The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 3 (of 9): Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and PrivateJefferson, Thomas
History
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 3 (of 9): Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private
Jefferson, Thomas
United States -- Politics and government -- 1775-1783; United States -- Politics and government -- 1783-1865
Pagan's counsel moved the justices of the
supreme judicial court for their opinion in the case of Hooper and Pagan,
referred to their consideration by the resolve of the General Court,
founded on the British consul's memorial. Chief Justice and Justice Dana
being absent, Justice Paine delivered it as the unanimous opinion of the
judges absent as well as present, that Pagan was not entitled to a new
trial for any of the causes mentioned in the said resolve, and added,
"that the court intended to put their opinions upon paper, and to file
them in the cause: that the sickness of two of the court had hitherto
prevented it, but that it would soon be done."
It is somewhat remarkable, that the supreme judicial court of
Massachusetts Bay, should allege that this case did not necessarily
involve a question relative to prize or no prize, when the very jury to
whom the court referred the decision of the case established the fact;
their verdict was for three thousand and nine pounds two shillings and ten
pence, damages, which sum is for the vessel called the brigantine Thomas,
her cargo, and everything found on board. Hence it is evident, that the
case _did_ involve a question of prize or no prize, and having received
a formal decision by the only court competent to take cognizance thereof,
(viz. the high court of appeals for prize causes in England,) everything
that at all related to the property in question, or to the legality of the
capture, was thereby finally determined. The legality of the capture being
confirmed by the high court of appeals in England, cannot consistently
with the principles of the law of nations be discussed in a foreign
court of law, or at least, if a foreign court of common law is, by any
local regulations, deemed competent to interfere in matters relating to
captures, the decisions of admiralty courts or courts of appeal, should be
received and taken as conclusive evidence of the legality or illegality of
captures. By such decisions, property is either adjudged to the captors
or restored to the owners; if adjudged to the captors, they obtain a
permanent property in the captured goods acquired by the rights of war,
and this principle originates in the wisdom of nations, and is calculated
to prevent endless litigation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account