Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1863-03-24

down 4az0o very readily aud added 10 the h9et I
at Vicksburg-and the shade Of the departed
Mallory viii lift up its hands in purgatory and
exelaim IN the language of Dominic Sampson, 7
" Prodigious " The attack upon Fort Pember-
ton shows what ditching can do; its result viii
show whether we have been counting chickens
before they are Matched in anticipating a large /.
addition to our Mississippi aotJlla.
IMPGRTANT DECISIONS BY a.
.. sUPREM& COURGs
The Prize Cases-Stqtes Taring United States
St0eks-Ths AlmadsH Mine Case.
Several important decisions, heretofore made
By the q. S. supreme court, have been noticed
by US. The, following report of these, we find
in our Northern exchanges, Of the l4th:
H PRIZE CASES.
Mr.. Justice Grier delivered the opinion Of the
court ia tbs prize cases. The main questions
were. first, whether the blockade as laid on by
the President was valid ia law, so as to make
its violation to result in the lawful capture aud
condemnation Of the vessel violating aud, sec
ond, whether the commercial property Of the
ports blOeksded, IN its incidents Of ship and
cargo, was justly liable 70 the rule Of maritime
capture end prize Of war.
Both these questions we're determined by the
court IN favor Of the government, and the De
erees of condemnation il the courts below were
affirmed throughout IN the cases of ali the YES
sells, with the single exception of the property
Of Messrs. Irwin & Co, Of New York, which
was laden on board the Crenshaw, which, hay
ing been purchased aud paid for before Virginia
had seeded, was held not to fall under the rule
aud was accordingly restored. The sdjudics-
ton of the above questions, Of course, involved
the discussion Of the point whether or not such
q state of war existed ct the time Of the CAPTURE,
in contemplation o FLAW, as TO give 20 the gov
ernmsnt Of The United States full beligarsnt
rights aud powers.
This point, largely discussed, IN the opinion
of the court was fully ruled in favor Of the gov
eminent The dissenting opinion was read By
Judge Nelson, and took an opposite view of all
these questions, insisting that the Proclamation
establishing TIE blockade required, IS an indis-
penssble condition precedent 80 condemnation
for breach of il, that the vessel, whether taken
in egress from the port or 10 entering it, should
receive warning Of the blockade from Ons Of
the blOeksding vessels, and that such warning
should be in10Tsed upon her register. Il seemed
70 be conceded that this was not The tTua rule
of blockade under the laws of nations, but that,
under the proclamation of the President. such
proceedings must precede lawful condemnation.
The dissenting opinion also held that at the
time of the captures and prior to the m cling OF
Congress, there was 90 state of war in the Unj-
ted States bringing with it the legal cOust-
quences Of war, and subjeeiing the commerce. Of
ang rebel port to the rule Of maritime capture.
Il regarded the establishment of the blockade
as a municipal proceeding. The commence
I ment of q state Of war, bringing with It the le-
gal consequences Of war, was fixed, it was held
By the act OF Congress Of July Is, authorizing
the President, by proclamation, to close the
rebel ports, and declare commercial Intercourse
with the insHrreetona-y districts thereafter Az
lawful.
After reading the dissentzg %opinioa. judge
Nelson stated that ne was authorized to an
nounce that Chief Justice fancy AMI Ar jus.
tee CatrOn eOncured with him Mr.. Justice
Clifford then announced shat be, also, e0neurTed
in the dissenting opinion the chief justice was
not present st the delivery Of the opinion, and
Mr., Justice Catron, apparently iudisposed, re-
tired from the bench before the reading was con
eluded. OF the many eminent counsel Ia the
ease, there we're present only Mr.. Carlisle for
claimants, and Mr.. Eames and Nh Sedgwick,
with the Encouragement, for the government.
STATES TAxlNG U. S. STOCKS.
Mr.. Justice Nelson announced that be held
the opinion in the case Of the people Of the
State Of New York against the Bank of Com.
merce, IN which the stocks constituting a part
Of the capital Of the bank we're taxed under the
State law, The tax was confirmed By the su-
preme court Of New York, appealed to the
court Of appsals, and thence to this court on
writ Of error. He did not resd thu opinion, as
it was late, but announced that the court had
reversed the judgment of the court below in
both cases presented, holding that It is not in
the power of the States 10 tax tie stocks of the
United States. This is the unanimous opinion
Of the court.
THE ALMADEN n CASE.
In the great case OF the New Almsden quick
silver mine, the judgment of the supreme cours
r5YeTses the decree ia the court below, which
was in favor of the claimant, Castllers, under
whom The Messrs Barron claim Ths court adj
judges that Castillers never had any valid site |
to the mine, by reason Of the inefHcency in law
of the papers issued by the Mexican authorities,
upon which his claim of title rested In Teseh-
ing this conclusion, the court held, in the FIRST
plaee, that the dispsteh of the msxiesn Minis
ter Of foreign relations to the Mexican authori-
ties in California did rot amount in law to a
grant of the two leagues of land around the
mine, which, under it, were claimed by Csstl-
lers.
The court also held that the board Of commits
constituted by statute to dstarmins land
titles in California after IFS conquest By the
United States, had n9 Jurisdiction over the min
right, which, By well known principles Of
mining law, is wholly separate and distinct
from the grant Of the land in which ths mine is
found. Jnsticas Grier, Cstron and Weyne dis.
sent from the opinion Of the court This judg
ment Of the supreme court leaves the title to the
mine, which, IS is well known. is If enormous
value, to be contested between tbs Uaited States
on the one part, and what is commonly called
the Fsssett interest on the other Part; this latter
having, as it is understood, united With
itself most, if not al, Of the other outstanding
which claim the mine.
Among the interests affiliated with EhE Fsssets
interest, which are stll subject to litigation, is
thst Of the Hon R9bsrtJ. Waikef, the value of
which is, of course, greatly augmented By this
decision. Thenet nHual income from this min
is estimated to be near half . million. Wheu
in the hands Of Messrs Barron, a. a time when
quicksilver commanded a higher price than st
present, the yield from the mine was probsbIy
nearly q million Among the emiuent counsel
engaged in this great case en- both sides, the fol
lowing were present when the opinion was read:
Messrs. O'CenoT, johnson AID Pcacby4 counsel
Tor The claimant, and sx Attorney Ganaral Back
who appeared for the Cover ment TIE Hon
Robert j. Wslkerswas slso present