Governor Sir P. Wodehouse to Rear-Admiral Sir B. Walker, August 8, 1863.

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency’s letter of yesterday’s date, and to inclose the copy of an opinion given by the Acting Attorney-General to the effect that the vessel to which you refer ought to be regarded as a tender and not as a prize.

I shall take care to submit this question to Her Majesty’s Government by the next mail, but in the meantime I conclude that your Excellency will be prepared to act on the opinion of the Attorney-General in respect to any vessels which may enter these ports in the character of prizes converted into ships of war by the officers of the navy of the Confederate States.

Extracts from “Wheaton’s Elements of International Law."

What constitutes a setting forth as a vessel of war has been determined by the British Courts of Prize, in cases arising under the clause of the Act of Parliament, which may serve for the interpretation of our own law, as the provisions are the same in both.  Thus it has been settled that where a ship was originally armed for the Slave Trade, and after capture an additional number of men were put on board, but there was no commission of war and no additional arming, it was not a setting forth as a vessel of war under the Act.  But a commission of war is decisive if there be guns on board; and where the vessel after the capture has been fitted out as a privateer, it is conclusive against her, although, when recaptured, she is navigating as a mere merchant-ship; for where the former character of a captured vessel had been obliterated by her conversion into a ship of war, the Legislature meant to look no further, but considered the title of the former owner forever extinguished.  Where it appeared that the vessel had been engaged in a military service of the enemy, under the direction of his Minister of the Marine, it was held as a sufficient proof of a setting forth as a vessel of war; so where the vessel is armed, and is employed in the public military service of the enemy by those who have competent authority so to employ it, although it be not regularly commissioned.  But the mere employment in the enemy’s military service is not sufficient; but if there be a fair semblance of authority, in the person directing the vessel to be so employed, and nothing upon the face of the proceedings to invalidate it, the Court will presume that he is duly authorized; and the commander of a single ship may be presumed to be vested with this authority as commander of a squadron.

Rear-Admiral Sir B. Walker to Governor Sir P. Wodehouse.  August 8, 1863.

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency’s letter of this day’s date, covering the written opinion of the Acting Attorney-General of this Colony as to the legality of the so-called tender to the Confederate States armed ship Alabama, and for which I beg to express my thanks.