on. The confederate flag was hoisted after we left the ship. We then came down to Teneriffe. The above has been read over to me, and is correct and true. Statement of the circumstances under which the British vessel Sea King, official No. 48547, of London, has been sold by Mr. P. S. Corbett, the master thereof. The above vessel left London on the 19th of October, 1864, bound to Bombay, calling at port or ports on the passage. The cargo consisted of coals and provisions for the voyage. There were no munitions of war whatever on board. I held a certificate of sale from the owner. On the 19th of October I sold the said ship, receiving the amount agreed upon as per bill of sale. I am not aware that by the said sale I in any way infringed the foreign-enlistment act. (Signed) P. S. CORBETT. HENRY C. GRATTAN, Consul. The law-officers of the Crown were forthwith requested to advise the government as to the course which should be taken in relation to the facts stated in the above report. On the 14th November, 1864, the law-officers reported their opinion as follows: 2 The law-officers of the Crown to Earl Russell. LINCOLN'S INN, November 14, 1864. MY LORD: We are honored with your lordship's commands signified in Mr. Layard's letter of the 12th instant, stating that he was directed by your lordship to transmit to us a copy of a dispatch received on the 12th instant from Her Majesty's consul at Teneriffe, reporting the circumstances under which a number of men had been landed at that port from the British steamer Laurel, and the part taken by that vessel in the equipment at sea of the British steamer Sea King as a vessel of war for the government of the so-called Confederate States. That Mr. Consul Grattan states that he had taken the depositions on oath of four of the seamen of the Sea King, who were landed from the Laurel, and that he had deemed it proper to send Captain Corbett to England in safe custody to answer a charge of having infringed the foreign-enlist ment act. That your lordship had ascertained that the depositions had not yet reached the Board of Trade, and that your lordship was unable, therefore, at present, to submit them for our consideration; and Mr. Layard was directed, however, to send us at once the consul's dispatch, as well as a copy of a telegram received at the Board of Trade, announcing the arrival of twenty-two of the men at Liverpool, and to request that we would take these papers into consideration, and furnish your lordship with our advice as to the course which should be adopted by Her Majesty's government in this matter. We are also honored with Mr. Layard's letter of this day's date, forwarding the depositions in the case of the Sea King. In obedience to your lordship's commands we have taken these papers into consideration, and have the honor to report That we think the depositions taken at Teneriffe, and forwarded to Her Majesty's government by Mr. Consul Grattan, do not support the conclusion arrived at by the consul, that Captain Corbett (whom we understand to have been in command of the Sea King until she was handed over to certain agents of the Confederate States off Desertas) is chargeable with any offense against the foreign-enlistment act. To constitute an offense under the seventh (the equipment) clause of that act, there must have been an equipment, &c., with a view to employment in the belligerent [140] service of a foreign power, within some part of the United Kingdom, or of Her Majesty's dominions beyond the seas. In like manner, to constitute an offense (by a person not himself enlisting, &c.) under the second section such person must have been concerned within the United Kingdom, or in some part of Her Majesty's dominions elsewhere, in inducing or procuring others to enlist, &c., or to go, of to agree to go, or embark for some part of Her Majesty's dominions for the purpose of 1Appendix, vol. 1, p. 481. 2 Ibid, p. 482. with intent to be enlisted, &c.; and to constitute an offense under the sixth section, the master or other person in command of a ship or vessel in some part of the United Kingdom, or of Her Majesty's dominions beyond the seas, must knowingly and willingly have taken, or engaged to take, on board persons who had enlisted, or had agreed, &c., to enlist, &c., or who were departing from Her Majesty's dominions for the purpose and with the intent of enlisting, &c. In every one of these cases the criminal act must have been committed within some part of "Her Majesty's dominions," a word which, as here used, does not, in our opinion, include a British ship on the high seas. But all the facts mentioned in these depositions appear to have taken place upon the high seas, beyond the limits of Her Majesty's territory. It is, indeed, not improbable that in the preparation of the Sea King for her voyage (if she went to sea under Captain Corbett's command from any port in this country) an offense against the seventh section of the act may have been committel. It is also possible that the officers and men, or some of them, may have been hired and taken on board in this country with a view to employment in the confederate service, so as to constitute offenses against the second and sixth sections, or one of them. But there is no evidence to support either of these conclusions in the depositions taken at Teneriffe by Consul Grattan. All, therefore, that we can now advise your lordship to do is to direct that the twenty-two men, or some of them, who have just landed at Liverpool, be immediately examined by the solicitor to the treasury, or some person deputed by him, and their evidence reported to us; and that the solicitor be directed to obtain such other information as may be accessible in this country with respect to the previous history of the Sea King, the nature and circumstances of her equipment, the engagements of her crew, and the persons concerned therein, if there should be reason to believe that she sailed from this country with the view of being employed as a ship of war in the confederate service. We have, &c., ROUNDELL PALMER. The lords commissioners of the treasury were requested to give immediate directions to their solicitor, in conformity with the concluding paragraph of the law-officers' report. On the 19th November, 1864, Earl Russell received from Mr. Adams a note, submitting for Earl Russell's consideration a copy of a letter from Mr. Dudley relating to the Sea King, together with copies of two depositions made by seamen who had shipped on board of that vessel in the port of London, and who had returned to England from Teneriffe in the mail steamer Calabar. These depositions, though containing some statements which were clearly erroneous, confirmed, in general, the truth of those sent to the foreign office by Consul Grattan. With reference to the original hiring, one of the deponents, John Hereus, deposed as follows:2 On or about the 25th of September last past, I and John Wilson, a ship's carpenter, were looking for a ship in London, and went on board the steamship Sea King, lying in the East India dock, and spoke to the chief mate. He pointed out the captain, whose name, we were informed, was Corbett, and we spoke to him about going on the ship. He asked us if we were single men, and said he wanted all single men if he could get them. He told me that the ship would be ready in ten days or a fortnight, and if I liked to wait he would give me the chance. He asked the carpenter if he could come to work at once, and he agreed to do so, and went to work the next morning. On or about the 5th of October I went to the Sailors' Home, and there signed articles as able seaman at £2 10s. a month for a voyage to Bombay, thence to any port or ports in the Indian Ocean, or China Seas, Japan or Australian Colonies, Pacific or Atlantic Oceans, and back to a port in the United Kingdom, voyage not to exceed two Tears. I received a note for a month's advance, which I got cashed at Isabella Calder's, No. 6 Bird street, East London. On Friday, the 7th of October, I took my clothes on board, when we were told she was not going until Saturday morning, the 8th. The other deponent, who was the John Wilson referred to in Herçus's Appendix, vol. 1, p. 484. 2 Ibid., p. 486. statement, deposed to a like effect as to both the terms and the mode of hiring. With reference to the persuasions used in order to induce the men to enlist in the service of the Confederate States, the said John Wilson deposed as follows:1 After we had finished taking in the things from the Laurel, the mate came and called all hands aft, and said the captain wanted to see us. We all went and gathered round the cabin-doors, and Captain Corbett came out and said, "Well, meu, [141] I have sold the ship to the confederates; she is to *belong to their navy, to be a cruiser, to burn and destroy merchant-vessels and whalers in particular. She is not to fight, but merely to take prizes, and there will be a first-rate chance for any of you young men who will stop by the vessel, and I should advise you all to do it.' The general reply made by the men was that we did not want anything to do with her. The new captain then came out of the cabin and asked if we would not join. He was dressed in a gray uniform. Captain Corbett introduced the man when he came out as the American officer who was to have the command of the ship, but did not mention his name; said he would pay the seaman £4 per month, and £10 bounty. One of the engineers, one of the firemen, and two of the seamen consented to join, and took the bounty and signed the articles. The officer in uniform, when he came out to us, announced that the Sea King was now the Shenandoah of the confederate navy. Liquor had been served among the men, during the time we were making the transfer, in profusion. Some were under its influence. It was brought round twice after we got through, and offered to the men. They made great efforts to induce the men to jou. They raised the wages to £7 and £15 bounty for able seamen. They offered me £16 a month and £15 bounty. I declined to accept it, or to stop with them on any terms. A bucket of sovereigns was brought out on the deck to tempt the men to jojn. A portion of the crew of the Laurel joined. The person whom Captain Corbett introduced