Gay's Gold
Supreme Court of the United States
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana; the case being this: By a non-intercourse act of July 13th, 1861, it was declared that “all goods, and chattels, wares, and merchandise,” coming from a State proclaimed by the President iu insurrection, into other parts of the United States, should be forfeited.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana; the case being this: By a non-intercourse act of July 13th, 1861, it was declared that “all goods, and chattels, wares, and merchandise,” coming from a State proclaimed by the President iu insurrection, into other parts of the United States, should be forfeited. The 3d section of an act of May 20th, 1862,* supplementary to the act of July 13th, 1861, just mentioned, enacted as follows: “ That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby further empowered to prohibit and prevent the transportation in any vessel, &c., within the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Miller
The facts disclosed by the claimant’s witness, Edwards, his manner of testifying, his relations with the forbidden traffic, and with Gay, leave little room to doubt that, whether the gold was intended to reach Gay’s manual possession or not, it was destined to be used in purchasing cotton in the insurrectionary district. It is conceded that Gay was not a rebel, and was, technically at least, a loyal man. He could easily have come to New Orleans and made oath to his claim for the money, and given his own testimony as to the destination of the gold. It is probable that he, or he and Freeman,…
2Cited by5 opinions
- In Re DeesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Helm v. ZarecorDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1913
- United States v. BarnardDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1947
- Culp v. HolbrookIndiana Court of Appeals · 1920
- Wise v. Chew Hing LungCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1897