The Mersey. Notwithstanding the exceedingly positive assertion of the master, mate, and steward, in their examination in preparatorio, that no alteration or destruction of any papers on board had been made, the log is produced palpably mutilated by having the first leaf torn or cut from the paper book out of which the log is formed, so as to leave marks of writing or figuring visible upon the first page thereof, and leading to a strong presumption that other entries had also been made upon the second page, because that method of keeping the log is subsequently followed to the time of the capture of the vessel. The other half of that sheet, the left side of the outward one, remains entire, and the whole book is stitched through the middle folding of the same, the broken edge of the displaced leaf showing marks of writing still upon it outside of the stitching which fastened it. Two circumstances thus apparent on the face of the log, as it stands, demand clear explanation from the testimony of the master and mate. One is, why no regular entry is made by name of the port of departure on the voyage and of the port of destination, if really a fair trading adventure was contemplated between two neutral ports. Another particular gathered from the dismembered log contrasts very unfavorably with the positive averments of the master and mate in their examinations. The note on the bottom of the first written entry in the log represents the longitude of the vessel at the hour of her departure (10 a. m., Thursday, April 24, 1862) to be 79° 13', and on Saturday, April 26, when taken in tow by the captors, the entry represents the vessel to be in longitude 79° 33', only twenty minutes west of her point of departure, whilst the mate testifies that she was arrested about one hundred miles from land, and the master, in the face of that entry, swears he had no knowledge of the longitude of the place of her capture. It is moreover observable that the remarks heading the first two remaining pages of the log omit naming the month as well as the place of beginning of the voyage, leaving the implication very strong that those particulars, as well as others tending to shed light upon the enterprise, had been duly registered in the first opening of the log account thereof, and that the after leaves had been continued as if the preliminary facts and others characterizing the voyage were already duly recorded I therefore hold that, upon the evidence, the log must have been thoughtfully changed or spoliated, and that in judgment of law such alteration or suppression was made with intent to mislead and deceive with regard to the purpose of the voyage, and is, therefore, fraudulent, The Sarah. as against the rights of the United States as a belligerent power, and affords evidence of culpability which, coupled with other marks of disguised and dishonest practices, authorizes and demands the condemnation of the vessel and cargo. Without dwelling longer upon special points of law or fact in the case, the result is 1st. The vessel left Charleston as enemy property, and no attempted change of it to neutral property was made until her arrival in Nassau. There is no evidence of a bona fide consideration paid for her purchase, or of a bill of sale executed thereof, or of actual possession delivered to the alleged purchaser, or that he ever exercised acts of ownership over the vessel, or claimed to be her owner. 2d. She came out of Charleston by evading the blockade of the port, and was seized on her first voyage subsequent thereto. (The Christiansberg, 6 Ch. Rob., 376, 382, notes; The General Hamilton, 6 Ch. Rob., 62.) 3d. The alleged voyage from Nassau to Baltimore was simulated and unreal and was meant for a blockaded port. The mutilated log, the description of cargo on transportation, the mode of fitting out and conducting the enterprise, the notorious course of dealing and trade to and from Nassau since the war, and the misrepresentations in the log and in the testimony of the master and mate of the approach of the vessel, when captured, towards Charleston, are facts justifying strong suspicions of her integrity and honesty, and must prevail against her in the absence of exculpatory proof. For the causes indicated I adjudge the vessel and cargo confiscable in this suit, and decree their condemnation and forfeiture accordingly.* THE SLOOP SARAH AND CARGO. Vessel and cargo condemned as enemy property. (Before BETTS, J., July 28, 1862.) BETTS, J. The pleadings and preparatory proofs show that this vessel and cargo were enemy property, owned in Mobile, and were captured in the Gulf stream, off Mobile and Ship island; that in the latter place the vessel was delivered to the government, on appraisal, and that the cargo was sent to New York for adjudication. The allegations of the libel are fully sustained by the evidence, and condemnation of both vessel and cargo are decreed accordingly. *This decree was reversed on appeal, by the circuit court, July 17, 1863. The Lucy C. Holmes-New Eagle-Jesse J. Cox THE SCHOONER LUCY C. HOLMES AND CARGO. Vessel and cargo condemned as enemy property. (Before BETTS, J., July 28, 1862.) BETTS, J. This vessel and cargo were captured off the coast of North Carolina, May 22, 1862, by the United States steamer Santiago de Cuba, and were sent into this port as prize. The vessel and cargo were owned in South Carolina, and sailed from that port for Nassau, New Providence. No proof being furnished from the papers, or the examinations in preparatorio, vindicating the honesty of the vessel and cargo, both of them are, upon the pleadings and proofs, condemned as enemy property, and decreed to be forfeited. THE SLOOP NEW EAGLE AND CARGO. Vessel and cargo condemned as enemy property. (Before BETTS, J., July 28, 1862.) BETTS, J.: This vessel and cargo were captured by the United States mortar-boat Mathew Vassar, May 6, 1862, in the Gulf of Mexico. The sloop was taken to Ship island, and appropriated to the use of the United States, and the cargo was transported to New York, and was here arrested and condemned by default. The vessel was sailing under the confederate flag, and she and her cargo were owned in the seceded States, and were accordingly enemy property. Both, upon the legal proofs before the court, are lawful prize of war, and are condemned, as such, to forfeiture. THE SCHOONER JESSE J. COX AND CARGO. Vessel and cargo condemned as enemy property, and for a violation of the blockade. (Before BETTS, J., July, 1862.) BETTS, J.: This schooner was captured as prize by the United States gunboat Cayuga, on the 25th of March, 1862, in the Gulf of Mexico, and was sent for adjudication to this port, where she was libelled on the 6th of June last. The attachment was duly served, and notice given by the marshal, according to law, on the 24th of June last. The Agnes H. Ward. The facts established by the preparatory proofs and the papers found on board of the vessel are, that the vessel was registered at Mobile, March 17, 1862, under the oath of a resident in the Confederate States, as the property of him and an association of owners there resident. Shipping articles were filed at the custom-house in Mobile, on the 19th of March, between the master and crew of the vessel, for a voyage from the port of Mobile to a place not named, but left blank in the articles; but the manifest of the cargo, dated the same day, was from Mobile to Havana. The master was put in charge of the vessel about the 15th of March, to run her from Mobile to Havana. Her cargo was cotton and turpentine, shipped and owned at Mobile by the owners of the vessel. She left Mobile under the confederate flag, and was captured, on the 28th of March, about two hundred miles out of the port, and was taken by the captors to Ship island, where the vessel was appropriated to the military use of the United States, by order of General Butler, then in command of the United States forces at that place, and the cargo was transmitted to, and delivered at, this port. Upon these facts, it is clear that the vessel and cargo were at the time of capture enemy property, and that the vessel was under the enemy flag, and had broken the blockade of Mobile in entering upon her voyage. Judgment of condemnation and forfeiture accordingly is rendered. THE SCHOONER AGNES H. WARD AND CARGO. Vessel and cargo condemned as enemy property, and for a violation of the blockade. (Before BETTS, J., July, 1862.) BETTS, J.: This vessel and cargo were libelled on the 6th of June last, and an attachment was issued, returnable on the 1st of July instant, and was returned on that day. The vessel and cargo were captured on the Atlantic ocean, two hundred miles from Cape Hatteras, and off the coast of South Carolina, by a merchant steamer, on the 27th of May, 1862, and were sent into this port for adjudication. The vessel and cargo were owned by residents in Wilmington, North Carolina. The schooner sailed out of Wilmington for Nassau, N. P., under the confederate flag, and had no other on board. She left the mouth of Cape Fear river for Nassau, N. P., with a cargo of cotton and turpentine, to avoid the vessels blockading the The Nassau. port of Wilmington, and was to return to the same port. The master and all the persons on board knew of the blockade of the port of Wilmington when the voyage commenced. The register and shipping articles, and the other ship's papers, show that the vessel was documented as an enemy vessel, and the testimony of the master and mate proves her evasion of the blockade, well knowing its existence. Upon the proofs, the vessel and cargo are clearly subject to condemnation and forfeiture, both as enemy property and for being sailed from a blockaded port with intent to violate the blockade. Decree accordingly. THE STEAMER NASSAU AND CARGO. On a motion for the sale of a cargo pending the hearing, on the ground that it is in a perishing condition, the judgment of the prize commissioners, founded on their inspection, as evidenced by their report, will prevail, unless controlling evidence is produceed counteracting their judg ment. A sale ordered in this case. (Before BETTS, J., July, 1862.) BETTS, J.: On Saturday last, motions were made in behalf of the libellants, upon two reports of the prize commissioners, supported, in respect to the vessel, by the affidavit of the marshal, and in relation to the arms, by the deposition of Orison Blunt, stating that, in the opinion of the commissioners, and on their examination and personal inspection, the rifles laden on board the prize vessel Nassau are deteriorated by swettage and rust from water, and that the vessel is rapidly leaking, and is kept afloat with difficulty, and that both the vessel and her cargo of arms are in a perishing condition. The reports advise the court that, for the causes aforesaid, the said vessel and arms should be immediately sold, which recommendations of the commissioners the United States attorney moves the court to have carried into effect. Mr. Edwards, on the part of the claimants, opposes the motion for the sale of either the vessel or the arms, upon a report of one of the port wardens, that, in his opinion, the leakage of the vessel is not such as to render her state a perishing one, and because neither portion of the seized property having been yet condemned, the court ought not to deprive the claimants of their rights to the property in kind, in case it be acquitted on trial of the charges on which it was captured as prize. It appears to the court that, in a case of speculative differences of opinion between witnesses, whether the condition of property seized |