Abbildungen der Seite

as to the circumstances of the capture, whether it | 1812, prohibiting the interruption of vessels coming
5e joint, collusive, or within neutral territory. from Great Britain, in consequence of the supposed
The Anne,

(144) 430 repeal of the British orders in council, must have
17. Irregularities on the part of the captors, oriy- been actually known to the commanders of vessels
inating from mere mistake, or negligence, which of war, in order to invalidate captures made con-
work no irreparable mischief, and are consistent trary to the letter and spirit of the instructions.
with good faith, will not forfeit their rights of The Mary & Susan, (Richardson claimant),

(57) 35

(448) 431
18. Ưnder the 6th section of the patent law of

1793, ch. 156, the defendant pleaded the general
issue, and gave notice that he would prove at the See Admiralty, 13.
trial, that the machine for the use of which, with-
out license, the suit was brought, had been used

previous to the alleged invention of the plaintiff,
in several places which were specified in the See Duties, 2, 3, 4.
notice, or in some of them, “and also, at sundry
other places in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and else-

where in the United States. The defendant, hav-
ing given evidence as to some of the places speci- 1. The United States are not entitled to priority
fied, offered evidence as to others not specified. over other creditors, under the act of 1799, c. 128, g.
Held, that this evidence was admissible; but that 65, upon the ground of the debtor having made an
the powers of the court, in such a case, are suffi- assignment for the benefit of creditors, unless it is
cient to prevent, and will be exercised to prevent proved that the debtor has made an assigninent of
the patentee from being injured by surprises.

all his property
Evans v. Eaton,

(454, 503) 433, 445 United States v. Howland, (108, 116) 526, 528
19. Testimony on the part of the plaintiff, that 2. Where the deed of assignment conveys only
the persons, of whose prior use of the machine the the property mentioned in a schedule annexed to
defendant had given evidence, had paid the plaintiff the deed, and the schedule does not purport to con-
for licenses to use the machine, ought not to be ab- tain all the property of the party who made it, the
solutely rejected, though entitled to very little onus probandi is thrown on the United States to

show that the assignment embraced all the debtor's

(505) 446 property.
20. The circuit courts have no power to set aside Id.

(116) 528
their decrees in equity on motion, after the term at 3. The decisions on the subject of the priority of
which they are rendered.

the United States in case of insolvency, &c., col-
Cameron v. V'Roberts,

(591) 467 lected.
See Jurisdiction.

Id. note 1,

(118) 629

1. A writ of error will not lie on a judgment of

1. Where an enemy's vessel was captured by a
Evans v. Phillips,

(73) 516 privateer, recaptured by another enemy's vessel,
2. The refusal of the court to grant a motion for and again recaptured by another privateer, and
a new trial affords no ground for a writ of error. brought in for adjudication, it was held, that the
Barr v. Gratz,

(220) 655 prize vested in the last captor: an interest acquired
3. Where a cause is brought to this court, by in war, by possession, being devested by the loss of
writ of error, or appeal from the highest court of posession.
law or equity of a state, under the 25th sec. of the The Astrea,

(125) 52
judiciary act of 1789, c. 20, upon the ground that 2. A neutral ship, chartered for a voyage from
the validity of a statute of the United States was London to St. Michaels, thence to Fayal, thence to
drawn in question, and that the decision of the St. Petersburg, or any port in the Baltic, and back
state court was against its validity, &c.; or that the to London, at the freight of 1,000 guineas, on her
validity of a statute of a state was drawn in ques passage to St. Michaels was captured, and brought
tion, as repugnant to the constitution of the into the port of Wilmington, N. C., for adjudica-
United States, and the decision was in favor of its tion. A part of the cargo was condemned, and part
validity; it must appear, from the record, that the restored. The freight was held to be chargeable
act of Congress, or the constitutionality of the upon the whole cargo, as well upon that part
state law was drawn into question.

restored as upon that condemned.
Miller v. Nicholls,
(311, 315) 578, 579 The Antonia Johannah,

(159) 60
4. But it is not required that the record should, Qucre, Whether more than a pro rata freight
in terms, state a misconstruction of the act of Con- was due to the master in such case.
gress, or that it was drawn into question. It is Id.

