Collusive captures and violations of the revenue laws committed
by a private armed vessel are a breach of the condition of the bond
given by the owners under the Prize Act of June 26, 1812, ch., 430,
sec. 3. If such breach appear upon demurrer, the defendants are not
entitled to a hearing in equity under the Judiciary Act of 1789,
ch. 20, sec. 26.
This was an action of debt originally brought in the District
Court of Maine by the United States against the defendants in that
court, Greeley and others, upon a bond executed by them on 17
December, 1813, under the Prize Act of June 26, 1812, c. 430, s. 3,
as owners of the private armed vessel called the
Fly,
conditioned that
"The owners, officers, and crew of the said armed vessel shall
observe the laws and treaties of the United
Page 21 U. S. 258
States and the instructions which shall be given according to
law for the regulation of their conduct, and satisfy all damages
and injuries which shall be done or committed contrary to the tenor
thereof by such vessel during her commission, and deliver up the
same when revoked by the President of the United States."
The defendants pleaded a performance of this condition, to which
the district attorney replied that on 15 December, 1813, at a place
called St. Johns, the same being a colony and dependency of Great
Britain, certain goods, &c., the same being of the growth,
produce, and manufacture of Great Britain or some colony or
dependency thereof, the importation whereof into the said states,
then and for a long time afterwards and at the time of bringing the
same into the said District of Maine was by law prohibited, were
put on board a certain vessel or schooner called the
George with the intention to import the same into the said
states contrary to the true intent and meaning of the statute in
such case made and provided and with the knowledge of the master of
the said schooner
George, and afterwards, in pursuance of
said intention, the said schooner did depart from the said place of
lading, to-wit, St. Johns, and there afterwards, on the high seas,
by way of collusion and with intent to evade the statute aforesaid
and under color of capture by the private armed vessel called the
Fly, aforesaid, to import the said goods, &c., into
the said states contrary to the true intent and meaning of the
statute aforesaid, the said schooner
George, so
Page 21 U. S. 259
laden as aforesaid, was taken possession of by the said Dekoven,
by and with the said private armed vessel called the
Fly,
whereof the said Dekoven then and there was master as aforesaid, on
the high seas, and afterwards, on 24 January, 1814, the said
schooner
George and the goods, &c., aforesaid, were
brought into the port of Ellsworth in the said District of Maine,
and the goods, &c., were then and there, under color of
capture, by said Dekoven, his officers and crew, in and with said
schooner
Fly, imported in manner aforesaid, into the said
states, contrary to the true intent and meaning of the statute
aforesaid. Other pleadings followed (which it is not necessary to
state), ending with a demurrer, upon which the district court was
of opinion that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment. The
defendants thereupon moved for a hearing in chancery upon the
making up of the judgment on the bond declared on, which motion was
denied and judgment rendered for the United States. The cause was
then brought by writ of error to the circuit court, the judges of
which were divided in opinion upon the following questions, which
were thereupon certified to this Court.
1. Whether an American private armed vessel, duly commissioned,
making collusive captures of enemy's property during the late war
with Great Britain, and under color of such capture introducing
goods and merchandise into the United States contrary to the
provisions of the Act of March 1, 1809, c. 195, revived and
continued in force by the Act of March 2, 1811, c. 306, thereby
Page 21 U. S. 260
broke the condition of the bond given pursuant to the third
section of the statute of June 26, 1812, c. 430, requiring, "that
the owners, officers, and crew who shall be employed on board such
commissioned vessel shall and will observe the treaties and laws of
the United States?"
2. Whether, if such proceeding on the part of such private armed
vessel be a breach of the condition of said bond, and such breach
appear upon demurrer, the defendants can by law claim a hearing in
chancery under the Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789, c. 20, s.
26?
The court directed the following certificate to be sent to the
circuit court.
CERTIFICATE. This cause came on the be heard on the transcript
of the record of the Court of the United States for the First
Circuit in the District of Maine on the points on which the judges
of that court were divided in opinion, and was argued by counsel.
On consideration whereof, this Court is of opinion:
1. That an American private armed vessel, duly commissioned,
making collusive captures of enemy's property during the late war
with Great Britain, and under color of such captures introducing
goods and merchandise into the United States contrary to the
provisions of the Act of March 1, 1809, c. 195, revived and
continued in
Page 21 U. S. 261
force by the Act of March 2, 1811, c. 306, thereby broke the
condition of the bond given pursuant to the third section of the
statute of June 26, 1812, c. 430, requiring
"that the owners, officers, and crew, who shall be employed on
board such commissioned vessel, shall and will observe the treaties
and laws of the United States."
2. That where such breach appears upon demurrer, the defendants
cannot, by law, claim a hearing under the Judiciary Act of
September 24, 1789, c. 20, s. 26.
All which is directed to be certified to the Circuit Court of
the United States for the First Circuit and District of Maine.