The south-western. [volume] (Shreveport, La.) 1852-1870, 1865-06-07
AN IMPoRrANr DECISION IN A CoNF1scATIoN

AN T,poRTAYT DECISION IN A CoNFIscATIoN
CAsE-An extremely interesting point mas re-
Gently been decided by the United states CIRCUIT
court at New York, Judge Nelson presiding, CON
corning the rights Of citizen OF State WHICH
has been in Instruction, to standing IN court 10
defend his property seized under the conhscatloh
acts of the United States
The case was an appeal from decree OF the
district court condemning as forfeited to the
United States certain shares of the capital stock
Of the Great Western railway corporation
under the laws Of Illinois-owned by lie Roy NJ
Wiley a resident of Alabama. The libel OF IN
formation was founded on two acts OF congress,
one of August 6, 1861, the other OF July II,
1862. Wiley appeared by his proctors, put IN
his claim and his answer TO the.llbel, which were
stricken from the files by order of court, on the
Ground that, as a resident of State III insur-
rection against the United States hewas an alien
enemy and had no persona sta1ids IN court.
Other points of great interest were decided by
the court, but the most important question III
the case was whether or not the lower court was
right in striking from the files the claim and
answer of Wiley.
The acts of congress, above indicated, provide
| for the seizure of enemies property, as prize OF
war on land, i,sre belIi, which according TO the
/
| tborities by the law of nations, and can be up
held only by the municipal law Of the nation.
The law Of nations authorizes the capture as
prize Of war on the high seas-these acts OF
CONGRESS. on the land; and in the latter case, the
acts expressly provide that the proceedings shall
conform to the proceedings in admiralty and
revenue cases; and if the property Is found tc
belong to a person engaged III the rebellion, II
shall be condemned as enemy's property The
proceeding of condemnation, so far as may ot
practicable, is intendad by the acts OF congress
to be in analogy to proceedings in prize cases q
4 seizure Of enemies property on the high seas
These acts of congress are but an extension o.
the rule which, according TO international law
has always been applied, itare beJti, to enemies
propertv at sea. The principle that an alleT
enemy has no standing in court and canno
appear and defend his property seized as prIz'
of war on the high seas, does not appear to have
been applied to a claimant in the admiralty. Th'
hooks are full of cases in which the question in
yolyed was the national character of the claim
ant-whether a neutral or an enemy. In man.
prize cases growing out of the recent rebellion
the main point turned on the fact whether th
claimant was neutral, loyal citizen or an enc
: nv. These questions were fully discussed an
decided at the last term Of the supreme cour
The two proceedings, capture on the high sea
and capture on land, are made analogous b
act of congress, The court did not discuss th
question whether the claimant could be regarde
an alien enemy, be having been citizen of til
United States at the breaking out of the wa
and still being resident Of one Of the State
for even if an alien enemy he was entitled
appear as claimant, and contest the allegation
{ in the libel
e The decree of the lower court was reversed
t. New Orleans Times.