STANFORD LIBT

SUPREME COURT U. S

FEBRUARY TERM, 1807.

THE UNITED STATES v. KID AND WATSON.

round copper

at the

subject to du.

THIS case was certified from the circuit court of the Round cop district of Pennsylvania, upon a division of opinion per bars, between the judges of that court, upon the question plates, and whether certain articles of copper, viz. round copper plates turned bars, round copper plates, and round copper plates turned up up at the edges, imported by the defendants, were sub- edges, are not ject to duty, within the meaning of the acts of con- ty upon impor gress, viz. 20th July, 1789, and 10th of August, 1790, tation. vol. 1. p. 251. s. 1. by which "copper in plates" is exempt from duty, and the act of the 2d of May, 1792, vol. 2. p. 71. s. 2. by which "copper in pigs and bars” is also exempt from duty.

The jury found a special verdict, the substance of which was, that such articles as those in question are of no use in the form in which they are imported, but are worked up as a raw material. That the round, the square, and the flat bars are, by the manufacturers and artists, known by the denomination of "bars." That all the articles are sold by weight, and the same price is paid for round as for square or flat bars; and for round plates, and round plates turned up at the edges, as for square or oblong plates. "And that all the aforesaid articles come under the description of bars and plates."

the

Rodney, Attorney-General,

Admitted that the case was not to be supported, on part of the United States, and that judgment must be given for the defendants.

2

The owner of a privateer

party, is not

"tation unless

to his hands.

United States

have power

tences of the

causes.

rem, the court

JENNINGS v. CARSON.

THIS was an appeal from the sentence of the circuit capturing court for the district of Pennsylvania, in a cause civil neutral.pro- and maritime, in which Jennings was the libellant, and able to a de- Carson the respondent; the former claiming to be cree of resti- owner of the sloop George and cargo, captured, in the the property year 1778, by the American privateer Addition, com- · or its pro- manded by Moses Griffin, of which the respondent, ceeds, came Carson, was part owner, and which was libelled and The district condemned, on the 31st of October, 1778, as lawful courts of the prize, by the court of admiralty for the state of Neware courts of Jersey; from which sentence of condemnation there prize; and was an appeal to the continental court of appeals, estato carry into blished under authority of the old congress, where the effect the sen- sentence of condemnation was, on the 23d of Decemold continent- ber, 1780, reversed, and restitution ordered, but never al courts of ap- obtained. In the mean time, however, the vessel and peals in prize cargo had been sold by the marshal of the state court In all pro- of admiralty, for paper money, under an order of the ceedings in court contained in the sentence of condemnation, and has a right to it did not appear what had been done with that money. order the No measures were taken to enforce the decree of restithing to be tatution during the old confederation. tody of the On the 19th of May, 1790, after the adoption of the to be presu- present constitution of the United States, Jennings med to be in filed his libel in the district court for the district of custody of the unless Pennsylvania, alleging that he was a subject of the the contrary States *General of the United Provinces, an inhabitant, appears. and domiciled, at the island of St. Eustatius, and owner * 3 of the sloop George and her cargo, at the time of capThe thing does not fol- ture bound to the port of Egg-Harbour in the United low the ap- States, and consigned to A. and G. Caldwell, in the peal into the superior prosecution of which voyage she was illegally captured court, but re- by the privateer Addition, owned in part by the respondcourt below, ent, Carson, and praying process for arresting Carson, which has a to answer, &c.. A supplemental libel was filed, setting Fight to order forth the proceedings against the vessel in the court of if perishable, admiralty of New-Jersey; the sentence of condemnanotwithstand- tion; the appeal; the reversal of that sentence, and ing the ap.

ken into cus

law; and it is

law,

mains in the

it to be sold,

peal.

the order of restitution.

v.

Carson.

Neither the original nor supplemental libel prayed Jennings any specific or general relief, other than process for arresting Carson, so that he should appear to answer the libellant" in his said complaint, of the wrongs and injuries aforesaid, according to the resolutions of the continental congress, the laws of the United States, and of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the laws and usages of nations in this behalf practised, used, and established."

Carson, being taken upon the writ of arrest, appeared and filed his plea and answer, averring the sloop George to have been the property of a subject of the King of Great Britain, at the time of capture, and employed in carrying goods to the British army and navy; that the goods were imported directly or indirectly from Great Britain or Ireland, contrary to the regulations of congress and the law of nations; the King of Great Britain then being at war with the United States.

It admits that Carson was the owner of one third of the privateer. It admits the capture, the condemnation, and sale, the appeal and reversal, and the order of restitution, but denies that any part of the proceeds of the sale ever came to the hands of the owners of the privateer, or either of them, but remained in the hands of the marshal of the court of admiralty of New-Jersey, who alone is answerable for the same. It avers, that Griffin, the commander of the privateer, h⚫ probable cause for making the capture, and, therefore, the owners are not liable.

It denies the jurisdiction of the district court of Pennsylvania to take cognisance of the question, the same belonging exclusively to the court of admiralty of the state of New-Jersey, and to the court of appeals established by the continental congress. It denies the jurisdiction of the court as a prize court in any case, and especially in cases of capture made during the British war, and avers that it has no authority to carry into effect a decree of either of those courts established under the old government.

After filing his plea and answer, Carson died, and Jennings filed a petition, suggesting the death of Carson, and charging his executors with assets, and praying that the suit may stand revived against them; upon

*4

V.

Carson.

Jennings which a citation issued, and the executors appeared and answered generally by a reference to the answer and plea of their testator, and further pleaded, that by the law maritime, the law of the land, and the laws and ordinances of the United States, they, as executors, are not liable to be proceeded against in that court for the several matters set forth in the libel, for that they are not answerable for the wrongs and offences, or the pretended wrongs and offences, of their testator; and also, for that courts maritime have not authority to intermeddle with the estates and effects, real or personal, of deceased persons, or to give relief against the same, or to seize or take the same effects or estates in execution, or to imprison the bodies of executors for the default of the testator.

*5

To these pleas and answers there were general repli

cations.

On the 30th of March, 1792, the judge of the district court gave an opinion in favour of its jurisdiction in general cases as a prize court; but on the 21st of September, 1793, he dismissed the libel, on the ground that the district court was not competent to compel the execution of a decree of the late continental court of *appeals. (a) This sentence was affirmed in the circuit

(a) The following learned opinion of the Hon. Judge Peters, upon the prize jurisdiction of the district courts of the United States, is too important to be omitted.

"This is a case in which the general principles are stated in the proceedings and exhibits, and, therefore, will appear clear enough by the perusal of them. There are some circumstances, however, not clearly ascertained by those exhibits, which I shall have occasion to mention, in the course of the observations which I shall make on the merits hereafter. The libel complains of the illegal capture of the sloop George, whereof Robert Smith was master, and her cargo, the property of the libellant, then and now a subject of Holland, during the late war, viz. in July, 1778, by the schooner privateer Addition, Moses Griffin, commander, belonging to the testator, Joseph Carson, and others, who are named in the answer of Joseph Carson, in his lifetime.

“It is alleged, on the part of the respondents, that the vessel captured was employed in carrying goods belonging to the subjects of Great Britain, contrary to the regulations and laws of the then congress. They rely on the libel and condemnation in the state court of admiralty of New-Jersey, the verdict of the jury ascertaining the facts, and the condemnation by the court and order of sale, and for payment of the net proceeds to the captors.

"The sale of the vessel and cargo at vendue, and the moneys being received by the marshal of the court, in whose hands it is said they now remain in depreciated paper, not having been distributed