Smith v. United States
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
[Error to the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] This also was an action of debt for the penalty of the double value, under the embargo law, and was in many respects similar to the preceding case.
Read the full summary
[Error to the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] This also was an action of debt for the penalty of the double value, under the embargo law, and was in many respects similar to the preceding case. The declaration was as follows: “Joseph Smith was attached to answer to the United States of America, in a plea of debt, for that during the continuance of a certain act of the United States, entitled, ‘An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States,’ and of the several acts supplementary thereto, to wit, on the…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
The first error assigned is, in effect, that a conclusion “contrary to the law in such case made and provided,” is not a conclusion against the form of any statute; and if not, then upon acknowledged principles, the judgment ought to be reversed. The objection savors a good deal of technical nicety; but as this is a penal action, if it be well founded in law, the plaintiff in error ought to have the full benefit of it. At the argument, no authority precisely in point was produced, and the objection therefore was endeavored to be supported upon the general rule, and upon…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1806
3Cited by5 opinions
- Townsend v. JemisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- Gay v. JoplinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1882
- State v. O'DonnellSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1873
- Haskell v. MoodyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1829
- Wilcox v. WebbIndiana Supreme Court · 1823