(168) 62
sufficient to give this court jurisdiction of the 3. The charter-party is not the measure by which
cause, that the record should show that an act of the captor is bound, where the freight is intlamed
Congress was applicable to the case.

to an extraordinary rate by the perils of naviga-

(315) 579 tion.
5. Depositions, taken on further proof, in one Id. note 1,

(170) 63
prize cause, cannot be invoked into another.

4. Where the goods were shipped in the enemy's
The Erperiment,

(84) 520 country, in pursuance of orders from this country,
6. Practice of invoking testimony in the prize received before the declaration of war, but previ-

ous to the execution of the orders the shippers be-
ld. Note 1,

(Ib.) 520 came embarrassed, and assigned the goods to cer-
7. A sale under a fi. fa., duly issued, is legal, as tain bankers to secure advances made by them, with
respects the purchaser, provided the writ be levied a request to the consignees to remit the amount to
upon the property before the return day, although them (the bankers) and they also repeated the same
the sale be made after the return day and the writ request, the invoice being for account and risk of
be never actually returned.

the consignees, but stating the goods to be then the
Wheaton v. Sexton,

(503, 506) 626 property of the bankers; beld, that the goods hav-
8. Depositions taken according to the proviso in ing been purchased and shipped in pursuance of or-
the 30th sec. of the judiciary act, of 1789, c. 20, ders from the consignees, the property was origin-
under a dedimus potestatem, “according to common ally vested in them and was not devested by the in-
usage, when it inay be necessary to prevent a fail-termediate assignment, which was merely intended
ure or delay of justice," are, under no circum- to transfer the right to the debt due from the con-
stances, to be considered as taken de bene esse, signees.
whether the witnesses reside beyond the process The Mary and Susan, (B. G. &. H. Van
of the court or within it; the provisions of the act Wagenen, claimants.)

(25) 27
relative to depositions taken de bene esse being con- 5. The property of a citizen engaged in trade with
fined to those taken under the enacting part of the the enemy is liable to capture and confiscation as

prize, whether that trade be carried on between an
Sergeant v. Biddle,

(508) 627 enemy's port and the United States, or between
See Admiralty, 1, 4, 5.

such port and any foreign country; and the offense
Chancery, 20.

of trading with the enemy is complete the moment

the vessel sails with the intention to carry a cargo

to an enemy's port.
The President's instructions of the 28th August, The Rugen,

(74) 40

6. Enemy's property cannot be transferred in 12. But, if evidence in the nature of further transitu, so as to protect it from capture. Where proof be introduced, and no formal order or obthe invoice of the goods was headed, " consigned to jection appear on the record, it must be presumed Messrs. D. B. & F., by order, and for account of J. to bave been done by consent, and the irregularL.," and, in a letter accompanying the invoice from ity is waived. the shippers to the cousignees, they say, “for Mr. Id.

(241) 229 J. L. we open an account in our books here, and 13. Concealment or spoliation of papers, is not, debit him, &c.; we cannot yet ascertain the pro- per se, a sufficient ground for condemnation in a ceeds of his hides, &c., but we find his order for prize court. It is calculated to excite the rigilance goods will far exceed the amount of those ship- and justify the suspicions of the court; but it is ments; therefore, we consign the whole to you, open to explanation; and if the party, in the first that you may come to a proper understanding with instance, fairly, frankly, and satisfactorily exhim;" held, that the goods were, during their tran- plains it, he is deprived of no right to which he is sit, the property, and at the risk of the enemy ship- otherwise entitled. If, on the contrary, the spoliapers, and, therefore, subject to condemnation. tion is unexplained, or the explanation is unsatis The St. Joze Indiano,

(208) 73 factory, if the cause labor under heavy suspicions, 7. Where enemy's property is fraudulentlyblend- or gross prevarications, further proof is denied, ed in the same claim with neutral property, the and condemnation ensues from defects in the evilatter is liable to share the fate of the former. dence which the party is not permitted to supply. The St. Nicholas,

(431) 128

(1.) 229 See Alien enemy.

