Caledonian Dickey

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtSTORY
Citation4 L.Ed. 523,4 Wheat. 100,17 U.S. 100
Decision Date16 February 1819
PartiesThe CALEDONIAN: DICKEY, Claimant

17 U.S. 100
4 Wheat. 100
4 L.Ed. 523
The CALEDONIAN: DICKEY, Claimant.
February 16, 1819
February 3d, 1819.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Rhode Island.

This cause was argued by D. B. Ogden, for

Page 101

the appellant and claimant,(a) and by the Attorney-General, for the United States.(b)

STORY, Justice, delivered the opinion of the court.

This is the case of an American ship, which sailed from Charleston, South Carolina, with a cargo of rice, bound to Lisbon, about the 28th of May 1813, under the protection of a British license. In the course of the voyage, the ship was captured by a British frigate, and sent into Bermuda for adjudication. Upon trial, she was acquitted, and her cargo being prohibited from exportation, was afterwards sold by the agent of the claimant, at Bermuda, and the proceeds were remitted for his use. The ship sailed from Bermuda for the United States, in November 1813, and upon her arrival at Newport, in Rhode Island, was seized by the collector of that port, as forfeited to the United States. The libel contains four articles propounding the causes of forfeiture; first, for the ship's having on board and using a British license; secondly, for the ship's being engaged in trade with the enemy; and, thirdly and fourthly, for using a British license, contrary to the act of congress of the 2d of August 1813, ch. 56, prohibiting the use of British licenses.

It is unnecessary to consider the last two articles,

(a) He cited The Nelly, note to The Hoop, 1 Rob. 219; The Two Friends, Id. 283; The Thomas Gibbons, 8 Cranch 421, to show, that the vessel could not be seized as prize, after her arrival in port, nor by a non-commissioned seizer.

(b) Citing The Ariadne, 2 Wheat. 143.

Page 102

which are founded upon statutable prohibitions, because it is clear, that the two preceding articles, founded on the general law of prize, are sufficient to justify a condemnation jure belli, the proof of the facts being most clearly established.

The only questions which can arise in the case, are, whether the ship was liable to seizure for the asserted forfeiture, after her arrival in port; and, if so, whether the collector had authority to make the seizure. And we are clearly of opinion, in favor of the United States, on both points. It is not necessary, to enable the government to enforce condemnation in this case, that there should be a capture on the high seas. By the general law of war, every American ship, sailing...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 practice notes
  • Jeffers v. United States, No. 10499.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 7 Diciembre 1950
    ...272 U.S. 321, 47 S.Ct. 154, 71 L.Ed. 279 (1926); Taylor et al. v. United States, 3 How. 197, 11 L.Ed. 559 (U.S.1845); The Caledonian, 4 Wheat. 100, 4 L.Ed. 523 (U.S.1819). But it does not follow from this that illegally seized property may be introduced in evidence in a criminal proceeding.......
  • Madewell v. Downs, No. 94-2612
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 29 Agosto 1995
    ...effect as if the federal agency had originally seized the property on the date it was seized by the local authorities. The Caledonian, 17 U.S. 100, 103, 4 Wheat. 100, 4 L.Ed. 523 (1819); One Ford Coupe, 272 U.S. at 321, 47 S.Ct. at 155, 71 L.Ed. 279 (1926); United States v. $119,000 in U.S.......
  • State of Ohio v. Wright, No. 91-3615
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 30 Abril 1993
    ...retroactively cloaked with federal authority effective as of the moment of the seizure. Cf. The Caledonian, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 100, 103, 4 L.Ed. 523, 525 (1819) ("If [the government] adopts the acts of the party [that seizes property], and proceeds to enforce the forfeiture by legal process......
  • United States v. 673 Cases of Distilled Spirits and Wines, Civ. A. No. 677.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • 5 Julio 1947
    ...71 L.Ed. 392, the court held: "The Circuit Court of Appeals relied on the often quoted language of Mr. Justice Story in The Caledonian, 4 Wheat. 100, 4 L.Ed. 523, to the effect that anyone may seize any property for a forfeiture to the Government, and that if the Government adopts the act a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
33 cases
  • Jeffers v. United States, No. 10499.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 7 Diciembre 1950
    ...272 U.S. 321, 47 S.Ct. 154, 71 L.Ed. 279 (1926); Taylor et al. v. United States, 3 How. 197, 11 L.Ed. 559 (U.S.1845); The Caledonian, 4 Wheat. 100, 4 L.Ed. 523 (U.S.1819). But it does not follow from this that illegally seized property may be introduced in evidence in a criminal proceeding.......
  • Madewell v. Downs, No. 94-2612
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 29 Agosto 1995
    ...effect as if the federal agency had originally seized the property on the date it was seized by the local authorities. The Caledonian, 17 U.S. 100, 103, 4 Wheat. 100, 4 L.Ed. 523 (1819); One Ford Coupe, 272 U.S. at 321, 47 S.Ct. at 155, 71 L.Ed. 279 (1926); United States v. $119,000 in U.S.......
  • State of Ohio v. Wright, No. 91-3615
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 30 Abril 1993
    ...retroactively cloaked with federal authority effective as of the moment of the seizure. Cf. The Caledonian, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 100, 103, 4 L.Ed. 523, 525 (1819) ("If [the government] adopts the acts of the party [that seizes property], and proceeds to enforce the forfeiture by legal process......
  • United States v. 673 Cases of Distilled Spirits and Wines, Civ. A. No. 677.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • 5 Julio 1947
    ...71 L.Ed. 392, the court held: "The Circuit Court of Appeals relied on the often quoted language of Mr. Justice Story in The Caledonian, 4 Wheat. 100, 4 L.Ed. 523, to the effect that anyone may seize any property for a forfeiture to the Government, and that if the Government adopts the act a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT