« EdellinenJatka »
Vol. i. 464.
express the range, township, quarter township or fraction, and number of Vol. i. 491. the lot located as aforesaid. But no location shall be allowed, nor shall
any patent be issued for any lot or lots of one hundred acres, except in Upon surren: the name of the person originally entitled to such warrant, or the heir der of warrant shall receive
or heirs of the person so entitled; nor shall any land, so located and patent. patented, to a person originally entitled to such warrant, be considered
as in trust for any purchaser, or be subject to any contract made before the date of such patent, and the title to lands acquired, in consequence of patents issued as aforesaid, shall and may be alienated in pursuance of the laws, which have been, or shall be passed in the territory of the United States, northwest of the river Ohio, for regulating the transfer
of real property, and not otherwise. Where loca. Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, That in all cases after the sixtions are made teenth of March next, where more than one application is made for the on the same tract, priority
same tract, at the same time, under this act, or under the act to which this to be determin. is in addition, the Secretary of the Treasury shall determine the priority ed by lot.
of location by lot. Public notice Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the to be given of Secretary of the Treasury to advertise the tracts which may be reserved by the Secre. for location, in lots of one hundred acres, in one newspaper in each of tary of the the states, and in the territory aforesaid, for and during the term of Treasury.
three months. The plat re. Sec. 10. And be it further enacted, That the actual plat and survey, turned by the Surveyor" Gen.
returned by the Surveyor General, of quarter townships and fractional eral to be con. parts of quarter townships, contained in the tract mentioned and declusive as to scribed in the act to which this is a supplement, shall be considered as quantity.
final and conclusive, so far as relates to the quantity of land supposed to be contained in the quarter townships, and fractions, so that no claim shall hereafter be set up against the United States, by any proprietor, or holder of warrants for military services, on account of any deficiency in the quantity of land contained in the quarter township or fractional part of a quarter township, which shall have been located by such proprietor or holder, nor shall any claim be hereafter set up by the United States, against such proprietor or holder, on account of any excess in the quantity of land contained therein.
APPROVED, March 1, 1800.
March 3, 1800. Chap. XIV.-An Act providing for Salvage in cases of Recapture.(a)
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives vessel other than a vessel of war or privateer, or when any goods which Salvage on reshall hereafter be taken as prize by any vessel, acting under authority captured profrom the government of the United States, shall appear to have before by residents of belonged to any person or persons, resident within or under the protec- the U: States, tion of the United States, and to have been taken by an enemy of the and claimed beUnited States, or under authority, or pretence of authority, from any nation. prince, government or state, against which the United States have authó rized, or shall authorize, defence or reprisals, such vessel or goods not having been condemned as prize by competent authority before the recapture thereof, the same shall be restored to the former owner or owners thereof, he or they paying for and in lieu of salvage, if retaken by a public vessel of the United States, one eighth part, and if retaken by a private vessel of the United States, one sixth part, of the true value of the vessel or goods so to be restored, allowing and excepting all imposts and public duties to which the same may be liable. And if the vessel so retaken shall appear to have been set forth and armed as a vessel of war, before such capture or afterwards, and before the retaking thereof as aforesaid, the former owner or owners, on the restoration thereof, shall One moiety to be adjudged to pay for and in lieu of salvage, one moiety of the true be paid in lieu
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That when any (a) Salvage on recapture. Salvage is a compensation for actual services rendered in saving the property charged with it; and it is demandable of right for vessels saved from the enemy, or from pirates. There must be meritorious services, and the taking must be lawful. Talbot v. Seaman, 1 Cranch, 1; 1 Cond. Rep. 229.
On the recapture of a vessel by a neutral vessel, no claim for salvage can arise, for the recapture was a hostile act, not justified by the situation of the nation to which the recapturing vessel belongs, in rela. tion to that from the possession of which the recaptured vessel was taken. The degree of service rendered in such a case, is precisely the same as if it had been rendered by a belligerent; yet the rights accruing from the recapture are different, because no right can accrue from an act which was unlawful. Ibid.
American property recaptured was restored on payment of salvage; the libel having prayed the con demnation as prize, and no salvage having been claimed. The question of salvage is incident to the question of prize. The Adeline, 9 Cranch, 244; 3 Cond. Rep. 397.
In order to entitle to salvage, as upon a recapture or rescue, the property must have been in posscssion of the enemy, either actual or constructive. The Ann Green, 1 Gallis. C. C. R. 274.
Salvage is not due for "rescuing a vessel of a neutral out of the hands of a belligerent, who has taken possession for a supposed violation of a treaty or the law of nations." The Antelope, Bee's D. C. R. 233.
An American vessel was captured by an enemy, and after condemnation and sale to an enemy, was recaptured by an American privateer. The original owner claimed the vessel, offering to allow salvage. Held: that it was not a case for salvage, under the act of March 3, 1800, or the act of June 26, 1912. The property had become completely divested by the capture and condemnation. The Star, 3 Wheat. 78; 4 Cond. Rep. 198.
of salvage. value of such vessel of war, or privateer.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That when any vessel or goods, Compensation which shall hereafter be taken as prize, by any vessel acting under author for recaptured rity from the government of the United States, shall appear to have be- ed by the Uni. fore belonged to the United States and to have been taken by an enemy ted States. of the United States, or under authority, or pretence of authority from any prince, government or state, against which the United States have authorized, or shall authorize, defence or reprisals, such public vessel not having been condemned as prize by competent authority before the recapture thereof, the same shall be restored to the United States. And for and in lieu of salvage, there shall be paid from the treasury of the United States, pursuant to the final decree which shall be made in such case by any court of the United States, having competent jurisdiction thereof, to the parties who shall be thereby entitled to receive the same, for the recapture as aforesaid, of an unarmed vessel, or any goods therein, one sixth part of the true value thereof, when made by a private vessel of the United States, and one twelfth part of such value when the recapture shall be made by a public armed vessel of the United States; and for the recapture as aforesaid of a public armed vessel, or any goods therein, one moiety of the true value thereof, when made by a private vessel of the United States, and one fourth part of such value, when such recapture shall be made by a public armed vessel of the United States.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That when any vessel or goods Salvage on re which shall be taken as prize, as aforesaid, shall appear to have before captured proa belonged to any person or persons permanently resident within the ter- by alien friends. ritory, and under the protection of any foreign prince, government or state, in amity with the United States, and to have been taken by an enemy of the United States, or by authority or pretence of authority from any prince, government or state, against which the United States hare authorized, or shall authorize, defence or reprisals, then such vessel or goods shall be adjudged to be restored to the former owner or owners thereof, he or they paying for and in lieu of salvage, such proportion of the true value of the vessel or goods so to be restored, as by the law or usage of such prince, government or state, within whose territory such former owner or owners shall be so resident, shall be required on the restoration of any vessel or goods of a citizen of the United States, under like circumstances of recapture, made by the authority of such foreign prince, government or state; and where no such law or usage shall be known, the same salvage shall be allowed as is provided
VOL. II 3
by the first section of this act: Provided, that no such vessel or goods shall be adjudged to be restored to such former owner or owners, in any case where the same shall have been, before the recapture thereof, condemned as prize by competent authority, nor in any case where by the law or usage of the prince, government, or state, within whose territory such former owner or owners shall be resident as aforesaid, the vessel or goods of a citizen of the United States, under like circumstances of recapture, would not be restored to such citizen of the United States: Provided also, that nothing herein shall be construed to contravene or alter the terms of restoration in cases of recapture, which are or shall be agreed on in any treaty between the United States, and any foreign
prince, government or state. Distribution Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That all sums of money which of salvage. may be paid for salvage, as aforesaid, when accruing to any public armed
Act of March 2, 1799, ch. 24,
vessel, shall be divided to and among the commanders, officers and crew sec. 97. Act of thereof, in such proportions as are or may be provided by law, respecting April 23, 1800, the distribution of prize money: and when accruing to any private armed ch. 33.
vessel, shall be distributed to and among the owners and company concerned in such recapture, according to their agreements, if any
such there be; and in case there be no such agreement, then to and among such persons, and in such proportions, as the court having jurisdiction
thereof shall appoint. Repeal of for. Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That such parts of any acts of mer laws, Congress of the United States, as respect the salvage to be allowed in
cases of recapture, shall be, and are hereby repealed, except as to cases of recapture made before the passing of this act.
APPROVED, March 3, 1800.
STATUTE I. Chap. XV.-An Act declaring the assent of Congress lo cerlain ucts of the Slales
of Maryland and Georgia. March 17, 1800.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the con[Expired.] sent of Congress be, and hereby is granted to the operation of an act Act of April of the General Assembly of the state of Maryland, passed on the twentyAct of April 16, sixth day of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-one, 1814, ch. 60.
entitled “An act empowering the wardens of the port of Baltimore to Act of April 20, 1822, ch. 29.
levy and collect the duty therein mentioned,” and also to so much of an act of the state of Georgia, passed February the tenth, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, entitled “An act for regulating the trade, laying duties on all goods, wares, liquors, merchandise and negroes imported into this state; and also an impost on the tonnage of shipping, and for other purposes therein mentioned," as authorizes a duty of three pence per ton on all shipping entering the port of Savannah, to be set apart as a fund for clearing the river Savannah.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That this act shall be, and continue in force until the third day of March, one thousand eight hundred and eight, and no longer.
APPROVED, March 17, 1800. STATUTE I.
Chap. XVI.-- An Act to aller the times of holding the District Court in North March 19, 1800.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives Act of March 3, 1797, ch. 27. of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the ses Act of Feb. 13, sions of the district court for the district of North Carolina, shall here1801, ch. 4.
after be holden on the first Monday in February, May, August and NoAct of March 3, 1801, ch. 32.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That all process which shall have been issued, and all recognizances returnable, and all suits and other proceeding, which have been continued to the said district court on the first Monday in April next, shall be returned and held continued to the said court on the first Monday of May next.
APPROVED, March 19, 1800.
CHAP. XVIII. An Act to extend the privilege of franking letters and packages April 3, 1800.
to Martha Washington. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all letters and packages to and from Martha Washington, relict of the late General George Washington, shall be received and conveyed by post free of postage, for and during her life.
APPROVED, April 3, 1800.
STATUTE I. CHAP. XIX.-An Act to establish an uniform System of Bankruptcy throughout April 4, 1800. the United States.(a)
by Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives Act of Dec. 19, of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That from 1803, ch. 6.
(a) Decisions on the Bankrupt Law of the United States.-The holder of a promissory note, drawn before, but transferred after a commission of bankruptcy had issued against the drawer, is entitled to prove his debt under the commission, and to receive a dividend. Humphreys v. Blight's Assignees, 4 Dall. 370.
In the case of negotia paper, the assignee takes it, discharged of all the equity as between the original parties, of which he had no notice. But wherever the assignee has notice of such equity, either positively or constructively, he takes the assignment at his peril. A commission of bankruptcy is legal notice that wherever mutual debts subsisted between the bankrupt and his creditors, the right of set-off attaches. When the negotiable paper was assigned after the commission of bankruptcy, the party takes it, subject to any set-off as between the drawer and payee. Ibid.
Under the bankrupt law of the United States, a joint debt may be set-off against the separate claim of the assignee of one of the partners; but such set-off could not have been inade at law, independent of the bankrupt law. Tucker v. Oxley, 5 Cranch, 34; 2 Cond. Rep. 182.
A joint debt may be proved under a separate commission, and a full dividend received; it is equity alone which can restrain the joint creditor from receiving his full dividend until the joint effects are ex. hausted. Ibid.
Wherever the terms in which a power is granted by the constitution to Congress, or wherever the nature of the power itself, requires that it shall be exclusively exercised by Congress, the subject is completely taken away from state legislatures, as if they had been forbidden to act upon it. The power granted to Congress of establishing uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy, is not of this description. Sturges e. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122 ; 4 Cond. Rep. 409.
In the distribution of a bankrupt's effects in this country, the United States are entitled to a prefer. ence, although the debt was contracted by a foreigner in a foreign country; and although the United States had proved their debt under the commission of bankruptcy, and had voted for an assignee. Har. rison r. Sterry et al., 5 Cranch, 289; 2 Cond. Rep. 260.
A conveyance on the eve of bankruptcy, to give a preference to a particular class of creditors, is a fraud on the bankrupt law and void. Ibid.
Such assignment may be valid to secure money actually advanced on the credit of it, and subsequent to its date. Ibid.
Under a separate commission of bankruptcy, against one partner only, his private property, and his interest in the funds of the company passes. Ibid.
The right to compensation from Spain, held under an abandonment made to underwriters, and accepted by them, for damages and injuries, which were to be satisfied under the treaty, by the United States; passed to the assignees of the bankrupt, who held such rights by the provisions of the bankrupt law of the United States, passed April 4, 1800. Comegys et al. v. Vasse, 1 Peters, 193.
The circuit courts of the United States have jurisdiction of matters arising under the bankrupt law of the United States, as they have of any other subject, where the constitution and laws of the United States give jurisdiction, but the district courts have not the same jurisdiction in cases of bankruptcy, as the chancellor of England has. Lucas et al. v. Morris et al., 1 Paine's C. C. R. 396.
The district courts of the United States have not, like the chancellor in England, exclusive jurisdiction over the entire esecution of the bankrupt law. They cannot remove assignees, nor compel them to account. lbid.
Upon the death of an assignee under the bankrupt law of the United States, the right of action for a debt due to the bankrupt, vested in the executor of the assignee. Richards et al. Assignees, &c. v. Ma. ryland Ins. Co., 8 Cranch, 84; 3 Cond. Rep. 45.
Where the original ground of action is founded on contract, but the immediate cause arises ex delicto, and the claim is for damages, unliquidated by any express agreement, or such as the law will not imply an agreement to pay; the certificate of bankruptcy is no bar; because such claim could not have been proved under the commission. Dusar v. Murgatroyd, 1 Wash. C. C. R. 13.
Whc may be and after the first day of June next, if any merchant, or other person, a bankrupt.
residing within the United States, actually using the trade of merchandise, by buying and selling in gross, or by retail, or dealing in exchange, or as a banker, broker, factor, underwriter, or marine insurer, shall,
But if the agreement were to pay a particular sum, on failure to perform the contract; or if the case was such that the plaintiff has his election to bring either trespass or case for money had and received, and waives the former by bringing the latter; the damages become a debt, which the law implies a pro. mise to pay, and the certificate k a bar. Ibid.
In an action brought against the owner of a vessel for damages for an injury sustained on board a ship by the neglect of the master, a certificate of bankruptcy cannot be pleaded in bar. Ibid.
One guilty of perjury in proceedings under the bankrupt law, cannot be prosecuted for the offence, after the repeal of the law." United States v. Passmore, 4 Dall. 372.
A deed executed before the 1st of June, 1800, although acknowledged after, is not within the 1st section of the bankrupt act of April 4th, 1800, chap. 19. Wood v. Owings, 1 Cranch, 239; 1 Cond. Rep. 302.
A certificated bankrupt or insolvent, discharged from the particular contract, need not be made a party to the bill on the contract. Van Reimsdyke v. Kane's Ex’r, 1 Gall. C. C. R. 371.
The power given 10 Congress to pass uniform laws, relative to bankruptcy, is exclusive of such power in the state governments; and this, whether the former has thought proper to exercise it or not. Golden v. Prince, 3 Wash. C. C, R. 313.
A discharge from a debt under the bankrupt laws of the place of contract, is good in every other place where pleaded, as an extinguishment of the debt. But a like discharge where the contract is not made, has no effect. Le Roy v. Crowninshield, 2 Mason's C. C. R. 151.
A debtor concealing himself from, and being denied to his creditors, does not constitute an act of bankruptcy under the laws of the United States; unless the service of process is thereby prevented. Barnes et al. v. Billington, 1 Wash. C. C. R. 29.
If the debtor order himself to be denied to creditors and others, and is in consequence thereof denied to an officer, who comes to serve a process, it is an act of bankruptcy; provided the officer comes to serve the process, and not on other business : and the denial has taken place within six months of the issuing of the commission. Ibid.
Giving a bond, with warrant to confess judgment to one creditor, upon the eve and in contemplation of bankruptcy, does not constitute a bankruptcy; unless the judgment entered on the bond, and the issuing of the execution was at the instance or by the procurement of the debtor. Such a bond would be a fraud on the general creditors. Ibid.
Where two of three assignees of a bankrupt enter into an agreement in the absence of the third, the contract is not binding on the absent assignee; unless he had previously given authority to make it, or substantially recognize and acknowledge it. Aliter, among partners. Blight v. Ashley et al., 1 Pcters' C. C. R. 16.
The agreement of the assignees of a bankrupt, to give a preference to a particular creditor, is not valid, without the assent of the commissioners, and a certain portion of the creditors. Ibid.
Denial to an officer, whereby he is prevented serving process, must be really adversary, and not by concert between the creditor and the debtor, to bring about an act of bankruptcy. Ibid.
No debt but such as is due and owing at the time of the bankruptcy, can be proved under the com. mission; and, consequently, an endorser or acceptor of a bill of exchange, drawn by the bankrupt, who has not paid it before the bankruptcy, cannot prove the debt. Marks et al. Assignces v. Barker et al., 1 Wash. C.C.R. 178.
The acceptor or endorser of a bill of exchange, who pays the bill after the bankruptcy of the drawer, may offset the same against the bankrupt's assignces; but he must show the debt to be a subsisting one in him, at the time the action was brought, for this is a case of mutual credit, given before the bankruptcy, although the money was not paid until after. Ibid.
The district courts of the United States have not power, in bankrupt cases, to remove assignces, or compel them to account. Lucas v. Morris, Paine's C. C. R. 396.
The holder of the negotiable paper, payable" without defalcation,” under the laws of Pennsylvania, assigned after a commission of bankruptcy has issued, may come in under the commission; allowing all just offsets existing at the time of the bankruptcy, and which would have been admitted if the assignment had not been made. Humphreys v. Blight's Assignees, 1 Wash. C. C. R. 44.
The purchaser of a negotiable note, who becomes so after a conimission of bankruptcy has issued, may prove under the commission; and he holds the note, subject to all legal offsets. Ibid.
The 65th section of the bankrupt law of the United States, passed the 2d of March, 1799, does not repeal the provisions of the laws of the United States, which give to the surety who pays bonds for duties, a preference over other creditors. Mott v. The Assignees of Maris, 2 Wash. C. C. Ř. 196.
The provisions of the bankrupt law except from its general operation, not only the preference of the United States, but also the right of preference for satisfaction of debts due to the United States. Ibid.
P. paid a sum of money to the United States, as surety of S., in a bond for duties. S. became insolvent, and assigned his effects to Baker, who received four thousand dollars under the assignment, mixed the same with his own funds, and afterwards became bankrupt, and the defendants were appointed his assignees; but no effects, known to be part of the estate of S., came into their hands. The plaintiff claimed to have a preference and priority over the general creditors of Baker. By the Court-Although the United States might, under the 65th section of the law to regulate the collection of duties, be entitled to claim of the defendants to the amount which came into the hands of B., as the assignees of S., the provisions of the law do not extend to the surety who has paid the bond, the same rights and privileges. Pollock v. Pratt & Harvey, 2 Wash. C. C. R. 490.
A. H. devised an estate to C. S., for life; and after the death of C. S., he directed that the estate should be sold, and divided among the grandchildren of the testator, who should be living at the death of C. S. B. married one of the grandchildren, and, before the death of C. S., B. became bankrupt. B. and wife, after the decease of c. S., sold the property claimed under the will of A. H., and the plaintiff claimed