Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1812-09-10
4 dollars per annum.

musI he tried in the district where the sei-
: zure IS made /; but it is the case of a se,z re-
as prize OF war. which may De tried before
! any competent tribunal, in any port Of ne
United States, TO which the prize shall Do
| sent.
I'd, That the Non-Importation Act is still
IN force and, consequently, it is unlawful
to import INTO the .ited States, any kind
of goods from Great Britain Or Ireland, orr
from the colonies dependencies of Greae
Britain and also, to import goods OF Brp-
fish growth, produce or manufacture, from
any other foreign country. The ship Su re-
ror has imported ner cargo INTO the United
States, IN violation OF the non-importatIon
laws, and both ship and cargo are liable to
seizure and contiscltion. rhe 8eh section ,f
the act of the LIST of MlrcA, 1919, (Which is
one of the sections revived and continued,
by the acts of TIE 1st of May, 80, and the
u oi March 1917 declares, that ali ne
Officers of the Customs shall have the
same authority that they have i'll revenue
cases, to seize goods imported Contrary to
the law; u Keep tlcm IN custody tor trial /;
and to enter vessels, dwelling houses, ana
stores, III sedch OF gods uniawilIly import
ed. Hut there Is nothing IN this Affirmative
provision OF the act, which can DC construed
TO destroy the right and the duty OF every
ci1izen and particularly Of every public t.
hcer, to seize and place in the custody OF ,.le
law, property found IN the direct ard pJsi-
tive violation OF legislative PROHIBITION. Tx
deed, the lSth section of the oct of the lst
| Ut March, llO9, adopts the rue for dls.rI-
| ouung peiia.ue, aud iorieitures, prescribed
| ny the Collccuoh Law, which provides OF
| the Case OF Il private lnl1rmer; and wnds
ever an msormer might lawfully do III e.
| revenue case, u cnttie hi self to share "a q
| ioteiture, ne nav lawfully dol non IN ior-
| tarion case. Tne rgh of d private mo. Her
| to seize goods IN the act IT beng SNUG, II,
was never DOUBTED
The Ulcer of the y an iolt had tl4l a
rlght 90 seize the Superior wltn le, ,at;J,
While She vas III the act If violating ;Ie a IL
Importation Jaw. but 1t Is ms dutJ 10 de-
| iVer her, within Il reasonable tine after d.
| seizure Tor that Cause, into the cha &c 1 ,le
| collector OF the district, i'll wnich sac vas
| seized, and IN which ne Question OF forfeI-
| ture can alone be tried.
Ihat part IF the nDn-:ntercourse system,
which authorised seizures by public ara d
| vessels, aud distribution al the torlcI,u, IS,
| according to the rules prescribed i'll tlc Use
| OF prize, by the act for the goversmcsl Of
| the navy, is no longer in force. Wne,ner as
pu1ilc armed vessels are entitled ON general
| principles, TO share as InfOrmers, upon sei--
lures ~ach they make, is a distinct qlesuOn
Ahu hOO Wiluh the scope OF the present en-
quiry.
Upon the whole, ] am of opinion. that the
| snip Superior Is liable to seizure upon O0tR
grounds buC that being seized by pu1iic
armed vessel, dis prize Of war, before any
seizure BY the Collector OF Delaware ior a.
breach of che non-inportation act, tne pro-
ceedIngs against her nust, IN the hrst irs
stance, DC, on behalf Of me captors.
AN, sir, with great esteem, your ubedS
| ent servant,
A. ]. DALLAS.
| 27th august, 1912.
To Com. .AieTander Murray.