1. A neutral vessel at anchor, completely laden with a neutral
cargo, on the neutral side of a river dividing neutral from hostile
water, washing a blockaded coast, was captured as being subject to
just suspicion of an intent to break the blockade.
2. The captain of the vessel (who was however absent at the time
of capture)
Page 72 U. S. 181
and the mate, being examined
in preparatorio, testified
that she was in neutral waters when captured. A stevedore, yet on
board, that she had drifted to the place where she was taken under
stress of weather, he not knowing whether when captured she was in
neutral waters or not.
Held that this preliminary
testimony warranted restoration.
3. Further proof having been allowed, it appeared that the
vessel, when captured, was a quarter or a half mile within the
hostile waters, the mate admitting this fact but testifying that
the vessel had drifted to the spot, its anchor and chain being too
light, and he expressing as one reason for not returning to the
former anchorage as soon as the wind became fair that the captain
was in port (about 36 miles distant) with the ship's papers and
that he did not like to move the vessel without orders, and as
another that the ship was fully laden and ready to sail, and had
been seen by two blockading men-of-war, which did not disturb her,
and that he thought the vessel might safely remain where she was
till the captain returned, the mate proposing also, if not
captured, to return at once to the anchorage from which he had
drifted. On this,
Held that the case for the captors was not improved by
the further proof, and that with the restitution costs and expenses
to be paid by the captors, was to be decreed.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE stated the case and delivered the opinion of
the Court.
The bark
Teresita was captured near the mouth of the
Rio Grande on the 16th of November, 1863, by the United States
steamer
Granite City. The cargo consisted of one hundred
and fifty-eight bales of cotton.
She was brought into New Orleans for adjudication, and upon
hearing the district court directed restitution of the vessel and
cargo.
There was no question of the neutrality of the ship or her
cargo, but it was claimed for the captors that she was in Texan
waters when captured, and therefore subject to just suspicion of
intent to break the blockade.
The captain and the mate of the ship, in their preparatory
Page 72 U. S. 182
depositions, testified that she was in Mexican waters, but the
captain, being on shore at the time, could not be certainly
informed as to this. A stevedore who had been employed on board the
vessel and had not been discharged testified that she had drifted
to the place where she was taken under stress of weather. He did
not know whether she was then in Texan or American waters. Her full
cargo had been taken in at her former anchorage.
The preliminary hearing took place on this evidence, which
doubtless warranted restitution.
Further proof, however, was allowed. It consisted of depositions
by the captain and some other officers of the
Granite City
to the effect that the
Teresita, when captured, was a
quarter or half a mile north of the line, according to the bearings
by the compass, and that the mate admitted that she was in Texan
waters. But the same deposition showed that the mate declared that
his vessel had drifted to the spot, his anchor and chain being too
light, and assigned as one reason for not returning to the former
anchorage as soon as the wind became fair that the captain was at
Matamoras with the ship's papers, and he did not like to move the
vessel without orders, and as another that the ship was fully laden
and ready to sail, and had been seen by two American men-of-war,
which did not disturb her, and he thought therefore that she might
safely remain where she was till the captain returned. It appeared
also that the mate proposed, if not captured, to return at once to
the anchorage from which he had drifted.
We are of opinion that under such circumstances temporary
anchorage in waters occupied by the blockading vessels does not
justify capture in the absence of other grounds. The case for the
captors was not improved by the further proof. The decree of
restitution must be affirmed, and we shall direct the costs and
expenses to be paid by the captors.
Decree and direction accordingly.
