Rensselaer Union, Volume 6, Number 15, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 1 January 1874 — Attorney-General Williams’ Opinion Regarding the Virginias. [ARTICLE]

Attorney-General Williams’ Opinion Regarding the Virginias.

' tWiamxoroK, December 22. The following is the opinion of AttorneyGeneral Williams in the Virginius case: Depabtment or Justice, I Washington, December 17. f The Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State: Sib: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th Inst., submitting tp me a large number of documents and depositions, and askiug for my opinion as to whether or not the Virginias at the time of her capture by the Spanish man-of-war Tornado was entitled to carry the flag of the United States, and whether or not she wmcarrying it improperly and without right at that time. These questions arise under the protocol of the 3Vth ultimo between tbe Spanish Minister and the Secretary of State, in which, among other things, it was agreed to that on the 25th Inst. Spain shall salute the flag of the United States; but it is further provided that if Spain should prove to the satisfaction of the United States that the Viaginius was not entitled to carry the flag of the United States, and was harrying it at the time other capture without right and improperly, the salute will be dispensed with, as in such case it not being necessarily requtrable, but the United States will expect In such case a disclaimer of intent of indignity to its flag in the act which was committed. Section lof the act of Dec. 81, 1702, provides that ships or vessels registered pursuant to such act, and no other except such as shall be duly qualified according to law for carrying on the coasting trade, and denominated or deemed ships or vessels of the United Btates, shall be entitled to the benefit and privileges

appertaining to such ships. Section 4of the aum« act provides for an oath by which, among other things, to obtain registry of a vessel, the owner is required to answer that there la not a subject or citizen of any foreign prince or State, directly or indirectly, by way of trust, confidence, or otherwise, interested in such ship or vessel, or in the profits or issues thereof. Obviously, therefore, no vessel in which a foreigner is direel ly or indirectly interested is entitled to a United States registry, and if one is obtained by false oath as to that point, and the fact is that the vessel ia owned or partly owned by foreigners, she cannot be deemed a vessel of tho United States, nor entitled to the benefits or privileges appertaining to such vessels. The Virginius was registered in New York on the 26th of September, 1870, in the name of Patterson, who made oath as required by law: but depositions submitted abundantly show that in fact Patterson was not the owner at that time, but that the vessel was the property of certain Cuban citizens in New York, who furnished the necessary funds for her purchase. J. E. Shepherd, who commanded the said vessel when she left New York with a certificate of her register in the name of Patterson, testified positively that he entered into an agreement to command said vessel at an interview between Quesada, Mora, Patterson, and others, at which it was distinctly understood that the Virginius belonged to Quesada, Mora, and other Cubans, and that said Mora exhibited to him receipts fur the purchase money and for repairs and supplies upon said steamer, and explained to him how the said funds were raised among Cubans in New York. Adolpho de Varona, who was Secretary of the Cuban mission in New York at the time the Virginius was purchased, and afterward sailed in her as Quesada’s Chief of Staff, testifies that he was acquainted with all the details of the transactions, and knows that the Virginius was purchased with the funds of Cubans, and with the understanding and arrangement that Patterson should appear as the nominal owner because foreigners could not obtain a United States register for a vessel Francis Bowes, Charles Smith, Edward Greenwood, John McCann, Mathew Murohy, Am brose Rawlings, Thomas Gallagher, John Furlong, Thomas Anderson, and George W. Miller, who were. employed upon the Virginius in various capacities after she was registered in the name of Patterson, testify clearly to the effect that they were informed, and understood while they were on the vessel, that she belonged to Quesada and Cubans represented by him, and that he navigated, controlled, and treated such vessel in all respects as though it was his property. Nothing appears to weaken the force of this testimony, though the witnesses were generally subjected to cross-examination; but, on the contrary, all the circumstances of the case tend to its corroboration. With the oath for registry the statute requires a bond id be given, signed by the owner, captain, and one or more sureties; but there were no sureties upou the bond given by Patterson & Shepherd. Pains have been taken to ascertain if there was any insurance upon the vessel, but nothing of the kind has been found; and Quesada, Verona, and other Cubans who took passage upon the Virginiua, instead of going on board at the wharf in the usual way, went aboard off a tug after the vessel had left the harbor of New York. - I cannot do otherwise than to hold, upon this evidence, that Patterson’s oath was false, and that the register obtained in his name was a fraud upon the navigation laws of the United States. Assuming the question to be whaj. appears to conform to the intent of the protocol whether or not the Virginius, at the time of her capture, had a right as against the United States to carry the American flag, I am of the opinion that she had no such right, because she had not been registered according to law; but I am also of the opinion that she was as much exempt from interference on Ihe high seas by another power, on that ground, as though she had been lawfully registered. Spain, no doubt, has a right to capture a vessel with an American register, and carrying the American Hag, found in her own waters assisting orendeavoriug to assist the insurrection in Cuba; but sbe lias no right to capture such a vessel on the high seas upon an apprehension that, in violation of the neutrality of the navigation laws of the United States, she was on her way to assist such rebellion. Spain may defend her territory and her people from hostile action from what is or appears to be an American vessel, but she has no jurisdiction whatever over the question as to whether or not such vessel is on the high seas in violation of any law of -the United States. Spain cannot rightfully raise that question as to the Virginius, hut the United States may, and as 1 understand the protocol they have agreed to do it and be governed by that agreement; and, without admitting that Spain would otherwise have any interest In the question, I decide that the Virginius at the time of her capture was without right, and improperly, carrying the American flag. Very Respectfully,

GEORGE H. WILLIAMS ,

Attorney General.