Respublica v. Gordon
Supreme Court of the United States
The.defendant was included in an act of proclamation issued during the late war, and not appearing within the time prescribed, was attainted of treason, for adhering to the king of Great Britain, in consequence of which, his estate was confiscated to the use of the commonwealth, but it had never been taken into possession.
Read the full summary
The.defendant was included in an act of proclamation issued during the late war, and not appearing within the time prescribed, was attainted of treason, for adhering to the king of Great Britain, in consequence of which, his estate was confiscated to the use of the commonwealth, but it had never been taken into possession. He returned, since the peace, to the state of Pennsylvania, and applied to the executive council, representing that he was a minor at the time of the Attainder, and was forcibly prevented by his guardian from joining the American army — for which reasons he prayed a…
1Opinion of the Court
But now, the Chieb Justice delivered the opinion of the court, that anj proceedings against Mr. Gordon, the defendant, would contravene an express article in the treaty of peace and amity, entered into between the United States of America and Great Britain, for which reason, they could not sustain the suggestion filed by the attorney-general. And the defendant was accordingly discharged, (a)(a)
The object that the defendant meant to accomplish by this proceeding, was to reverse the attainder; in consequence of which his title to the estate would revive, and as it had not beer appropriated or…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Nixon v. Administrator of General ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Oneida Indian Nation of New York, Cross v. State of New York, Counties of Broome, Chenango, Cortland, Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Madison, Oswego, Oneida, Onondaga, St. Lawrence and Tioga, Individually and as Class Representatives, Cross-Appellants. Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin and Oneida of the Thames Band, Plaintiffs- Cross-Appellees v. State of New York, Counties of Broome, Chenango, Cortland, Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Madison, Oneida, Onondaga, Oswego, St. Lawrence and Tioga, New York, and Valentine Ryan, New York Electric & Gas Corp., St. Regis Paper Co., and Georgia Pacific Corp., Individually and as Class Representatives, Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Oneida Indian Nation v. New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. PrattSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.