Decision Date01 January 1800
Citation4 U. S. 14
CourtU.S. Supreme Court



By the Confiscation Act of Georgia, a debt due to the plaintiff on bond by a citizen of the State of Georgia had become forfeited to the state, he having been attainted by an act of the legislature of that state for adhering to the British cause in the war of the Revolution. In a suit instituted by him for the debt, upon the act of the legislature being pleaded in bar by the obligor, he replied that the acts of the legislature were contrary to the constitution of that state and void. Held that the Confiscation Acts of Georgia were valid.

The presumption must always be in favor of the validity of laws if the contrary is not clearly demonstrated. WASHINGTON, JUSTICE.

The general principles contained in the Constitution are not to be regarded as rules to fetter and control, but as matter merely declaratory and directory, for even in the Constitution itself we may trace repeated departures from the theoretical doctrine that the legislative, executive, and judicial powers should be kept separate and distinct. CHASE, JUSTICE.

The power of confiscation and banishment does not belong to the judicial authority, whose process could not reach offenders, and yet it is a power that grows out of the very nature of the social compact, which must reside somewhere and which is so inherent in the legislature that it cannot be divested or transferred without an express provision of the Constitution.

The record exhibited the following case:

Basil Cooper, at present of the Island of Jamaica in the dominions of His Britannic Majesty, formerly an inhabitant of the State of Georgia, brought an action in the Circuit Court of Georgia to November term, 1797, against Edward Telfair, of the District of Georgia, upon a bond for ?1,000 sterling, equal to ,285.70, dated 14 May, 1774.

After oyer of the bond and condition, the defendant pleaded in bar 1st, payment; 2d,

"That on 4 May 1782, an act was passed by the Legislature of the State of Georgia entitled 'An act for inflicting penalties on and confiscating the estate of such persons as are therein declared guilty of treason, and for other purposes therein mentioned,' by which it is among other things enacted and declared"

"that all and every the persons named and included in the said act are banished from the said state, and that all and singular the estate real and personal of each and every of the aforesaid persons which they held, possessed, or were entitled

Page 4 U. S. 15

to in law or equity on 19 April, 1775, and which they have held since or do hold in possession or others holding in trust for them or to which they are or may be, entitled in law or equity, or which they may have, hold, or be possessed of in right of others, together with all debts, dues and demands of whatsoever nature that are or may be owing to the aforesaid persons or either of them be confiscated to and for the use and benefit of this state."

"That the said Basil Cooper is expressly named and included in the above in part recited acts, and that he was on the said 44 May, 1782, and for a long time before, a citizen of the State of Georgia and of the United States of America."

"That the said Basil Cooper, being a citizen, &c., owing allegiance, &c., on 4 May, 1782, and for a long time before, adhered to the troops of his Britannic Majesty, then at open war with the said State of Georgia and United States of America, and did take up arms with the said troops, &c. That the said Basil Cooper hath never since returned within the limits and jurisdiction of the said United States or any of them. That by virtue of the above recited act, and also of an act entitled"

"An act to continue an act to authorize the auditor to liquidate the demands of such persons as have claims against the confiscated estates, and for other purposes therein mentioned,"

"passed 13 February, 1786, and of another act entitled"

"An act to compel the settlement of the public accounts, for inflicting penalties on the officers of this state who may neglect their duty, and for vesting the auditors with certain powers for the more speedy settlement of the accounts of this state with the United States,"

"passed 10 February 1787; the sum of money mentioned in the condition of the bond, and all interest thereon, have become forfeited and confiscated to the State of Georgia and the right of action attached thereto, and no cause of action hath accrued to the said Basil Cooper to demand and have of the said Edward Telfair the said sum of money. . . ."

To this plea the plaintiff replied

"That he was never tried, convicted, or attainted of the crime of treason alleged against him, and that by the constitution of the state (in force at the time of passing the acts in the said plea set forth, to-wit, on 4 May 1782), unanimously agreed to in a convention of the people of this state on 5 February, 1777, it is ordained that"

" Article 1. The legislative, executive, and judiciary, departments shall be separate and distinct, so that neither exercises the powers properly belonging to the other."

" Article 7. The house of assembly shall have power to make such laws and regulations as may be conducive to the good order and wellbeing of the state, provided such laws and regulations be not repugnant to the true intent and meaning of any rule or regulation contained in this Constitution. "

Page 4 U. S. 16

" Article 39. All matters of breach of the peace, felony, murder, and treason against the state to be tried in the county where the crime was committed. . . ."

" Article 60. The principles of the habeas corpus act shall be part of this Constitution."

" Article 61. The freedom of the press and the trial by jury to remain inviolate forever."

"And that the said recited acts, so far as they can operate to bar the said Basil from maintaining his action, are repugnant to the true intent and meaning of divers rules and regulations contained in the said Constitution, and are as to the action of the said Basil null and void, without that. . . ."

The defendant demurred to the replication, and the plaintiff joined in demurrer.

On 2 May, 1799, the circuit court, composed of Ellsworth, Chief Justice, and Clay, District Judge, decided that the replication was insufficient, that the plea in bar was sufficient, and that judgment on the demurrer be entered for the defendant.

Upon this judgment the present writ of error was brought, and the following...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Koehler v. Hill
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • April 21, 1883
    ... ... the truth may be ...           In ... support of this proposition Shawhan v. Loffer , 24 ... Iowa 217; Cooper v. Sunderland , 3 Iowa 114; ... Boker v. Chapline , 12 Iowa 204; Bonsall v ... Isett , 14 Iowa 309; Morrow v. Weed , 4 Iowa 77; ... Ballinger ... validity of laws, unless the contrary is clearly ... demonstrated." Cooper v. Telfair , 4 U.S. 14, 4 ... Dallas 14. "It is but a decent respect due to the ... wisdom, the integrity, and the patriotism of a legislative ... body, by ... ...
  • Young v. Salt Lake City
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • March 1, 1902
    ... ... unconstitutional beyond all reasonable controversy, then the ... law should be sustained. Cooper v. Telfair, 4 U.S ... 14; Adams v. Howe, 14 Mass. 340; State v ... Wilcox, 45 Mo. 458; Sharpless v. Philadelphia, ... 21 Penn. State 147 ... ...
  • Xianmin Guan v. Changkun Bi
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • March 6, 2014
  • Pleuler v. State
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • November 12, 1881
    ... ... Such substantially has been the holding of all courts ... speaking upon this subject. Cooper v. Telfair , 4 ... U.S. 14, 4 Dall. 14. Sharpless et al. v. The Mayor ... etc. , 21 Pa. 147. Adams v. Howe , 14 Mass. 340 ... City of ... ...
2 books & journal articles
  • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: Colorado's Standard for Reviewing a Statute's Constitutionality
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Lawyer No. 23-4, April 1994
    • Invalid date
    ...rationale of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard of review. 19. Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. 171, 175 (1796). 20. Cooper v. Telfair, 4 U.S. 14, 18--19 (1800). 21. Supra, note 17. 22. 25 U.S. 213, 270 (1827). 23. Supra, note 20. 24. Ogden, supra, note 22. 25. Thayer, supra, note 18 at ......
    • United States
    • Faulkner Law Review Vol. 12 No. 1, September 2020
    • September 22, 2020
    ...unequivocally appear to us, we shall think it our duty not to shrink from the task of saying such law is void."). (41) Cooper v. Telfair, 4 U.S. 14, 18 (1800) (Washington, J.) ("The presumption, indeed, must always be in favor of the validity of laws, if the contrary is not clearly demonstr......

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