The Boston
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
[Appeal from the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] In admiralty. The information against the schooner Boston and appurtenances alleged, that certain prohibited goods of foreign growth, &c., were, at the Cape of Good Hope, with the knowledge of the owner and master, put on board the same schooner with intention to import the same into the United States, contrary to the act 1st March, 1809, c. 91 [2 Story’s Laws, 1115; 2 Stat 529, c. 24],…
Read the full summary
[Appeal from the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] In admiralty. The information against the schooner Boston and appurtenances alleged, that certain prohibited goods of foreign growth, &c., were, at the Cape of Good Hope, with the knowledge of the owner and master, put on board the same schooner with intention to import the same into the United States, contrary to the act 1st March, 1809, c. 91 [2 Story’s Laws, 1115; 2 Stat 529, c. 24], and that the same goods were afterwards, in pursuance of the same intention, actually imported into the port of Boston.…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
It has been contended by the counsel for the claimants, the schooner and cargo are not forfeited, because the cargo was not taken on board with an intention to import the same into the United States, contrary to the act of 1st March, 1809; that their whole conduct shows that they never meant to violate the law, but intended the importation should be made into the United States, upon the contingency only that it should by subsequent events become lawful; and that within forty-eight hours after the arrival of the schooner at Boston, they gave an ulterior destination to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Flagler v. KiddCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1897
- Cunard S. S. Co. v. StranahanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1904
- National Sugar Refining Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951