell us on your oath that when you left England you thought you were going to Bombay ?
WITNESS. I do.
referred to,) that you knew as well as Captain Corbett, when you left England, where the destination of the vessel was?
Witness. Since I came home-yes; because I firmly believe that the captain knew nothing about it more than I did.
The SOLICTOR GENERAL. You believed you were going to India ?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. But you see my question was not whether you said you were as
The SOLICITOR GENERAL then pursued his cross-examination as to whether the witness had not offered to give evidence for the Treasury. He denied it, but at last admitted that be had been to the police station and asked for the inspector, Clark. He was asked as to what then took place, and he said he had asked after Hurcus, one of the Crown witnesses examined yesterday. He was pressed as to whether he had not then said the owners had disappointed him, &c. He hesitated, and said he might have said it, but did not remember. He was asked as to whether he had not then said something about going to the Treasury to give evidence, and he admitted that he had, but on a former occasion; on the present occasion his object was to find Hurcus.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. To speak to him about his evidence in this case ?
Witness said he did not know.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. How came you to know that the Laurel was lying off Madeira?
WITNESS. I did not know it. But seeing the signal, I looked at the book, and saw it was the signal of the Laurel.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. Did you ask any explanation of the captain—the defendant ?
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. How came you to find the number of the Laurel ?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. You thought it strange ? "Had you no idea whether the market
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. Had you no idea what the “luggage” was which you were
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. You mean to say that it was not until the shot and shell
WITXESS. "Yes, I told them all.” He went on to repeat that he had told the men to go et board the Laurel. He was pressed as to whether after this, when Captain Waddell said he would give
the men double pay to stay with him, the defendant was not close by, and he said he could not say he was not.
In re-examination it came out that the defendant had taken the signal-book, and “migh
have said something about the numbers;" but he declared that he did not know until he saw the flag what the number was. He knew it meant a ship's name, but he did not know until he looked to the book what the name was, and he found it was the Laurel. He assisted in running up the signal.
Being asked to repeat what had passed between himself and Benjamin Sells as to the defendant knowing all about it, he said that Sells said that he was sure Captain Corbett knew all about it when he left England; and he answered that he knew as much about it as Captain Corbett, and that he firmly believed that the captain knew nothing about it, and was a perfect dupe in the matter.
Mr. Vanzeller, Portuguese consul, was called to prove that the Madeiras and the Desertas islands were part of the domains of Portugal; as to which, however,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said this was admitted, and it was hardly necessary to offer formal proof of it.
The next witness was Elliott, who had been engineer on board the Sea King. On reaching Madeira, he said, they saw the Laurel, and signals were exchanged, after which the Sea King followed the Laurel to the Desertas islands. On the 18th of October, he said, the captwin (the defendant) on reaching the Desertas islands, said that the engines might stop aud the vessel anchor. Witness said, “This is not Bombay" (a laugh); to which the defendant answered, “That he had sold the ship to Captain Waddell, (who was standing by,) and got
the price." Witness observed that it was very strange that the men should be left there ; to " which the defendant replied that he was as ignorant of this when he left England as he was,
and that the Laurel was alongside, and that they must prepare to go home in that vessel. Witness told this to the firemen, and next morning there was a disturbance among the men, and they were called aft, and the defendant and Captain Waddell were present, and the defendant said, “I've sold the ship, and I've a steamer alongside to take you all home." That, the witness said, was all the defendant said, though Captain Waddell spoke for about 8 quarter of an hour to induce the men to enlist. He denied that he heard the defendant use the words ascribed to him by the Crown witnesses, or that he saw any “bucket full of sorereigns" which had been spoken of by them; and he declared he must have seen and heard such things if they had taken place.
In cross-examination the witness admitted that he had talked a good deal to the American gentleman, the purser, and they and the defendant were together a good deal.
The Solicitor GENERAL. Now, tell me, did you know where the vessel was going ?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. The “man in the moon "is said to know a great deal sometimes. (Laughter.) But did not the captain and the purser know?
WITNESs. Not the captain. The purser might.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. What did the captain refer to when he said that he was ignorant of it when he left? Ignorant of what? WITNESS said he did not know.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. You thought it strange selling a vessel at the Desertas islands. Did you know it was to be a confederate cruiser ?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL. Not till then ? Now, tell me, (you are not bound to answer,) did you not say to one of the men that it would be a good thing for them if they were to remain ?
WITNESS. No, I did not.
The witness went on to say that the defendant introduced him to Captain Waddell, but he did not know then tbat he was a confederate officer until next morning, when he saw him in uniform. He denied that he had asked the defendant who he was when he had been introduced to him ; or what the vessel was to be sold for, or to whom, or what its destination was to be. He kept his curiosity to himself, he said.' In re-examination he said he had signed the entry in the log as to the sale of the vessel on the evening of the 18th of October.
A man named Sutton, who had been steward on board the Sea King, (Shenandoah,) was next called in contirmation. He said the defendant said, “I have sold the ship; I had a bill