Part 3 (1/2)
On October 21st, 1862, a large s.h.i.+p was seen carrying a cloud of canvas, and running with great speed before the wind. The reefs of the Alabama's topsails were shaken out and preparations made to set the topgallant sails in case it should be necessary, and the cruiser ran down diagonally toward the stranger's path. She was p.r.o.nounced ”Yankee” long before she came within gunshot, and as she drew near a blank cartridge brought her to the wind. The admirable seamans.h.i.+p displayed in bringing her to a speedy halt called forth the praise of even the Alabama's captain, and one can only wonder that some of her master's skill was not expended in avoiding this suspicious steamer idling in mid-ocean. The British flag she wore could hardly deceive anybody, after the tales which were told by the captains who were taken into Boston on the Emily Farnum. But doubtless Captain Saunders relied upon the fact that his cargo was well covered with consular certificates, remembering that the Farnum had escaped by having a cargo which was owned abroad.
The prize proved to be the Lafayette, from New York, laden with grain for Belfast, Ireland. Captain Saunders readily obeyed the order of the boarding officer to go on board the Alabama with his s.h.i.+p's papers. He was shown into the presence of Captain Semmes, and produced his British consular certificate, with the remark that he supposed that was sufficient protection. After a hasty examination, Semmes said:
”New Yorkers are getting smart, but it won't save it. It's a d--d hatched up mess.”
The Lafayette was burned.
The decree of the ”Confederate Prize Court,” which seems to have comprehended neither more nor less than the Alabama's commander, was in this case as follows:
CASE OF THE LAFAYETTE.
The s.h.i.+p being under the enemy's flag and register, is condemned.
With reference to the cargo, there are certificates, prepared in due form and sworn to before the British consul, that it was purchased, and s.h.i.+pped on neutral account. These _ex parte_ statements are precisely such as every unscrupulous merchant would prepare, to deceive his enemy and save his property from capture. There are two s.h.i.+pping houses in the case; that of Craig & Nicoll and that of Montgomery Bros. Messrs. Craig & Nicoll say that the grain s.h.i.+pped by them belongs to Messrs. Shaw & Finlay and to Messrs. Hamilton, Megault & Thompson, all of Belfast, in Ireland, to which port the s.h.i.+p is bound, but the grain is not consigned to them, and they could not demand possession of it under the bill of lading. It is, on the contrary, consigned to the order of the s.h.i.+ppers; thus leaving the possession and control of the property in the hands of the s.h.i.+ppers.
Farther: The s.h.i.+ppers, instead of sending this grain to the pretended owners in a general s.h.i.+p consigned to them, they paying freight as usual, have chartered the whole s.h.i.+p, and stipulated themselves for the payment of all the freights. If this property had been, _bona fide_, the property of the parties in Belfast, named in the depositions, it would undoubtedly have gone consigned to them in a bill of lading authorizing them to demand possession of it; and the agreement with the s.h.i.+p would have been that the consignees and owners of the property should pay the freight upon delivery. But even if this property were purchased, as pretended, by Messrs. Craig & Nicoll for the parties named, still, their not consigning it to them and delivering them the proper bill of lading, pa.s.sing the possession, left the property in the possession and under the dominion of Craig & Nicoll, and as such liable to capture. See 3 Phillimore on International Law, 610, 612, to the effect that if the goods are going on account of the s.h.i.+pper or subject to his order or control, they are good prize. They cannot even be sold and transferred to a neutral _in transitu_. They must abide by their condition at the time of the sailing of the s.h.i.+p.
The property attempted to be covered by the Messrs. Montgomery Bros, is s.h.i.+pped by Montgomery Bros., of New York, and consigned to Montgomery Bros., in Belfast. Here the consignment is all right. The possession of the property has legally pa.s.sed to the Belfast house.
But when there are two houses of trade doing business as partners, and one of them resides in the enemy's country, the other house, though resident in a neutral country, becomes also enemy, _quoad_ the trade of the house in the enemy's country, and its share in any property belonging to the joint concern is subject to capture, equally with the share of the house in the enemy's country. To this point see 3 Phillimore, 605. Cargo condemned.
