The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-07-02
COMMERCE As AFFECTED BIZ WAR.
Not Unlawful Until the Government 80 De-
ciares-A supreme Court Dccisien.

Not UnInwf Until the Governments 80 De-
ciares-A supreme Court Decision.
WASHINGTON, July lin the case Of
Edward Matthews, plaintiff IN error. vs.. Nelson
Nc Stes, In error to the Court Of Common Pleas
for the city and county Of New York, the
Supreme Court Of the United States has rem
dered the folio wing decision:
The judgment which this writ Of brings before
sirmstlon OF judgment against The plaintiff 10 error
o New York The original cause OF action intef
s sa co.. OF eIsss1f sy the n nso Of
alleged TIA, ns,he ,S y1s " see lime OF the seeep,
dated April e. 1851 made payable in one year 70 the
order Of Mcses, Value Co, ana It was accepted py
prlasipsi defence, and ne only Que which presents
eeps.nee was made, Inc defendant @s,tsess Was
resident Of the state Of New Yors that the other
residents Of Lous.n. and that before the acceptance
feSei ION Tns defence vas no, sus,sosa IN the
sgmmsn Ps s and The Judgement Of ,na, court was
tssreicre sonsider..ien w6stnsf The FsrneT
ih.. The civil war had an eiisience Commencing be-
fore that date must be Acceped established fac
"a;
PsSi: TI;s.a ias s.,s: % south Ssrons sscfss Ala
81 "a war sns
those states and tue United states Il must also be
eoneedss :. general rule TO be one Of ne lmmsea.e
such state Of sm even whsn not declared ias =.
jecL, sdhsrenis q the coatsaains forces Ia IN.
lawful and e. 4 inteTrseted Tee reason. for mi.
ali the members Of each oeiiisercni respectively
aud. were commercial Intercourse allowed IL Mould
tend 10 strengthen the enemy and snord facilities for
re.p9nde!nSes Hence has become an established
ing between he citizens subjects OF the nations or
powers ~ war. and places every Individual Of the
iSem:eves, in stale OF hossiity" xna /, disioves
or cuzens OF the two CONT nding parties prior to the
war for their continued existence would involve com.
mics Sun further, II is undenlDle that civil var
siesd UPON and follow state Of ioreiss war. we" cer
tain nis is 80 when civil war is sectional Equally
unl,wful between the coutendlng parties and It dis
But while all tins /. true general rule 1t is not
Without eaSeDSIs state o. war may exist and yet
sariy inconsistent with zach other trading with
even to a limited extent by a military commander
such permssions or licenses are partial suspensions OF
they are very common. BynkershocS. In his Qusest.
principle Of law that an immediate coaseSuence OF The
commencement ~ war Is the introduction Of all com.
var, remarks The gtiii!y however. o. merchants,
sttsp OF the laws ~ wal AZ ~ ec syss so me
alternately permitted aud FORBIDDEN 10 lime OF war as
commercial nation Is anxious to trade, aud accom-.
that i may be in Of the goods Of others Thus,
sometimes some, a mutual commerce Is permitted gen
Will Others prohibted ana sometimes II is
prohibited sltoerther" Hsleck. In his Treatise on
in Laws Of War, page 676 seq discusses the sub
lect At considerable length, and reDarss: That
branch OF the Government to which, from the form OF
lie Constitution, the power Of dec airing making war
is snlrusted has an undoubted right 10 regulate
modify, IN discretion, the hostiities which II sane
tons In England licenses are granted directly
Dy the Crown or by some subordinate officer whom
authority OF the Crown has been delegated either
by special instruc IONS or under act Of Paria-
ment In the United States. general rule,
licenses are is.ued under the authority OF an
an act Of Congress, but In special cases and for
purposes Immediately connected with the prosecution
Of the they may be granted by the authority
President as commandments Of the military and
naval forces OF the United sates held that until
the President issued his amatOn OF Aug TO- 1861,
In pursuance OF tue Of July IS OF that year, com
merco between the parties was not lawful, The
enactment that commerce should be unlawful after
such proclamation implies that is lawful until such
proclamation. Tho Court OF Appeals was, therefore,
rghI In holding that the partnership In case was
not dissolved BY the war when this acceptance was
made. Affirmed. Mr. Justice Strong delivered the
opinion.