to us as the commander of the Shenandoah came out on the Laurel; there were a number of others who also came out on the Laurel; I should say about forty. We left them on board the Shenandoah. Some were acting as officers. One of them, pointing at the commander, who was standing on the deck, said he was Captain Semmes. Hercus deposed to the same effect. Describing the inducements offered to the men, he said:2 I said I should not join, but four others said they would. One was a fireman, one an engineer, and two were ordinary seamen. They were under the influence of liquor, which had been supplied freely to all who would take it since we commenced taking in the guns. When they found us unwilling to go the wages and bounty were increased, until we were offered £7 a month, and £16 bounty, and to sign the articles for six mouths. A bucket containing sovereigus was brought on deck, and the officers took up handfuls to tempt the men on deck. The four who consented to go went into the cabin, and I afterwards saw one of them with twenty-eight sovereigns in his hand. He added: When the American officers who came from the Laurel to the Sea King were trying to persuade us to go in her, they said, “You had better go in the Shenandoah,” (which the Sea King was to be called.) They promised us the best of living, and said that the best of the provisions would be taken out of the prizes, and all that were then aboard which were no good would be thrown overboard. It was stated by the deponents that the officers who had gone ont in the Sea King, including the captain, returned in the Calabar to England. The only exception was one of the engineers. The statement that Captain Semmes was on board of the Sea King was erroneous. The copies of depositions sent by Mr. Adams were immediately laid before the law-officers of the Crown, who, on the 1st of December, 1864, advised thereon as follows:3 The law-officers of the Crown to Earl Russell. LINCOLN'S INN, December 1, 1864. MY LORD: We are honored with your lordship's commands signified in Mr. Hammond's letter of the 19th ultimo, stating that, with reference to our report of the 15th November, he was directed by your lordship to transmit to us a letter from Mr. Adams, inclosing copies of the depositions of two men who lately formed part of the crew of the Sea King, and to request that we would take these papers into our consideration, and favor your lordship with such observations as we might have to offer there проп. Mr. Hammond was also pleased to state that we should observe from the accompanying draught of a letter to the treasury that the lords commissioners have been requested to instruct their solicitor to take the depositions, and to proceed in this case in other respects in the manner recommended in our report; and that a dispatch of Mr. Consul Grattan was also inclosed. In obedience to your lordship's commands we have taken these papers into our consideration, and have the honor to report That, in our opinion, the depositions now forwarded by Mr. Adams are sufficient to prove that Captain Corbett did in this country engage and procure the deponents to serve as sailors on board the Sea King, which ship, from the whole of the evidence in the case, we infer to have been then a vessel intended by him to be used (after she should have been taken to the Azores) in the confederate service. These facts raise questions similar to those which were involved in the cases of the seamen on board the Georgia and Rappahannock, except that none of these particular deponents accepted the confederate service when the true object of the voyage was disclosed to them. Those questions, upon the construction of the act, are not free from difficulty; but in some of the other cases convictions have been obtained and submitted to; and we think that, even if there were no other point arising upon his acts when he handed over the [142] ship to her confederate commander, it would be proper, upon this evidence, that Captain Corbett should be prosecuted for a violation of the second section of the act, by procuring, or attempting to procure these men, and others unknown, to serve and be employed, &c., or to go and embark from Liverpool for the purpose, or with intent to serve or to be employed, &c., contrary to that section. We further think, on more deliberate consideration, that if the Sea King ought to be deemed (as, prima facie, we think she may be) to have been still a British ship when Captain Corbett endeavored to induce the men on board her to accept the confederate service, the question whether her deck was not then "a place belonging or subject to Her Majesty" is a serious one, which ought also to be raised by the indictinent. In our former report, we stated that we did not think a British merchant-ship at sea was included within Her Majesty's "dominions," in the sense of the act; but in the second clause there are also the other and larger words above noticed, to which we did not then advert, and which might, perhaps, receive a more extensive construction. We have, &c., ROUNDELL PALMER. Proceedings were accordingly directed to be taken against