Court Opinion

ID: 2160646
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-10-30 08:29:45.238393+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:26:20.752806
License: Public Domain

3 U.S. 6 (____)
3 Dall. 6
GLASS, et al. Appellants,
versus
The Sloop BETSEY, et al.
Supreme Court of United States.

It was argued by E. Tilghman and Lewis, for the appellants; and by Winchester (of Maryland) and Du Ponceau, for the appellee.
*15 THE COURT, having kept the cause under advisement for several days, informed the counsel, that besides the question of jurisdiction as to the District Court, another question fairly arose upon the record,  whether any foreign nation had a right, without the positive stipulations of a treaty, to establish in this country, an admiralty jurisdiction for taking cognizance of prizes captured on the high seas, by its subjects or citizens, from its enemies? Though this question had not been agitated, THE COURT deemed it of great public importance to be decided; and, meaning to decide it, they declared a desire to hear it discussed. Du Ponceau, however, observed, that the parties to the appeal did not conceive themselves interested in *16 the point; and that the French minister had given no instructions for arguing it. Upon which, JAY, Chief Justice, proceeded to deliver the following unanimous opinion.
BY THE COURT: The Judges being decidedly of opinion, that every District Court in the United States, possesses all the powers of a court of Admiralty, whether considered as an instance, or as a prize court, and that the plea of the aforesaid Appellee, Pierre Arcade Johannene, to the jurisdiction of the District Court of Maryland, is insufficient: THEREFORE IT IS CONSIDERED by the Supreme Court aforesaid, and now finally decreed and adjudged by the same, that the said plea be, and the same is hereby overruled and dismissed, and that the decree of the said District Court of Maryland, founded thereon, be, and the same is hereby revoked, reversed and annulled.
AND the said Supreme Court being further clearly of opinion, that the District Court of Maryland aforesaid, has jurisdiction competent to enquire, and to decide, whether, in the present case, restitution ought to be made to the claimants, or either of them, in whole or in part (that is whether such restitution can be made consistently with the laws of nations and the treaties and laws of the United States) THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the said District Court of Maryland do proceed to determine upon the libel of the said Alexander S. Glass, and others, agreeably to law and right, the said plea to the jurisdiction of the said court, notwithstanding.
AND the said Supreme Court being further of opinion, that no foreign power can of right institute, or erect, any court of judicature of any kind, within the jurisdiction of the United States, but such only as may be warranted by, and be in pursuance of treaties, IT IS THEREFORE DECREED AND ADJUDGED that the admiralty jurisdiction, which has been exercised in the United States by the Consuls of France, not being so warranted, is not of right.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the said Supreme Court, that this cause be, and it is hereby, remanded to the District Court, for the Maryland District, for a final decision, and that the several parties to the same do each pay their own costs.