The Mars
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
[Appeal from the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] The information in this case proceeded for a forfeiture of the brig Mars, upon the allegation that the brig departed from the United States, bound to a permitted port, without giving bond pursuant to the act of 1st March, 1809, c. 91, § 10. There were other counts in the information, which were not considered by the court, because it was admitted, that there was a forfeiture under the…
Read the full summary
[Appeal from the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] The information in this case proceeded for a forfeiture of the brig Mars, upon the allegation that the brig departed from the United States, bound to a permitted port, without giving bond pursuant to the act of 1st March, 1809, c. 91, § 10. There were other counts in the information, which were not considered by the court, because it was admitted, that there was a forfeiture under the first count, an'd the answer of the claimant set up, as a justification of his title, that he was a bona fide purchaser…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
The question presented to the court is, whether property, which has become forfeited to the United States, and afterwards and before seizure, while remaining in the possession of the vendor, is sold to a bona fide purchaser for a valuable consideration, without notice, is protected against the claim of the United States. This question is peculiarly delicate and interesting, in whatever way it is considered. On the one hand, it strikes at the root of almost all the forfeitures in rem, which the legislature has provided, to guard the revenue laws from abuse; and, if the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Bennett v. American Art UnionThe Superior Court of New York City · 1852
- Williams v. DelanoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891