The next batch of prizes consisted of the Crenshaw, captured on the 26th of October, the Lauretta captured on the 28th, and the Baron de Castine on the 29th. The Crenshaw brought New York papers containing resolutions denouncing the ”pirates,” which had been introduced in the New York Chamber of Commerce by a Mr. Low, who was a member of that body, and had lost considerable property on account of the depredations of the Alabama.
The cargoes of the Crenshaw and Lauretta were covered by certificates of foreign owners.h.i.+p, but these were bunglingly gotten up, and evidently made only for the purpose of avoiding condemnation, and Captain Semmes, being well versed in international law, was able to pick flaws in all of them.
The Baron de Castine was an old and not very valuable vessel, bound with lumber from the coast of Maine to Cuba. She was released on a ransom bond, and carried the crews of the Lafayette, Crenshaw, and Lauretta, together with the derisive compliments of Captain Semmes to Mr. Low, into the port of New York, then distant only two hundred miles. The other prizes were burned.
The advent of the Baron de Castine carried fresh dismay to the s.h.i.+pping interests along the Atlantic coast. The news that a foreign consular certificate could not be relied upon to furnish protection seemed to sound the death knell of trade carried on in American s.h.i.+ps. The representatives of the foreign governments whose seals had been defied were appealed to for a.s.sistance in putting an end to the career of the ”pirate.” The New York Commercial Advertiser published the following article:
Some important facts have just been developed in relation to the operations of the rebel privateer Alabama, and the present and prospective action of the British and other foreign governments, whose citizens have lost property by the piracies of her commander.
The depredations of the vessel involve the rights of no less than three European governments--England, Italy and Portugal--and are likely to become a subject of special interest to all maritime nations.
[Ill.u.s.tration: DESTROYING THE GRAIN FLEET.]
Already the capture and burning of the s.h.i.+p Lafayette, which contained an English cargo, has been the occasion of a correspondence between the British consul at this port, Mr.
Archibald, and Rear Admiral Milne, commanding the British squadron on the American coast; and it is stated (but we cannot vouch for the truth of the statement) that the admiral has dispatched three war vessels in pursuit of the pirate. The consul has also, we understand, communicated the facts of the case to the British government and Her Majesty's minister at Was.h.i.+ngton. What action will be taken by the British government remains to be seen.
The Lafayette sailed from this port with a cargo of grain for Belfast, Ireland. The grain was owned by two English firms of this city, and the facts were properly certified on the bills of lading under the British seal. * * *
But another case (that of the bark Lauretta) is about to be submitted for the consideration of the British authorities, as well as those of Italy and Portugal. The facts establish a clear case of piracy. The Lauretta, which had on board a cargo consisting princ.i.p.ally of flour and staves, was burned by Semmes on the 28th of October. She was bound from this port for the island of Madeira and the port of Messina, Italy. Nearly a thousand barrels of flour and also a large number of staves were s.h.i.+pped by Mr. H. J. Burden, a British subject residing in this city, to a relative in Funchal, Madeira. The bill of lading bore the British seal affixed by the consul, to whom the s.h.i.+pper was personally known. The other part of the cargo was s.h.i.+pped by Chamberlain, Phelps & Co. to the order of parties in Messina, and this property was also covered by the Italian consular certificates.
The Portuguese consul at this port also sent a package under seal to the authorities at Maderia, besides giving a right to enter the port and sending an open bill of lading.
Captain Wells' account of the manner in which Semmes disposed of these doc.u.ments, and which he has verified under oath, is not only interesting, but gives an excellent idea of the piratical intentions of the commander of the Alabama.
The papers of the bark were, at the command of Semmes, taken by Captain Wells on board the Alabama. There was no American cargo and therefore no American papers, except those of the vessel. These, of course, were not inquired into. Semmes took first the packet which bore the Portuguese seal, and with an air which showed that he did not regard it as of the slightest consequence, ripped it open, and threw it upon the floor, with the remark that he ”did not care a d--n for the Portuguese.” The Italian bill of lading was treated in a similar manner, except that he considered it unworthy even of a remark.
Taking up the British bill of lading and looking at the seal, Semmes called upon Captain Wells, with an oath, to explain. It was evidently the only one of the three he thought it worth his while to respect.