14. French and Spanish law of spoliation of paSee Contraband.

pers. Application of the same. Opinions of M. See Domicile.

Portalis. Principle of reciprocity. See Duties.

Id. notel,

(242) 230 See Error.

15. A question of collusive capture. CondemnaSee Jurisdiction, 1, 2, 3.

tion to the United States. The George, (278) 239 See License, 1, 2.

16. A suit by the owners of captured property, See Practice, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8.

lost through the fault and negligence of the See President.

captors, for compensation in damages. See Sale, 3, 4,5.

The Anna Maria,

(327) 252 See Salvage.

17. The right of visitation and search is an un

questionable belligerent right; but must be exerPRIZE--2.

cised with as much regard to the safety of the 1. The evidence to acquit or condemn, must vessel detained as is consistent with a thorough excome, in the first instance, from the papers and amination of her character and voyage. crew of the captured vessel.


253 The Dos Hermanos,

(76, 79) 189 18. Detention, after search, pronounced to be 2. It is the duty of the captors to bring the ship's unjustifiable under the particular circumstances papers into the registry of the District Court, and of the case. to have the examinations of the principal officers


(334) 233 and seamen taken on the standing interrogatories. 19. The value of the captured vessel, and the Id.

(79) 189 prime cost of the cargo, with all charges, and the 3. It is exclusively upon these papers that the premium of insurance, where paid, allowed in as cause is to be heard in the first instance. If, from certaining the damages. the evidence, the property appears clearly to be Id.

(336) 253 hostile or neutral, condemnation or restitution im- 20. A libel against the commander of a squadron mediately follows. If the property appears to be calling on hiir to proceed to adjudication, or to doubtful, or the case suspicious, further proof may make restitution in value, of a vessel and cargo, be granted according to the rules which govern the detained for search by the captain of a frigate belegal discretion of the court.

longing to the squadron, and lost while in his pos

(80) 189 session. Libel dismissed. 4. If the parties have been guilty of gross fraud, The Eleanor,

(345) 257 or misconduct, or illegality, further proof is not 21. The commander of a squadron is liable to inallowed, and condemnation follows.

dividuals for the trespasses of those under his Id.

(1h.) 189 command, in case of positive or permissive orders, 5. Although some apology may be found in the or of actual presence and co-operation. But state of peace, which had so long existed previous quære, how far he is responsible in other cases. to the late war, for the irregularities which had Id.

(355) 239 crept into the prize practice, that apology no long- 22. Where a capture has actually taken place, er exists; and if they should hereafter occur, it with the assent, express or implied, of the commay be proper to withhold condemnation, even in mander of a squadron, the prize-master may be the clearest cases, unless the irregularities are considered as a bailee to the use of the squadron, avoided or explained.

who are to share in the prize money, and thus the 1d.

(81) 190 commander may be made responsible; but not so 6. If a party attempts to impose upon the court, as to mere trespasses, unattended with a conversion by knowingly or fraudulently claiming as his own, to the use of the squadron. property belonging in part to others, he will not be ld.

(357) 260 entitled to restitution of that portion which he 23. The commander of a single ship is responsible may ultimately establish as his own.

for the acts of those under his command; as are, Id.

(97) 194 likewise, the owners of privateers for the conduct 7. The claimants have no right to litigate the of the commanders appointed by them. question, whether the captors were duly commis


(lb.) 260 sioned; the claimants have no persona standi in 24. Detention for search is a right which a beljudicio, to assert the rights of the United States. ligerent may exercise over every vessel, except a But if the capture be made by a non-commissioned national vessel, which he meets with on the ocean. captor, the prize will be condemned to the United Id.

260 States.

25. The principal right necessarily carries with it Id.

(99) 194 all the means essential to its exercise; anong 8. A question of proprietary interest, and con- these may, sometimes, be included the assumption cealment of papers. Further proof ordered, open of the disguise of a friend or an enemy, which is a to both parties.

lawful stratagem of war. If in consequence of its The Fortuna,

(161) 209 use, the crew of the vessel detained abandon their 9. Where an enemy's vessel was captured by a duty before they are actually made prisoners of privateer, and subsequently dispossessed by the war, and the vessel is thereby "lost, the captors are force or terror of another, the prize was adjudged not responsible. to the first captor with costs and damages.


(359) 260 The Mary,

(123) 200 26. Whenever an officer seizes a vessel as prize, 10. A question of collusive capture. Condemna- he is bound to commit her to the care of a competion to the captors.

tent prize-master and crew; not because the origThe Bothnca and the Jahnstoff", (169) 211 inal crew, wben left on board (in the case of a seiz11. If the court below deny an order for further ure of the vessel of a citizen or neutral), are reproof when it ought to be granted, or allow it leased from their duty without the assent of the when it ought to be denied, and the objection is master, but from the want of a right to subject the taken by the party, and appears on the record, the captured crew to the authority of the captor's of appellate court can administer the proper relief. ficer. But this rule does not extend to the case of The Pizarro,

(247, 240) 226, 229 a mere detention for examination, which the com


mander of the cruising vessel may enforce by claimant to restitution; but is sufficient to lay a
orders from his own quarter-deck, and may, there foundation for the introduction of further proof.
fore, send an officer on board the vessel detained, The Friendschaft,

(14, 48) 322, 331
in order more conveniently to enforce it, without 2. The fact of invoices and letters of advice not
taking the vessel out of the possession of her own being found on board, inay induce a suspicion that
officers and crew.

papers have been spoliated. But even if it were
The Eleanor,

(361) 261 proved that an enemy master, carrying a cargo
27. The modern usages of war authorize the chiefly hostile, had thrown papers overboard, a
bringing of one of the principal officers of the ves- neutral claimant, to whom no fraud is imputable,
sel detained on board the belligerent vessel with is not thereby precluded from further proof.
the papers for examination.


(48) 331

(362) 261 3. A blockade does not, according to modern
28. Farther illustration of these principles. usage, extend to a neutral vessel found in port, nor
Appendix, note I.,

(13, 14, 15) 285 prevent her coming out with the cargo which was
29. It is the practice of this court, in prize causes, on board when the blockade was instituted.
to hear the cause, in the first instance, upon the Olivera v. The Union Ins. Co., (194) 367
evidence transmitted from the Circuit Court, and 4. Cases on the subject of licenses collected.
to decide from that evidence whether it is proper Note 1,

(207) 372
to allow further proof.

5. A question of proprietary interest and conceal-
The London Packet,

(371) 264 ment of papers. Farther proof ordered, open to
30. Afhdavits to be used as further proof in causes both parties. On the production of farther proof
of admiralty and inaritime jurisdiction in this court, by the claimant, condemnation pronounced.
must be taken by commission.

The Fortuna,

(237) 379

(373) 264 6. Where a neutral ship-owner lends his name to
31. Principles and practice in prize causes. cover a fraud with regard to the cargo, this circum-
Appendix, note I.,

(1) 281 stance will subject the ship to condemnation.
32. Extent of the prize jurisdiction of the admir-


(2245) 381
alty. ld.

(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) 281, 282 7. Relaxation of the rules of the court allowing
33. Seizures by non-commissioned captors. further proof in a case of concealment of papers.

(7) 283

(IV. 381
84. Probable cause for captures.

8. A neutral cargo found on board an armed

(8) 283 enemy's vessel is not liable to condemnation as
35. Responsibility of captors having a bona fide prize of war.

The Atalanta,

(409, 415) 422, 423

(9) 283

9. A question of proprietary interest. Further
36. Proceedings on sending in for adjudication. proof ordered.

(10) 284

(409) 422
37. Capture without probable cause.

10. It is not competent for a neutral consul, with-

(11) 284 out the special authority of his government, to
38. Proceedings to compel the captors to proceed interpose a claim on account of the violation of
to adjudication.

the territorial jurisdiction of his country.

(12, 16) 284, 286
The Anne,

(435, 445) 428, 431
39. Liability of commanders of squadrons and 11. Quere, Whether such a claim can be inter-
owners of privateers for the loss of captured prop- posed, even by a public minister, without the sunc-

tion of the government, in whose tribunals the

(13) 285 cause is pending.
40. Custody of the captured property.


(446) 431

(17) 286 12. A capture made within neutral territory is, as
41. Prize libel and monition.

between the belligerents, rightful; and its validity

(19) 287 can only be questioned by the neutral state.
42. Claims, and persons who are to conduct the

(447) 431

13. If the captured ship commence hostilities up-

(21) 287 on the captor within neutral territory, she forfeits
43. Rules of evidence.

the neutral protection, and the capture is not an

(23) 288 injury for which redress can be sought from the
44. National character of persons and ships, how neutral sovereign.


(lb.) 431

(27) 289 14. The district courts of the United States have
45. Questions of proprietary interest.

jurisdiction of questions of prize, and its incidents,

(31) 291 | independent of the special provisions of the prize
46. Act of the master, how far binding on the act of the 26th of June, 1812, ch, 430 (CVII).

The Amiable Nancy,

(546) 456
(37) 293 15. On an illegal seizure, the original wrong-doers
47. Recaptures and salvage.

may be made responsible beyond the loss actually

(40) 294 sustained, in a case of gross and wanton outrage;
48. Unlivery, appraisement, sale, and delivery on but the owners of the privateer, who are only con-
bail of the cargo.

structively liable, are not bound to the extent of

(49) 297 vindictive damages.
49. Questions of freight.


(558) 459

(53) 298

16. An item for loss by deterioration of the car-
50. Allowance of costs and expenses.

go, not occasioned by the improper conduct of the
(56) 299

51. Restitution of the master's adventure.


(559) 459

(58) 300

17. The probable or possible profits of an unfin-
52. Claims of joint capture.

ished voyage afford no rule to estimate the dum-

(ib.) 300
53. Decree of condemnation or restitution.

ages, in the case of marine trespass.

(560) 459


54. Condemnation to the captors, or as droits.

18. The prime cost or value of the property lost,

(71) 304

and, in case of injury, the diminution in value by
55. Distribution of the prize proceeds.

reason of the injury, with interest thereon, affords

(75) 306 the true measure for estimating damages in such
56. Responsibility of prize agents.

(78) 307

(Ib.) 459
57. President's instructions.

19. An item for the ransom of the vessel and car-
Id. note II.,

(80) 308 go, which had been subsequently seized by another
58. Standing interrogatories.

belligerent (as alleged for want of papers), of which
Id. note III.,

(81) 308 the vessel had been deprived by the first captors,
See Domicile.

rejected under the particular circumstances of the
See License.


(561) 459

See Domicile.

See License.
1. A bill of lading consigning the goods to a neu- See Piracy.
tral, but unaccompanied by an invoice or letter of See Practice, 1, 2, 3, 4, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17.
advice, is not sufficient evidence to entitle the See Salvage.




a case

[ocr errors]


innocently within our jurisdiction, to leave things
1. The government of the United States having to the state from which they have been forcibly

in the same state they find them, or to restore them
recognized the existence of a civil war between removed by the act of our own citizens.
Spain and her colonies, but remaining neutral, the


(502) 625
courts of the Union are bound to consider as law-
ful those acts which war authorizes, and wbich the above case, as the court could not consider the Car-

12. The Spanish treaty held not to apply to the
new governments in South America may direct thagenian captors as pirates, and the capture was
against their enemy.
The Divina Pastora,

not made within the jurisdictional limits of the

(52, 63) 512, 514
2. Unless the neutral rights of the United States treaty enjoins restitution.

