The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1847-08-03
Law Intelligence.

Nelson and BettsThe folio wing Is the opinion of the
United States The ship Recorder and cargo, the
growth or production Of the East Indies .
Inc hoea OF information charges that this ship not
truly and wholly belonging the citizens or subjects Of
the British East indies on the 22d Of May ls47 import
ed from London into New York various goods described
being the growth, production manufacture of the
British East Indies from which place they have usually
since March, 1917 been shipped for transportation and
by whereof and by virtue of the act of
OF March 1871 the said ship, her tackle &o and the
said cargo became and forfeited to the United
tion, 80
subjects Of the Queen Of Great Britain and resident in
England. within the United Kingdom pleaded specially
wholly belonged to Them and still does, and that the
British East Indies and at the time
and part and parcel Of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and ireland, and Of her Majesty's do
| minions and that the said goods were the growth
production and manufacture of the dominions of her
maj sy and were received by them board said ship
at thu port Of London for transshpment to the port of
New York and aver their right to make such importa-
To the special pleas the District Attorney demurred
JrLY s<Judge Belts district judge delivered the
The question raised by the issue in law is whether
the trade In which this ship was employed is inhibited
United States, passed March /, 1917
The first section of the act provides that after the
3oth DAY OF September next no goods, wares or mer
chandise shall be imported into the United States from
foreign port place except In vessels the United
States such foreign vessels truly and wholly belong
goods are the growth, production manufacture or
from which such goods, wares or merchandise only
Provided nevertheless that this regulation shall not ex
tend to the vessel of foreign nation which has not
adopted and when snail not adopt similar regulation
The second section declares the vessel and cargo
Ing into the United States, in violation of those provi-
sions. forfeited
| 1t is not stated fin the pleadngs nor admitted BY
the claimants the argument that Great Britain has
adopted regulations similar to those established by this
act and the claimants therefore in srictness of law
may be entitled to the objection, that the construction
insisted by the government does bring the vessel
and cargo within the condemnation of the statute
We think, however, If the navigation laws of Great
Britain, VIGOROUSLY restraining the trade In American
vessels with her colonies within limits
the regulations OF this statute udicaly
tced BY the Court the provisions of tho Convention
tween the United States aud Great Britain, of July
1918 must BIZ regarded part OF the law OF tho ease
and In that Convention Great Britain reserves to her
self aud adopts by Implication regulations similar in
TINS TO those established by The act Of Congress
SO also it stands adltted by the plsaduss that goods
war ana msronand,s. the growth production
uacturs OF the British East ,ndies have the pas
OF the act Of Congress usually shipp.d for
tran, portation from the ports OF the Eat Indies
Iht Dlstriot Attorney on The part tn, government
accordingly contt nded that the trade attempt,
Cd In this instance prohibited British ve.sesdrst
by the direct hnung" Of the act Of Ccngress
cendly by It's intent and policy th.red from ante
cdent aud cotempofanoous leading to its enact
ment
We think upon general principles Of law the question
no longer open to the government upon the
tion bearing the act of Congress- IN this
In September, 1917, on transmitting the act To- the
ofcers OF customs throughout the United States the
Secretary OF the Treasury instructed them that the
term country In the frs. section is considered as EN-.
bracug all the possessions OF foreign State however
widely separated which subjected the execu-
tive and legislative authority The productions and
manufactures Of foreign State and of colonies
be imported into the United In vessels by
the citizens subjects Of such State without regard
their place Of residence within Its possessions.n
This exposition Of the aot does not appear to have
been called in question doubted by the United States
until the 3Oth June s42 when an opinion was given
by the Attorney General its meaning
which on the 9TH OF july lsa2 was transmitted by the
Secretary Of tho Treasury to the collectors of the
toms
The Secretary his circular nstrucs the collectors
ney General and to take the penalties OF the
law are enforced in all coming its provi-
ana the seizure IN the present case made in
The Attorney General ntmates that the language of
the first section Of act not entirely free from am
bguy, but declares it his opinion that it does not In
ships" y '''''sA
extended to foreign vessels the enactng clause By
this they are allowed where they belong wholly to the
are the growth manufacture to bring these goods
to ports By the provso this is confined to cases
where reciprocal privilege OF the kind extend.
| ed to vessels"
Interpretation of the act Is entitled to the highest
respect and We regarded 1t removing meeting the
dmculties raised on this issue should give most
careful consideration We should probably consider
able hesitancy in accepting the key the inter
probation Of the act the idea put forth In the opinion
that the enacting clause extended privilege to foreign
vessels and that the provso confined il where
reciprocal privilege OF the same kind ia TO our
vessels 1t appears to US the natural reading Of
the act gives retsliatory and prohibtve
by the proviso from being enforced against
nation not having adopted like prohibitions or restrc
tons against the United States But we forbear an ex
animation Of this point because the submitted to
the Attorney General had Of the features marking
this That was Belgian vessel which imported TO the
U: S. cargo from Buenos Ayres the products of the
whether such indirect trade was open TO her in articles
OF foreign growth or production The Attorney General
was Of opinion that the act of March 1877 did not
authorize It, The case would have been opposite the
Belgian ship had been laden home port in Europe
with productions OF Belgian colony territory in the
East or West Indies or Africa and the United States
debarred importing the goods except directly
| from the place Of their production.
There Is no evidence before that the Treasury De-
partment the officers of the Customs have since the
act OF 1917, arrested questioned importations of
colonial in vessels OF the mother untry
from their home ports and must regard the CO.
temporary exposition Of the Act given the
OF the Treasury as the acqucsced In and
exposition Of the Attorney General referred to
and there evidence before his
has ever been enforced in a similar to this
We hold the Government, II not all other parties now
precuded by that long usage and practical construction
OF the law from questioning its correctness disturb
| ing the course Of its execution
Admitting that the face of the Act IL is doubtful
whether the trade now attempted to be can
be allowed conceding that the intention of the
statute to the contrary is manifest and that the Trea
sury Department msapprehended, and misinterpreted
its PROVISIONS in the instructions Of September 1917
We think the settled rules of law, and the principles
governing the Interpretation of human language with
whatever solemnty and to Whatsoever purpose it is
employed require US to adopt and adhere to the con
temporapeous construction corroborsted by undevi-
apg usage VI thirty years, that which be APP
Piled 70 the statute, aud govern this case
We deem 1t unn o-ssary Co state arguments or ana
lyze cases supporting the proposition.
Tho principle recognised aud illustrated by the hxh-
ost legal authorities Dwsrrison ststutes sos; abb
stat o; crunch 22y, Lrsnch ~. q Pick r. OIL
The Supreme Court Of the United States gives tho
most solemn sanction TO the doctrine Ia dccsrpg tn
cont. wporary exposition of the Constitute w. prsc
tsed ana scquiesced under for period OF years fxes
ita construction lStusrt aud Laird Cranch 1897 and
In pronouncng the practical construction OF statute
the one which must be enforced although clearly u
authorized by the law Itself Is Cransh 80
McKeer ana Delaney
In the first case the period Of acquiescenoe had been
comparative Of short durationabout twenty wears
The Supreme Court of Massachusetts. in cas-. mos,
maturely considered. held that contain Dor eous Ia
generally the best contraction Of statute It gives
the seIse Of community Of the terms made use OF bv
The LeQnaiu II aIuLixuitx