Page images
PDF
EPUB

neutral, it is settled, that where a person has his domicil, there is his country, whatever may be his country of birth or adoption.1

In all cases, the master and crew are presumed Question of^ to possess the national character of the vessel to acter. which they are attached, during the time of their employment.*

A person who remains in a belligerent country As affected by for several years, paying taxes, etc., though his design at first was a mere temporary sojourn, loses his national character.8

A neutral consul resident and trading in a belligerent country, is deemed a belligerent.4

The native character reverts at once, upon removal, and indeed as soon as one puts himself itinera to his native country, animo revertendi.

A neutral merchant trading in the enemy's coun- £^ected by try as a privileged trader, is deemed an enemy, but not if he be engaged in the ordinary and accustomed trade of neutral merchants.8

The domicil of a commercial partnership is regulated by that of the persons composing.8

1 The Vigilantia, 1 Rob., 1; The Endraught, 1 Rob., 19; The Susan Christina, 1 Rob., 237; The Indian Chief, 3 Rob., 23; The President, 5 Rob., 277; The Neptunus, 6 Rob., 403; The Venus, 9 Cranch., 253; The Frances, 1 Gall., 614; McConnel vs. Hector, 3 Bos. and Pul, 113.

The Endraught, 1 Rob., 23; The Bernou, 1 Rob., 102; The Frederick, 5 Rob., 8; The Ann, 1 Bod., 221.

a The Harmony, 2 Rob., 232.

4 The Indian Chief, 3 Rob., 22; The Josephine, 4 Rob., 25; The Citto, 3 Rob., 38; La Virginie, 5 Rob., 98; The St. Lawrence, 1 Gall., 457.

The Anna Catherina, 4 Rob.,119; TheRendsberg, 4 Rob., 139.

The Viglantia, 1 Rob., 1, 14, 19; The Susa, 2 Rob., 255; The Indiana, 3 Rob., 44; The Portland, 3 Rob., 44; The Vriend

If a neutral merchant continue in a house of trade in the enemy's country after knowledge of the war, he is regarded as an enemy.1

The character of the traffic alone, is sometimes sufficient proof of hostile character, as, if a neutral be engaged in the enemy's navigation, it impresses a hostile character upon all his vessels which have no distinct national character, as well as the one so employed.*

As affected by Xhe flaff or pass under which a ship is sailed is

the ship H flag

or pas«. deemed conclusive evidence of its national character, though in general, the national character of a vessel depends on the domicil of the owner; hut the owner is bound by the flag or pass which he sees fit to make use of, and when it happens to operate against him, he is not at liberty to deny the character which he assumed for his benefit. Such flag or pass so assumed does not bind other parties as against the owner. They are at liberty to prove the spurious character of the credentials, and the sifting of the evidence upon the hearing, by prize courts, is frequently directed to removing the mask and exposing the true character of the vessel in question.8

schap, 4 Rob., 166; The Jonge Klassina, 5 Rob., 29V; Tht Antonia Johanna, 1 Wheat, 159; The St. Jose Indiana, 2 Gall., 268.

1 The Francis, 1 Gallis., 618, and S. C, 8 Cranch, 348; Tht Susa, 2 Rob., 251, 255.

The Vriendschap, 4 Rob., 166.

"The Viffilantia, 1 Rob., 1, 19, 26; The Vrow Catherines Rob., 161; The Success, 1 Dod., 131; The Planter's Wench, 5 Rob., 22; The Magnus, 1 Rob., 31; The Fortuna, 1 Dod., 87; The Princessa, 2 Rob., 49; The Anna Catherina, 4 Rob., 107; The Commerce, 1 Wheat., 382.

The subject of the transfer of enemy's ships dur- As affected by ing war, has already been fully considered. The seis during6"" effect of such transfer becomes very often an im-war portant question at the hearing, and has frequently been discussed in prize courts. The student is referred to numerous additional authorities, illustrating the practice of the tribunals.1

So, too, has already been considered, the effect And the tranaof a transfer of property in cargo, from an enemy to transitu. neutrals, while upon the voyage, or as it is called, in transitu. This is a fruitful question for discussion and the determination of prize courts upon the hearing; and the reader is here referred to many decisions upon the subject both by the courts of England and the United States.*

It is sufficient after the consideration already Hiegai trade as given to the subject of illegal trade, or that which ^etary interbecomes illegal during war, to refer to the leading esta" decisions of the prize courts upon that subject, as

'The Phoenix, 5 Rob., 20; The Dree Gebroeders, 4 Rob., 232; Benton's Claim, 9 Cranch, 191; The Bernou, 1 Rob., 102; The Sechs Gedschmistem, 4 Rob., 100; The Argo, 1 Rob., 158; The Jenny, 4 Rob., 31; The Omnibus, 6 Rob., 71; The Minerva, 6 Rob., 396; The Packet de Bilboa, 1 Rob.,133; TheNoyt Gedacht, 2 Rob., 137, note a.