United States, the only two cases in which the
(as ascertained by the law of nations, the acts of

(502) 625
Congress, and treaties) are violated by the cruis-

See Domicile.
ers sailing under commissions from those govern-

See License.
ments, captures by them are to be regarded by us

See Practice, 5, 6.
as other captures, jure belli, are regarded ; the
legality of which cannot be determined in the
courts of a neutral country.

(64) 515
3. Note on the jurisdiction of neutral courts over

RULE OF 1756-1.
belligerent captures made in violation of the neu- 1. Grounds of the rule of the war of 1756.
tral jurisdiction.

The Commercen,

(396, 397) 120
Id. noto 3.

(65) 515

2. Origin and judicial history of the rule.
4. Different public acts by which the government

Appendix, note III.

(507) 149
of the United States has recognized the existence
of a civil war between spain and her colonies.
Appendix, note II.

(23) 686
5. Prize code of Buenos Ayres and Chili.


6. Where restitution of captured property is Where R. G. agreed with the managers of a lot-
claimed, upon the ground that the force of the tery to take 2,500 tickets, giving approved security
cruiser making the capture has been augmented on the delivery of the tickets, which were specified
within the United States, by enlisting men, the in a schedule, and deposited in books of 100 tickets
burthen of proving such enlistment is thrown upon each, thirteen of which books were received and
the claimant; and that fact being proved by him, paid for by him, and the remaining twelve were
it is incumbent upon the captors to show, by subscribed by him, with bis name in his own hand-
proof, that the persons so enlisted were subjects writing, and indorsed by the managers, “ Pur-
or citizens of the prince or state under whose flag chased, and to be taken by R. G." and on the en-
the cruiser sails, transiently within the United velope covering the whole, “R. G., 12 books;" on
States, in order to bring the case within the pro- the second day's drawing of the lottery, one of the
viso of the 2d sec. of the act of June 5th, 1794, c. last designated tickets was drawn a prize of $20,000,
226, and of the act of the 20th April, 1818, c. 83. and between the third and fourth day's drawing R.
The Estrella,

(298, 306) 574, 376

G. tendered sufficient security, and demanded the
7. The right of adjudicating on all captures and last 1,200 tickets, and the managers refused to de-
questions of prize, belongs exclusively to the liver the prize ticket; held, that the property in the
courts of the captors country; but, it is an excep, tickets vested when the selection was made and as-
tion to this general rule, that where the captured sented to, and that they remained in the possession
vessel is brought, or voluntarily comes infra præ- of the vendors merely as collateral security, and
sidia of a neutral power,

that power has a right to that the vendee was entitled to recover the amount
inquire whether its own neutrality bas been vio- of the prize.
lated by the cruiser which made the capture; and,

Thompson v. Gray,

(75) 40
if such violation has been committed, is in duty 2. When commodities are sold by the bulk, for a
bound to restore to the original owner property gross price, the sale is perfect; but if the price is
captured by cruisers illegally equipped in its ports. regulated at so much for every piece. pound, or

(307) 577

measure, the sale is not perfect, except only as to
8. No part of the act of the 5th June, 1794, c. 226, so much as is actually counted, weighed or meas-
is repealed by the act of the 3d March, 1817, c. 58.

The act of 1794, c. 226, remained in force until the Id. note 1,

(84) 42
act of the 20th April, 1818, c. 83, by which all the 3. But an article, purchased in general terms.
provisions respecting our neutral relations were

from many of the same description, if afterwards
embraced, and all former laws on the same subject selected and set apart, with the assent of the par-
were repealed.

ties, as the thing purchased, is as completely identi-

(311) 578
9. In the absence of any act of Congress on the lected previous to the sale, and specified in the

fied, and as completely sold, as if it had been se-
subject, the courts of the United States would

have authority, under the general law of nations, ld.

(83) 42
to decree restitution of property captured in viola-
tion of their neutrality, under a cominission, issued vesting of property, are the same, by which the

4. The common law and the prize law, as to the
within the United States, or under an armament, thing sold, after the completion of the contract, is
or augmentation of the armament, or crew of the at the risk of the vendec.
capturing vessel, within the same.