the master of the Sea King. He was arrested, in January, 1865, brought before a magistrate, committed for trial, and in November of the same year tried before the lord chief justice and a special jury, on the charge of having, either within the United Kingdom or on the high seas, enlisted British subjects, or incited them to enlist in the service of the Confederate States. The evidence produced at the trial was very conflicting. Several witnesses who had sailed in the ship were examined for the defense. These witnesses contradicted on material points the evidence given in support of the prosecution, and the statements contained in the foregoing depositions, and stated on oath that Corbett took no part in the endeavors made to induce the men to enlist, and that the persuasion used was used solely by the Americans who presented themselves as confederate officers. The chief justice put to the jury the question whether the defendant did, in fact, attempt to enlist the men or procure them to enlist, reserving any questions of law which might be raised on the part of the defense, in case the answer should be in the affirmative. The jury returned a verdict of "not guilty." The first mate of the Sea King, Charles Easman, who was examined for the defense, gave evidence, in the course of his examination, as follows: I was second mate of the Sea King when I sailed in her on her first voyage. I was first mate on her when she was sold to the confederates. Mr. R. Wright was her owner. She was to go to Bombay, and nothing was said as to her ultimate destination. She took in 850 tons of coal. It was an ordinary cargo, and coals at that time paid the best freight. She had forty-five hands the first voyage, and forty-seven the second. The steward of the ship, John R. Brown, who was also examined for the defense, stated that when she left London there was nothing out of the usual course in her stores which might lead to the supposition that she had any other destination than the East Indies. In cross-examination, he said, "Steamers often take cargoes of coal to the East Indies. She had nearly as many coals on board as she could carry. It is not an unusual thing to send a power of sale with ships going on a long voyage." With the view of obtaining further information respecting the Sea King, Mr. Hammond, on the 27th January, 1865, wrote to Messrs. Robertson & Co., of London, who had originally been part owners and managing owners of the ship. Mr. Hammond's letter and the answer returned by Messrs. Robertson & Co. were respectively as follows: Mr. Hammond to Messrs. Robertson & Co. FOREIGN OFFICE, January 27, 1865. GENTLEMEN: I am directed by Earl Russell to state to you that his lordship has been informed that the Shenandoah, a full-rigged ship of 1,100 tons and 250 horse-power, now stated to belong to the government of the so-called Confederate States, was formerly in the possession of your firm, at which time she bore the name of the Sea King; and I am directed to inquire whether you have any objection to inform his lordship of the circumstances under which you sold the vessel, and particularly whether she was sold to an agent of the so-called confederate government. I am, &c., (Signed) [143] * Messrs. Robertson & Co. to Mr. Hammond. E. HAMMOND. 5 NEWMAN'S COURT, CORNHILL, LONDON, January 28, 1865. SIR: We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of yesterday, and to inform you that the Sea King was sold by us to a British subject, a Mr. Wright, of Liverpool, through the agency of Messrs. Curry, Kellock & Co., of Liverpool, brokers, in the usual way, and that the bill of sale, &c., passed through Her Majesty's customs in due order. After the sale of the vessel we had nothing whatever to do with her, and she remained in dock for some weeks, and was entered out for Bombay, which port we were informed was to be her destination. We are not aware, nor have we any knowledge, that any confederate agent had anything to do with the ship during her stay in this country. The Sea King was only 150 horse-power, and not, as stated in your letter, 250. We have, &c., (Signed) ROBERTSON & CO. On inquiry it appeared that the Sea King was a screw-steamer, built at Glasgow in the year 1863, with a view to employment in the China trade. She was originally owned in shares by several part owners, Messrs. Robertson & Co., of London, acting as managing owners. She sailed from London, in November, 1863, for New Zealand and the China Seas, carrying troops for Her Majesty's government to Auckland, whence she proceeded to Hankow, and returned to London with a cargo of tea. In September, 1864, she was sold to a Mr. Richard Wright, a ship-owner of Liverpool. Wright, on the 7th November, 1864, granted a certificate of sale to P. S. Corbett, the master of the ship, by which he was empowered to sell her at any port out of the United Kingdom for a price not less than £45,000, within six months after the date of the certificate. When originally fitted out by Robertson & Co., and when sold by them to Wright, she had on board two ordinary 12-pounder carronades intended 1 1 Appendix, vol. i, p. 497. |