The New York herald., 1870-03-08
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

Invnlidity of transactions with Citizens Of
kebeiiious States Daring tho War-CIassin-
cation OF Goods by Custom Ofncers-What
Constitutes General and Particular Avera gcs.
WASHINGTON, March 7, 1870.
The United States Us. Henry OTossn.eve,.- Appcal
from the Court or Clafns-Grossmeyer prior to tno
rebellion was q citizen or New York and had claims
for loans and other Indebtedness against one Elm.
stein, resident OF Georgia, which, after the war
commenced. through friend who passed back and
forth, he directed should be invested IN cotton for
hs use and benefit by Einstein anu 1t was so done.
subsequently the cotton was captured BY the army
at Savannah, where It was stored sold by the gov-
ernment and the proceeds paid into the Treasury.
The Court OF Claims uRdinG that Grossmeycr had
never been within the rebel lines and was legal
throughout the war, gave MIN Judgment for the
brought here the Court now reversed the judgment
OF the Court Of CLAIMS Mr.. Justice DavIS delivering
the opinion holding that Al intercourse between the
two sections closed and became illegal upon the out
break OF the war, without the enactment OF any law
on the subjecs but that Congress- intending that
people eoncernngtt nad expressly declared the TACT
IL would have been unlawful, therefore for cross.
nave been done by his agent and n the act OF the
principal would have been unlawful that OF the
agent must be also And It follows that there was
NO authority for the parchase OF the cotton by Elm
stein; and there being no authority It's purchase
or course no title passed TO him. ana he was not the
owner Of the property and has no rlgntful claim 10
the proceeds. rns opinion taxes tho ground that
there could be no valid agency creatsd alter the
between tho citizens adnering to tho dinsrspt sec
tions, and that tue whole transaction was oonse-
quently void.
Hiram Barney Collector. Us. Schneider ct al
Error to the Circuit Court the southern District
Of Ne,o York-This action was brought to recover
certain duties claimed to have been illegally exacted
on imports OF Saxony dress goods as goods OF
similar description to dealrcs, the importers claim
Ing tnat they were not similar and were nos 80 re-
garded by the trade, and that customs o1iccrs are
bound by the names and descrpto OF goods
known 10 the trade and commerce and cannot arbi-
trarily insist upon CLASSIFICATION OF their own.
TheyCourt below directed verdict for the plaintiffs
ana tne Coliector brought the case here or review
Court holding that the question whether Inc goods
were OF similar description was mixed question
OF law and lacts and should have been submitted
to tho Jury to deterRinc under proper Instructions
OF the Court Judgment reversed and cause re-
manded.
ship q. L. Hartman vs EJaerich.-Appedl rom
the circuit court Jor ne District or cditrornlu.-The
question In this case was whether vessel under
charter to deliver freight Valparaiso TO the CON-
mander or the spanish navy, having learned un ar
rival at the Chincba Islands that the Spanish SQUAD
bad LETT that port aud It's present position was
not known, and believing TO make Valparaiso would
subject bota ship and cargo TO seizure, was sti,l
bound TO toucn At that port to earn compons satlon
for tue voyage. The Circuit Court be.ow held that
freight WAS not earned because the voyage was not
completed by making the port OF Valparaiso. Tnc
contract was for a certain voyage which Not being
performed no compensation was earned the shlp.
per nos oeng IN iault Tue risk and danger alleged
was no suiilcent reason for the nonperiormance OF
the Stipulated voyage. Mr.. Justice swayno now de-
ilvered the opinion OF tnis Court, aairming tnat
judgment
SHIP star Of Hope u.s. W,Hiam c. Ayuon et a.-
Appeal J'oni the circuit court Jor TIC Disrict or
California. THE question in this case was whether
inc suanaing u me shp star Of Hope ~ tne BsJ of