Open main menu

Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/34

This page needs to be proofread.


2.3 Cases roled and decreed in the !7|!· perry was {`ub§{l:ing, if not at the time of the depolition, yet, V'V"’ at {call, on the arrival of the {hip at Donnfnka, Oilober, 1 78o. And Ayn, E9' Company': letter, to Branrligbt U Son, dat- ed 6ib · arcb, 178 t, after the rupture with Holland, and {hon- ly before the {hip left Dominka, and which was found on board, proves the propertytobe then fublilting : for, in the clofe of the letter, they fay, •• captain W aurbargl: has drawn on you, in our favour, for dilburfement, L` tgt : r gr ;" which difburfement plainly refers to dilburfements of the {hip, which Brautligbr U Son could not be chargeable with, if they had parted with the property, and were no longer owners. No evidence at all is produced to {hew a change of proper- ty, ortransfer of the {hip. And, therefore, the fa€t being ad- mitted, that {`ne was the property of Brantliglvt if Sou, on her arrival at St. Ezyotxh, in r78o, and the property proved to be fublifling in OEober, 1780, and proved, to be fublilling in March, 1 781, a few days before {he {`ailed from Domimka, we cannot doubt, but that the property was {`ub{i{ki,,g’ at the time of her capture. She was then no prize to the Briziilz '· vateer; becaufe teéled by the Bririrb Proclamation: ghle was no prize to th? Ammkan privateer; becaufe {he was the property ofthe {`ubjefls of the State: GeneraL a nation in peace and fricudlhip with America. " But the papers, it is {`aid, prove the cargo to be the pro- pertyofperfons, not capitulants: For Morjn E9' Company, in their letter of the 6tb Mxrrb, {781, fpeal: of Kmder Ma/ovr, as a {hipper, who is not a capitulant.” What does this letter {`ay ? It is addreifed to Brantliglot if Son, and informs them, that the rupture with Holland, occali- oned all {hipmcnts to {io ; that afterwards, the Brithb Procla- mation, protefting the aolland vellels from capture, for ali- mited time, on their palfage back from Dominica, came to hand; that even then, no one but Kender Jllrmn and themfelves would {hip ; that, afterwards, {hipment went generally on. This letter proves clearly, that the cargo was {hipped by ma- _ ny di{F;rent pcrfons. Not only Kemler Mqjon {hipped, but Ilfor- jon if Company alfo {hipped, and there were other {hippcrs, who were alarmed, notwithltanding the Britirb Proclamation, and would not immediately {hip, though afterwards they proceeded to {hi . To Pwhat extent did Kcnder Maxon {hip P Mooj/ora E5' Co'.r.lcttcr, which is the only evidence that e {hipt at all, goes no further than to prove, that he {hipt a part of the cargo. How {hall this part be afcertained ? . The {hip, it is admitted, by counfel on both {ides, was con- {igned to Jllorjn E5' Co. and Alexander Hmdcrjon; and it ap- pears from the papers on board, that upwards of two thirds of the