If this was the case at that time, the government of the United States must have then had a different opinion on this subject, from what it now has. Mr. Adams will please to bear in mind, that I have only solicited to be accredited as a consular agent, having never agitated the question of an acknowledgment of our independence as a nation, which most certainly is anxiously desired by the goverment and people of South America, but which being a political question, I have never asked.
Mr. Adams will also be pleased to accept the renewed assurances of my most distinguished consideration and respect. DAVID C. DE FOREST.
Georgetown, January 8, 1819.
The supreme director of the United Provinces of La Plata, to his Excellency the President of the United States of North America.
Most Excellent Sir-The supreme government of these provinces have long exerted their zealous efforts to establish the closest and most amicable relations with the United States of America, to which the most obvious interests seem mutually to invite them. This desirable object has hitherto been frustrated by the events of the times; but the moment appears at length to have arrived, which presents to the people of these provinces, the flattering prospect of seeing their ardent wishes accomplished. In consideration of these circumstances, and in conformity with the 23d of the articles agreed upon with citizen William G. D. Worthington, the agent of your government in these provinces, I have nominated citizen David C. De Forest, their consul general to the United States, with the powers specified in his commission and instructions respectively. I therefore request your excellency to grant him the attention and consideration, which in the like case will be afforded to the public agents of your excellency resident in these regions.
I avail myself of this renewed occasion of reiterating to your excellency, assurances of the sentiments of respect and consideration, with which I have the honour to be, your excellency's most obedient and most humble servant,
the amount of salvage is discre- tionary, appeals should not be encouraged upon the ground of minute distinctions of merit, nor will the Court reverse the de- cision of an inferior Court, un- less it manifestly appears that some important error has been committed. The Sybil, The demand of the ship owners for freight and general average in such a case, is to be pursued against that portion of the cargo which is adjudged to the owners of the goods, by a direct libel, or petition; and not by a claim in- terposed in the salvage cause. Id. Any citizen may seize any pro- perty forfeited to the use of the government, either by the mu- nicipal law, or as prize, in or- der to enforce the forfeiture; and it depends upon the govern- ment whether it will act upon the seizure; if it proceeds to enforce the forfeiture by legal process, this is a sufficient con- firmation of the seizure. Caledonian,
under its peculiar circumstances, 6. The Admiralty possesses a ge-
neral jurisdiction in cases of suits See DUTIES, 1, 2, 3.
by material men, in personam and in rem. The General Smith,
7. Where the proceedings by ma- terial men is in rem to enforce a specific lien, it is incumbent up- on the party to establish the ex- istence of such lien in the par- ticular case. Id. 438. 443 3. Where repairs have been made or necessaries furnished to a foreign ship, or to a ship in the port of the State to which she does not belong, the general maritime law gives the party a lien on the ship itself for his se- curity, and he may maintain a suit in rem, in the Admiralty, to enforce his right. Id. 443 9. But as to repairs or necessaries in the port or State to which the ship belongs, the case is go- verned altogether by the local law; and no lien is implied un- less by that law. Id. 443 10. By the common law, material men furnishing repairs to a do- mestic ship have no particular lien upon the ship itself for their demand. Id. 443 11. A shipwright who has taken a
ship into his possession to repair it, is not bound to part with the possession until he is paid for the repairs. But if he parts with the possession (of a domes- tic ship,) or has worked upon it without taking possession, he has no claim upon the ship itself. Id. 443 12. The common law being the law of Maryland on this subject, material men cannot maintain a suit in rem in the District Court of Maryland for supplies fur- nished to a domestic ship, al- though they might have main- tained a suit in personam in that Court. Id.
1. An alien may take an estate in lands by the act of the parties, as by purchase, but he cannot take by the act of the law, as by descent. Orr v. Hodgson, 453 2. Where a person dies, leaving is-
sue, who are aliens, the latter are not deemed his heirs in law; but the estate descends to the next of kin who have an inheri table blood, in the same man- ner as if no such alien issue were in existence. Id. The 6th article of the treaty of peace of 1783, between the Uni- ted States and Great Britain, completely protected the titles of British subjects to lands in the United States, which would have been liable to forfeiture, by escheat, for the defeat of ali- enage. That article was not meant to be confined to confis- cations jure belli. Id. The 9th article of the treaty of 1794, between the United States and Great Britain, applies to the title of the partics, whatever it is, and gives it the same legal va- lidity as if the parties were citi- zens. It is not necessary that they should show an actual pos- session or seizin, but only that the title was in them at the time the treaty was made. Id. The 9th article of the treaty of 1794, did not mean to include any other persons than such as
taken by the individuals who composed the Association at the death of the testator; the sub- sequent incorporation of the As- sociation did not give it the ca- pacity of taking this bequest; there are no persons who could entitle themselves to the benefit of this legacy, were it not a cha- rity; and it is not sustainable in this Court, as a charity. Id.28, 29
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1, 2. 5. 3. Such a legacy would be sustain-
1. In 1790, S. H. a citizen of Vir- ginia, made his last will, con- taining the following bequest: "Item, what shall remain of my military certificates at the time of my death, both principal and interest, I give and bequeath to The Baptist Association, that for ordinary meets at Philadelphia annually, which I allow to be a perpetual fund for the education of youths of the Baptist deno- mination, who shall appear pro- mising for the ministry, always giving a preference to the de- scendants of my father's family." In 1792, the Legislature of Vir- ginia passed an act repealing all English statutes. In 1795, the testator died. The Baptist As- sociation in question had existed as a regularly organized body for many years before the date of his will; and in 1797 was in- corporated by the Legislature of Pennsylvania, by the name of "The Trustees of the Philadel- phia Baptist Association." Held, that the Association, not being incorporated at the testator's de- cease, could not take this trust as a Society. Baptist Associa- tion v. Hart's Ex'rs.
ed in England. Id.
29 4. The English stat. 43d of Eliz. gives validity to some devises to charitable uses, which were not valid, independent of that stat-
Id. Charitable bequests, where no legal interest is vested, and which are too vague to be claimed by those for whom the beneficial interest was intended, cannot be established by a court of equity, exercising its ordinary jurisdiction, independent of the stat. 43d Eliz. Id. Such charitable bequests cannot be established by a Court of equity, enforcing the preroga- tive of the king, as parens patriæ, independent of the statute 43d Eliz. Id. 7. If, in England, a charitable be-
quest of this nature, could be enforced by virtue of the king's prerogative as parens patriæ, Quære, How far this principle is applicable in the Courts of the United States? Id.
Note on Charitable Bequests, Appendix, Note I.
The rudiments of the law of cha- rities derived from the Roman law. Id.
5 No cases are considered as cha- ritable unless they fall within
2. The above bequest could not be
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan » |