Los Angeles herald., 1892-09-27
AN ADMIRALTY CASH
In the United states Circuit Court.
Judge Ross Opinion.

In the United States Circuit Court.
Judge Ross' Opinion.
Quite an important case was decided
by Judge E. M. Ross, in the United
States ciicuit court yesterday morning.
1t was entitled The United States va.
Two Hundred and Fifty Kegs of Nails.
1t was an action by the government to
enforce an alleged forfeiture of certain
merchandise, on the ground that it was
transported from one port of the United
States to another port therein, in for
eign bottom.
The court, in his opinion, says that
the answer of the owner of the property
admits bringing it into the port OF
Redondo, in this district, and sets up as
g defense that the merchandise was
wholly the product and manufacture of
the United States; was shipped from
New York in the Belgian ship Waes-
land, consigned to a commercial house
at Antwerp; it was there discharged
and landed, and subsequently shipped
on the British ship Kircudbrightshire
consigned to respondent at San Fran
cisco. 1t was brought there, entered as
the manufacture of the United States,
which had been exported and re-
turned to this country. Prior to
the departure of the Waesland from
New York respondent procured GUS
| toms certificate from the collector, of the
expectation of merchandise, and the
consignees at Antwerp procured from
the United States consul a certificate
that the merchandise consisted of arti-
cles of the manufacture of the United
| States, which had not advanced in value
or improved in condition by any process
OF manufacture or other means.
The libel is based on section 4347 of
the revised statutes, which provides
that no merchandise shall be imported
or transported, under penalty of for
feiture thereof, from one port OF the
United States to another port in the
United States, in vessel belonging
wholly or in part to the subject of for
eign power. The court, referring to
this, says that it was under re.enact-
ment of the fourth section of the act OF
1917, an act manifestly passed in the in
terest of American shipping, and to pre-
vent foreign vessels from engaging in
domestic commerce. Then the coast
however, it assumed larger proportions,
and it became an easy thing for foreign
vessels to take cargo from the United
States, touch and discharge at a Cana
dian port, then reload and proceed to an
American port.
To prevent this, congress passed the
act of 1866, which referred to such prac-
tices on the northern, northeastern and
northwestern frontiers OF the United
States providing tor forfeiture of such
vessel and payment OF tonnage.
"As congress thus made the evasion
of the provisions of the statutes" said
the court, "the courts cannot say that
any other conditions than those defined
constitute defense without departing
from the manifest intent of the statute
and usurping the powers of the legisla-
tive department of the government.
The act of the respondent was a palpa-
Bile evasion of the provisions of section
4347 OF the revised statutes; but it was
not the act thereby prohibited; nor was
there any concealment about the trans
action. II such evasions as are here
shown should Re prohibited, it is for
congress to prohibit them. 1t is not
for the courts to make the law, or to de-
part from the intention of the law-mak-
ing power, as manifested by it's enact
ments. The exceptions are overruled." !"
The decision of the court enables the
kegs Of nails to 60 on their way rejeic-
ing, 81