Armstrong's Foundry
Supreme Court of the United States
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Eastern District .of Louisiana, the proceeding below being one for condemnation of pi’operty as used in aid of the rebellion, and resembling in its' general featux*es the case just disposed of.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Eastern District .of Louisiana, the proceeding below being one for condemnation of pi’operty as used in aid of the rebellion, and resembling in its' general featux*es the case just disposed of. It was thus: An act of Congress passed August 6th, 1861, “ to confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes,”* enacted that property used in aid of the rebellion with consent of the owner, should be the lawful subject of prize and capture wherever found, and made it the duty of the President to cause it “ to be seized, confiscated, and condemned.” It…
1Opinion of the Court
The CHIEF JUSTICE
delivered the opinion of the court.
Upon the case presented, it is necessary to‘consider a single question only.
It was insisted, in argument, that the pardon pleaded by the appellant cannot avail to relieve him from the forfeiture of the property seized, because the liability to seizure arose, under the statute, from the mode in which the property was employed, and was not to be regarded as a penal consequence of the act of the owner.
¥e are unable to concur in this view. "We think it clear that the statute regarded the consent of the owner to the employment of his property in…
2Cited by21 opinions
- People v. One 1941 Chevrolet CoupeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Burdick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Coffey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Powers v. RaymondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Illinois Central Railroad v. BosworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.