70 U.S. 451 (1866), The Sally Magee

Citation:70 U.S. 451, 18 L.Ed. 197
Case Date:March 12, 1866
Court:United States Supreme Court

Page 451

70 U.S. 451 (1866)

18 L.Ed. 197


United States Supreme Court.

March 12, 1866

1. When a vessel is liable to confiscation, the first presumption is that the cargo is so as well.

2. The prima facie legal effect of a bill of lading, as regards the consignee, is to vest the ownership of the goods consigned by it in him.

3. Ownership thus presumptively in an enemy is not disproved by a test affidavit in prize, stating generally that the goods consigned had been purchased for their consignee contrary to his instructions, and that he had rejected them; and that this appeared 'from the correspondence of the parties,' which the affiant (an asserted agent of the alleged true owner) swore that he 'believed to be true,' but which neither he nor any one produced, or accounted for the absence of; and where, though two years had passed between the date of the claim and that of the decree, the consignors and asserted owners, who lived at Rio Janeiro, had not manifested any interest in the result of the prize proceedings, which were at New York, nor, so far as appeared, had been even applied to in the matter.

[N. B. The court, referring to The Merrimack and The Frances (8th Cranch, 317 and 354), admitted that the case would be different had the allegation as to purchase by the consignor, in contravention of orders and subsequent rejection by the consignee, been sufficiently proved; and proved affirmatively, as it was required to prove it.]

4. A lien on enemy's property, set up under the act of March 3, 1863, to protect the liens of loyal citizens upon vessels and other property which belonged to rebels, is not sufficiently proved by the test-oath of the party setting up the lien and asserting it without any specification as to date of origin, 'from correspondence' with the parties and 'copies of the invoice of the cargo' sworn to as 'believed to be true;' the correspondence

Page 452

and copies not bring produced, nor their absence accounted for. The principles asserted in the preceding paragraph of the syllabus apply here.

5. Capture at sea of enemy's property clothes the captors with all the rights of the owner which subsisted at the commencement of the voyage; and anything done thereafter, designed to incumber the property or to change its ownership, is a nullity.

6. Cases of prize are usually heard, in the first instance, upon the papers found on board the vessel, and the examinations taken in preparatorio; and it is in the discretion of the court thereupon to make, sua sponte, or not to make, an order for further proof. But the claimant may move for the order, and show the grounds of the application by affidavit, or otherwise, at any time before the final decree is rendered; and such an order may also be made in this court. The making of it anywhere is controlled by the circumstances of each case. It is made with caution, because of the temptation it holds out to fraud and perjury; and made only when the interests of justice clearly require it.

APPEAL from a decree of the District Court for the Southern District of New York, condemning as enemy's property the bark Sally Magee and her cargo, captured during the late rebellion; the question before this court being, however, only as to the cargo; the condemnation of the vessel not being appealed from. The case was thus:

Before the commencement of the rebellion, the vessel had been engaged in trade between Richmond and South America. Her outward voyages were usually to Rio Janeiro. She left Richmond upon her last voyage on the 2d of January, 1861--that is to say, about three months before the outbreak of our civil war 1--with a cargo of flour and domestic goods, shipped by Edmund Davenport & Co., of Richmond, and consigned to Charles Coleman & Co., at Rio. She took in a return cargo of coffee and a small parcel of tapioca. Four bills of lading were given. Three of them were to Coleman & Co.; two for consignments to Davenport & Co.; the third for a consignment to Dunlap & Co. The other bill of lading was to Moore & Co., of Rio, and was for a consignment also to Dunlap & Co. All the goods were to be delivered at Richmond.

The vessel sailed from Rio for Richmond on the 12th of May, 1861. When forty-five days out from Rio, and before any intelligence of the war had reached her, she was captured as prize, and sent to New York, where both the vessel and cargo were libelled in the District Court. Upon the return of the monition, on the 23d of July, 1861, two claims, both made by Fry, Price & Co., of New York, were interposed relative to the cargo. In July, 1863--two years after the proceedings on prize were instituted--both the vessel and cargo were condemned, the latter having been appraised at the considerable sum of $69,000.

One of the claims made by Fry, Price & Co., was in behalf of Coleman & Co., and embraced that part of the cargo (1500 bags of coffee) which was consigned to Davenport & Co. It stated among other things that Coleman & Co., as factors and commission merchants, at Rio Janeiro, 'had been directed to purchase and ship for the account, and to the consignment of Davenport & Co., coffee, if procurable, at not over ten and a half cents a pound; that Coleman & Co. did make...

To continue reading