The St. Joze Indiano,

(212) 74

(311) 578

Rules of the Roman and French law on this sub-
10. A cruiser, equipped at the port of Cartha- ject.
gena, in South America, and comissioned under 1d. note 1,

(1b.) 74
the authority of the province of Carthagena, one 5. Where an agent abroad purchases exclusively
of the United Provinces of New Grenada, at war on the credit of his principal, or makes an absolute
with Spain, sailed from the said port, and captured appropriation and designation of the property for
on the high seas, as prize, a vessel and cargo be his principal, the property vests in the principal
longing to the subjects of the King of Spain, and immediately on the purchase.
put a prize crew on board, and ordered her to pro-

(Ib.) 74
ceed to the said port of Carthagena; the captured But where a merchant abroad, in pursuance of
vessel was afterwards fallen in with by a private orders, either sells his own goods, or purchases
armed vessel of the United States, and the cargo goods on his own credit, no property in the goods
taken out and brought into the United States for vests in the correspondent until he has done some
adjudication as the property of their enemy. The notorious act to devest himself of his title, or bas
original Spanish owner, and the prize-master from parted with the possession by an actual and uncon-
the Carthagepian privateer, both



the ditional delivery for the use of such correspondent.
goods. The possession was decreed to be restored Id.

(213) 74
to the Carthagenian prize-master.

6. If the thing agreed to be purchased is to be
The Neustra Senora de la Caridad. (497) 624 sent by the vendor to the vendee, it is necessary, to
11. War having been recognized to exist between the perfection of the contract, that it should be de-
Spain and her colonies by the government of the livered to the purchaser, or to his agent, which the
l'nited States, it is the duty of the courts of the inaster of a ship, to many purposes, is considered to
United States, where a capture is made by either be.
of the belligernet parties, without any violation of Id. note 2 (The Venus),

(Ib.) 74
our neutrality, and the captured prize is brought See Prize, 4, 6.

[ocr errors]


4. The statute of the 430 George III., ch. 160, sec.

39, has no farther altered the previous British law
1. Where a promissory note is given for the pur- than to fix the salvage at uniform stipulated rates,
chase of real property, the failure of consideration instead of leaving it to depend upon the length of
through defect of title must be total, in order to time the recaptured ship was in the hands of the
constitute a defense to an action on the note. enemy.
Greenleaf .0 Cook,
(13, 16) 172, 173 The Star,

(88) 341
2. (nurre, Whether, after receiving a deed, a par- 5. Neither of the British statutes extent to neu-
ty can avail himself at law even of a total failure tral property.
of consideration.


(IV.) 341

(16) 173 6. The 5th section of the prize act of 1812, ch. 107,
3. But where the note is given with full knowl- does not repeal any of the provisions of the salvage
edge of the extent of the incumbrances, and the act of the 30 March, 1800, ch. 14, but is merely af-
party thus consents to receive the title, its defect firmative of the pre-existing law.
is no legal bar to an action on the note.


(89) 341
(17) 173 7. By our law the rule of reciprocity prevails
4. Any partial defect in the title or the deed is upon the recapture of the property of friends.
not inquirable into by a court of law in an action Id.

(91) 341
on the note; but the party must seek relief in 8. Note on the laws of the different maritime

countries of Europe as to recaptures and salvage.
(lb).) 173 Note 1,

(93) 342
5. Rule of the French law as to the recovery of 9. Law of Great Britain. ld.

purchase money on a failure of title.

10. Law of France. lil.

(95) 343
I. note 3,

(11).) 173 11. Law of Spain, Portugal and Holland.
6. It is not the duty of the vendee to communi- lil.

(97) 343
cate to the vendor intelligence of extrinsic circum- 12. Law of Denmark and Sweden. Id. (98) 344
stances which may influence the price of the com- 13. Recaptures from pirates. Id.

(99) 344
modity, where the particular information is exclu-
sively within the knowledge of the vendee, but the
ineans of intelligence are equally open to both par-

ties. But, at the same time, each party must take
care not to say or do anything tending to impose

See Chancery, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
upon the other.
Laidlaw et al. v. Organ, (178, 195) 214, 218

7. Doctrine of Pothier as to the respective obli-

See Chancery, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.
gations of the vendor and vendee in this respect.
Id, note 2,

(185) 215


See Chancery, 1.
1. In an action by the vendee for a breach of the
contract of sale by the vendor, in not delivering

the article, the measure of damages is the price of
the article at the time of the breach of the con- ing clause of the statute of limitations of Georgia,

The terms “beyond seas," in the proviso or sav-
tract, and not at any subsequent period.
Shepherd v. Hampton,

(200) 369 of 1767, are equivalent to without the limits of the
2 Quare, How far this rule applies to a case

state; and a party who is without those limits is
where advances of money have been made by the entitled to the benefit of the exception.
purchaser under the contract.

Murray v. Baker,

(541) 454
(lb.) 369
3. One citizen of the United States has no right

to purchase of, or sell to, another, a license or pass
from the public enemy, to be used on board an 1. The law of Kentucky requires, in the location
American vessel.

of warrants for land, some general description des-
Patton t. Nicholson,

(204) 371 ignating the place where the particular object is to

be found, and a description of the object itself.
Matson v. Hord,

(133) 54
See Chancery, 21, 22, 23, 24.

The general description must be such as will en-

able a person, intending to locate the adjacent resid-

uum, and using reasonable care and diligence, to
Where a British ship was captured by two French ready located. If the description will fit another

find the object mentioned, and avoid the land al-
frigates, and, after a part of the cargo was taken place better, or equally well, it is defective.
out, presented to the libelants in the cause, citizens

of the United States (then neutral), whose vessel

(1b.) 54

The hunter's trace, leading from Bryant's station,
the frigate had before taken and burnt, by whom
the prize was navigated into a port in this country, between the waters of Hingston and Elkhorn, is a

over the waters of Hingston, on the dividing ridge
and, pending the suit instituted by them, war was defective description and will not sustain the entry:
declared between the United States and Great


(130) 53
Britain, it was determined, that this was a case of
salvage. A salvage of one-half was given, and as

2. A question of fact respecting the validity of
to the residue, it was placed on the same footing of Kentucky.

the location of a warrant for lands, under the laws
with other property found within the territory at
the declaration of war, and might be claimed on

Taylor . Walton et al.

(141) 56
the termination of war, unless previously confis- 1798, entitled, " an act concerning champerty and

3. Under the act of assembly of Kentucky, of
cated by the sovereign power.
The Astrea, note 6. (The Adventure), (128) 52 notwithstanding an adverse possession.

maintenance," a deed will pass the title to lands,

Walden v. The Heirs of Gratz, 295, 296) 94, 95

4. The statute of limitations of Kentucky does
1. An American vessel was captured by the

not differ essentially from the English statute of the
enemy, and after condemnation and sale to å sub- 21 James I. c. 1, and is to be construed as that
ject of the enemy, was recaptured by an Ameriean statute, and all other acts of limitation founded
privateer. Held, that the original owner was not

upon it, have been construed; the whole possession
entitled to restitution on payment of salvage, un-

must be taken together; when the statute has once
der the salvage act of the 30 March, 1800, ch. 11, and begun to run, it continues, and an adverse posses-
the prize act of 26th June, 1812, ch. 107.

sion, under a survey, previous to its being carried
The Star,

(78) 338

into' grant, may be connected with a subsequent
2. By the general maritime law, a sentence of possession.
condemnation completely extinguishes the title of


(296) 95
the original proprietor.

5. Extract from the preface of Bibb's Reports of

(86) 340 Cases in the Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
3. The British salvage acts reserves the just post-

Appendix, note I,

(189) 143
liminii as to vessels of British subjects, even after
condemnation, unless they have been after capture

set forth as ships of war.

(88) 341 See Local Law, 11.
Wheat. 1, 2, 3, 4.
U. S., BOOK 4.



« ZurückWeiter »