A question of fact respecting the proprietary interest in prize
goods captured by an armed vessel fitted out in violation of the
statutes of neutrality of the United States. Restitution to the
original Spanish owners decreed.
This was a libel filed in the District Court of Maryland by the
Consul of his Catholic Majesty for the Port of Baltimore in behalf
of the Spanish owners of certain goods alleged to have been
captured on the high seas and taken out of the Spanish ship
Santa Maria by the privateer
Patriota, illegally
armed and equipped in the United States. The evidence in the cause
established the fact that the capturing vessel was owned by
citizens of this country and that she was armed, equipped, and
fitted out in violation of the laws and treaties of the United
States. But there was some contrariety in the testimony as to the
identity of the property, which the claimant, Burke, insisted upon
his title to hold as a
bona fide purchaser under a
condemnation and sale in some prize tribunal at Galveston. There
was also some evidence tending to show that Burke was a part owner
of the capturing vessel. The district court dismissed the libel and
ordered the property to be restored to the claimant, but this
decree was reversed by the circuit court and the cause was brought
by appeal to this Court.
Page 20 U. S. 494
MR. JUSTICE LIVINGSTON delivered the opinion of the Court, and
after stating the case, proceeded as follows:
In a case of so palpable a fitting out and arming in an American
port and proceeding thence directly on a cruise (whether with or
without a commission is in this case immaterial), the counsel for
the claimant and libellant was right in not attempting to justify
the capture. He has therefore confined his endeavors to show the
insufficiency of the evidence to establish
Page 20 U. S. 495
any title in the libellant or in those whom he represents to the
merchandise in question.
The allegation of the libel is that the property was part of the
cargo of the Spanish ship
Santa Maria, which was captured
by the
Patriota in the year 1817. The appellant says there
is no adequate proof of this fact. Without laying any stress on the
register of this ship, which has been sent from the Havana, and to
which the appellant has objected, there are four witnesses, and
they are the only witnesses in the cause, whose relation is so
uniform and particular as to leave no room to entertain doubt on
any part of this transaction.
Three of them were on board of the
Patriota at the time
of her sailing on her illegal cruise. They establish not only the
unlawful armament of this vessel in the port of Baltimore, but the
capture of the
Santa Maria, and that the sugars libeled
are the identical sugars which were taken out of her and put on
board of the schooner
Harriet, in which they were brought
to Baltimore. The other witness, Causter, although not present at
the capture, testifies in the most positive terms and of his own
knowledge that the sugars libeled were part of the cargo of the
Santa Maria. He speaks so much in detail on the subject,
and his means of information were so ample, that it is impossible
he should be mistaken. Under these circumstances, and when not a
single witness has been examined to throw any doubt on the subject,
the Court perceives no reason for disturbing the sentence of the
circuit court, which is
Affirmed with costs.
