Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

The Flying Scud, (1867)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States Number:  Visitors: 11
Judges: Nelson
Filed: Dec. 30, 1867
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: 73 U.S. 263 (_) 6 Wall. 263 THE FLYING SCUD. Supreme Court of United States. *264 Messrs. Dunning and Donohue, for the appellants, claimants of the cotton. Mr. Ashton, special counsel of the United States, contra. *265 Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. The proofs are full and uncontradicted, that each of the claimants purchased the cotton in question from different houses in Matamoras, and were merchants doing business there, with the exception of Lopez and Santos, who had r
More
73 U.S. 263 (____)
6 Wall. 263

THE FLYING SCUD.

Supreme Court of United States.

*264 Messrs. Dunning and Donohue, for the appellants, claimants of the cotton.

Mr. Ashton, special counsel of the United States, contra.

*265 Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court.

The proofs are full and uncontradicted, that each of the claimants purchased the cotton in question from different houses in Matamoras, and were merchants doing business there, with the exception of Lopez and Santos, who had removed to Brownsville, Texas, some year before the capture, from Matamoras, and were established in business there. It further appears from the proofs that the cotton was in the warehouses at Boca del Rio, or Bagdad, which is the port of entry for Matamoras, was carried in lighters from thence to the schooner, and taken on board. These proofs, and the greater portion of those which make the case, were produced *266 on an order for further proofs. The transaction appears free from all doubt or obscurity. The claimants, for aught that is shown, had no connection whatever with the cargo shipped from Nassau, and discharged at Brazos, or with the voyage or with the vessel, until it was chartered by Caymari to carry a cargo of cotton from Matamoras to Havana, which is dated the 15th day of July, 1863. The argument, therefore, founded on the suspicion that the claimants were connected with the breach of blockade at Brazos, in the cruise of the inward voyage, is without any foundation.

The decree below must be reversed, except as to the thirty bales claimed by Lopez and Santos. Although they are Mexican citizens, yet being established in business in the enemies' country, must be regarded according to settled principles of prize law, as enemies, and their cotton as enemies' property.

The decree below affirmed as to the thirty bales, and reversed as to the thirty-eight (38) and the one hundred and thirty-seven (137), and case remitted, with directions to enter decree for claimants, Jules Aldige and B. Caymari, restoring their cotton with costs.

DECREE ACCORDINGLY.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer