Morrow v. Blevins

• Decision Date: 31 July 1843
• Parties: MORROW v. BLEVINS.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

23 Tenn. 223

MORROW

v.BLEVINS.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

July, 1843.

Blevins brought this action of trespass against Morrow in the circuit court of Bradley county, and declared for a trespass in the seizure and destruction of two barrels of whisky and a keg of brandy. The defendant pleaded not guilty and a special plea, which set forth that the defendant was the captain of a company of volunteers in the service of the United States, under Gen. Wood, an officer appointed by the President of the United States, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, to command the forces stationed in the bounds of the Cherokee nation of Indians east of the Mississippi river, and that the laws of the United States prohibited the introduction and sale of spirituous liquors to the Indians, and that the plaintiff had brought into the bounds of the Cherokee nation east of the Mississippi the spirituous liquors, for the destruction of which he was sued, to vend to the Indians, and that he was notified to remove them, and refused so to do, and that thereupon it was seized, the barrels broken, and the liquor poured out and lost, and this was done by command of Gen. Wool, so in command as aforesaid. The plaintiff demurred to this plea. The demurrer was sustained, and the case was tried before Judge Keith and a jury of Bradley county, at the May term, 1838, and a verdict and judgment were rendered in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $100, from which judgment the defendant appealed.

S. Jarnigan, for plaintiff in error.

T. J. Campbell, for defendant in error.

Reese, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

Blevins sued Morrow for the seizure and destruction of two barrels of whisky and a keg of brandy. Morrow pleaded the general issue, and also that, at the time of the alleged trespass, he was an officer of the United States army, in the Cherokee nation of Indians, under the command of Brig. Gen. Wool, to whom the President of the United States had assigned the command of the public forces in that nation; that the plaintiff, in violation of the laws of the United States, had brought said whisky and brandy within the limits of the Cherokee nation of Indians, and was employed in vending and retailing the same to the Indian population without license or permission; and that the defendant, acting under the orders of Gen. Wool and in obedience to his command, seized and destroyed the said spirituous liquors, etc. This plea was demurred to, and the ...