Decree of the circuit court, and order for distribution of proceeds, wherein the collector's fourth is given over to the United States.

Present: His honor William Johnson.

Decree. At the hearing of this cause I was very much inclined to think favorably of it. I am satisfied that the Diana was not the vessel seen hovering on the coast to the north of Georgetown; that her state of distress was real, and not fictitious; that the damaged state of her cargo was a sufficient reason for opening and airing the articles found between decks, and that the necessity of disguising English articles in order to introduce them into the ports of the continent, during the time. of the exclusion of English goods, may have been the cause of the disguise put upon this cargo; but still the case may come strictly within the words of our statute. The goods, excepting the iron and steel, were unquestionably of British origin, and, although neutral property, and from a neutral port, if shipped for a port of these States, the forfeiture attaches. The only question, then, is, whether the destination to Amelia was real or colorable? It has been contended that, although real, and with an intention to close the voyage there, yet, as the goods were clearly intended for the southern market, and it is well known that everything landed in Amelia is intended to be brought surreptitiously or otherwise into the United States, that the forfeiture ought even in that case to attach. I am well convinced that there is a great deal of truth in this argument, and experience has taught us that shipments to Amelia are but evasions of our restrictive laws; but the diffi· culty of confining the application of such reasoning within practical limits would render it improper to adopt it. A shipment to the Cape of Good Hope for the like purposes, if that place presented facilities for the introduction of prohibited articles, would be equally within the scope of this argument. Such an extension of the restrictive system might have been made a provision of positive law, but could not be adopted by this court without it. But the destination to Amelia, in this case, could not have been intended to evade our laws. The disguise which the goods had assumed rendered such evasion unnecessary.The real avowed market for the goods was an American port, and the destination to Amelia could only be to avoid capture by our enemy. It is true the letter of instructions, and the oath of the supercargo, make out Amelia to be the real and primary place of destination. But it is a remarkable fact, that both the letter of instructions and the oath of the supercargo make out a voyage not sanctioned by the charter party.The charter party authorizes the destination to Amelia only in case our ports, from Cape Hatteras southwardly, should be "found in a state of blockade," and giving no permission to sail from thence to an Ameri

can port. But the letter of instructions makes Amelia the primary destination; the bills of lading are to Amelia and a market, and the destination to the United States only in case, upon Mitchelsen's arrival at Amelia, he shall find "any port of the United States where he can obtain a return cargo unblockaded," then not even confining himself to the limits of the capes of Virginia. Hence, I conclude that the destination to Amelia was only ultimate or colorable, to evade capture, and that the real voyage was that described in the charter party; that, by securing to herself the run from the capes of Virginia to Amelia, the vessel was intended to avail herself of the double chance of either finding a port unblockaded, or evading the blockade, and her real primary object was the market to be found in a port of the United States. In this view, I must consider this case as coming within the description of a shipment to a port of the United States, and confirm the decree of the district court condemning the cargo. As there is no evidence that the captain or owner were privy to the fact that the goods were of British origin, the vessel must be acquitted.

Extract from his honor Judge W. Johnson's order made in relation to the distribution of the proceeds.

"One-half goes to the United States necessarily, and the remaining fourth will also go to the United States, in consequence of the collector having been sworn as a witness; but it will go encumbered with whatever charges it would have been liable to in the hands of the collector."

I, James Jervey, district clerk for South Carolina district, do certify that the foregoing is a just and true copy of the decree pronounced in the circuit court in the case of the United States vs. the brig Diana and cargo; and the above extract is from the order of Judge Johnson relative to the distribution of the proceeds; all which proceedings are of record in my office, in the aforesaid case.

In testimony whereof, I have affixed the seal of the said court at Charleston, this eighteenth day of December, anno domini 1822, and in the forty-seventh year of the independence of the United States of America.

JAMES JERVEY, [L. S.]
District Clerk.

Certificate of the people of Georgetown of the integrity of the collector, and his correct administration.

We do hereby certify that the late Thomas Chapman, collector of the customs for the port of Georgetown, in South Carolina, was a gentleman of great worth and respectability; that through a long life he was distinguished for integrity, and many amiable and excellent qualities; that he fulfilled the duties of collector in the most honorable, zealous, and exemplary manner, and as a public officer no one could

be entitled to higher praise. His compensation as collector was very small, and, in our opinion, a very inadequate remuneration for faithful services to the government. He left, at his death, a family of seven children, and a very small property. It would afford sincere satisfaction to us, and to the people of this district in general, if Thomas Chapman's share of the Diana and her cargo could be restored to his family. We are perfectly satisfied that his conduct in that transaction was entirely praiseworthy.

1st Session.

No. 54.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

JANUARY 19, 1854.-Ordered to be printed.

Mr. WADE made the following

REPORT.

[To accompany Bill S. 148.]

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of Zachariah Lawrence, report:

After a careful examination of the evidence in this case, the committee are unanimously of opinion that the claimant is entitled to relief. The facts, as detailed in a previous report, appear to be as follows,

viz.:

The petitioner, and six others under his command, in the autumn of 1813, on board a private fishing craft, captured and brought into the port of Passamaquaddy, on the coast of Maine, a British sloop called "The Venture," having on board a valuable cargo. On arriving in port the vessel was taken possession of by Sherman Leland, then in command of that military post, on the ground that the capturing vessel had no commission from the United States authorizing her to make captures of enemy's vessels on the high seas.

"The Venture" was duly libelled and condemned and the proceeds, amounting to $21,163 31, after deducting all expenses, were disposed of by order of court, one moiety being paid into the treasury of the United States, and the other moiety being equally divided between the collector of the port, as informer, and Major Leland, as the military commander in making the capture. The capture having been made by non-commissioned captors, it was held by the court to have been made by the government. Under the prize acts, the distribution of the prize proceeds are confined to public or private armed vessels cruizing under regular commissions.

Soon after this occurrence the enemy obtained possession of Eastport and the adjacent region; and this memorialist, having been deprived by a legal, and as he supposed, final adjudication of his case, of all participation in the avails of his bold and successful enterprise against the enemies of his country-and being driven by the enemy from the pursuit of his accustomed vocation as a fisherman, he removed to the then luxurious wilderness of Ohio, and devoted his thoughts and his energies to the conquest of the wilderness and the cultivation of the earth, in order to procure for himself and his young family an honest and independent support. He has now become aged and feeble, while