* The Danekebaar Africaan, 1 Rob., 107; The IlaUtelda, 1 Rob., 114; The Vrow Margaretha, 1 Rob., 336; The Jan Frederick, 5 Rob., 128; The Carl Walter, 4 Rob., 207; The Sally, 3 Rob., 300, note a; The Atlas, 3 Rob., 299; The Anna Catherina, 4 Rob., 107; The Rendsburg, 4 Rob., 121 ; The Jan Frederick, 5 Rob., 128 ; The Aurora, 4 Rob., 218; The Merrimack, 8 Cranch 317 ; The Marianna, 6 Rob., 24; The St. Jose Indiano, 2 Gallia., 268, 1 Wheat., 208; The Venus, 8 Cranch, 253; The Frances, 1 Gall., 445, S. C, 8 Cranch, 344, 9 Cranch, 183; The Mary and Susan, 1 Wheat., 25; The Josephine, 4 Rob., 25.

affecting the important question to be determined at the hearing of proprietary interest.1 The effect of Allied to the subject of illegal trade, prize courts

violation of ." ° ,

blockade; of are often required, at the hearing, to determine teadTMbtode upon the evidence, whether there has been a violawast,n oTM7with tion or an attempted violation of a lawful blockher colonies; ade, an illegal traffic in contraband of war, a resistto search, ance to the right of search, an engagement in the coasting or colonial trade of the enemy, or unneutral conduct of any character. These several subjects have been fully reviewed. Some further authorities are here referred to, as well as others relating to the principles adopted by prize courts as to the important question, of the binding character of the acts of the master of the vessel, under various circumstances upon the owner of the vessel or the cargo.2

! The Vigilantia, 1 Rob., 1, 14; The Hoop, 1 Rob., 196; Pottt vs. Bell, 8 T. R., 548; The Rapid, 8 Cranch, 155; S. C, 1 GalL, 295; The Alexander, 8 Cranch, 169; S. C, 1 Gallis, 532; The Joseph, 8 Cranch, 451; S. C, 1 Gallis, 545; The Naiade, 4 Rob., 251; The Neptunus, 6 Rob., 403; The Banous, 4 Rob., 255; The Ann, 1 Dod., 221; The Abby, 5 Rob., 251; The Mary, 1 Gallis., 620; S. C, 9 Cranch, 120; The Lord Wellington, 2 Gallis., 103; The Julia, 1 Gallis., 594; S. C, 8 Cranch, 181; The Aurora, 8 Cranch, 203; The Hiram, 8 Cranch, 444; S. C, 1 Wheat., 440; The Ariadne, 2 Wheat, 143; The Atlat, 3 Rob., 299; The Sally, 3 Rob., 300, and note o.

* The Boedcs Lust, 5 Rob., 233, 1 Wheat., 389, note, 1 Wheat., 507; app. note 3; The Vrow Judith, 1 Rob., 150; The Adonis, 5 Rob., 256; The fmina, 3 Rob., 167; The Mars, 6 Rob., 79; The Rosalie and Betty, 2 Rob., 343; The Alexander, 4 Rob., 93; The Elsebe, 5 Rob., 173; The Shepherdess, 5 Rob., 262; The Hiram, 1 Wheat., 440; The Dispatch, 3 Rob., 279"; The Nereids, 9 Cranch, 388; The Fanny, 1 Dod., 443; The Vrow Juditk, 1 Rob., 150; The St. Nicholas, 1 Wheat., 417; The Phamix Ins. Co. vs. Pratt, 2 Binney, 308; Osieell vs. Vignt, 15

When a sentence is pronounced in a prize court, Tie decree of

., . • .-■ iii •, i condemnation

upon a hearing in the first instance, whether it be and proceedof condemnation, or acquittal and restitution, it is, ttieTVOnin all cases, an interlocutory decree, where any thing further remains to be done by the court, after deciding that the property is to be condemned or restored. And first, we will briefly review the subsequent proceedings upon an interlocutory decree of condemnation.

Condemnation being decreed, the next question Who are cap.

,, . -, . . . i , tors and joint

for the prize court to determine is, who are the captors enticaptors entitled to distribution. kTdistributfol

We have already passed in review the settled principles upon which this question is to be decided by the court; in connection with captures made by commissioned or non-commissioned vessels—public, private or armed vessels—and as to joint-capture, and the principles upon which it is to be determined what is a joint-capture, and who are entitled to share in the distribution as joint-captors.

It is not usual to file a claim of ioint-capture be- claim

* * or joint capture

fore the interlocutory decree of condemnation; but to be filed, and if it be delayed until after a decree of distribution, eatabMieA11 it is too late—unless it should happen that an appeal has been taken from the decree, when, as matter of favor, it seems that a claim of joint-capture may be admitted.1

It is a settled rule of prize courts, that a claim of joint-capture must be made in the ordinary way, by a regular allegation of the facts and circum

70; The Neptunus, 1 Rob., 170; The Hoop, 1 Rob., 196; The Daankbaarheit, 1 Dod., 183.

1 Duckworth vs. Tucker, 2 Taunt, 7; The Stella del Norte, 5 Rob., 349; Home vs. Camden, 2 H. BL, 533.

« PreviousContinue »