New Haven (Society for Propagation of the Gospel, &c. v.) 8 Wheaton, 464 · Newsom v. Pryor's Lessee, 7 Wheaton, 7. Nicholas v. Anderson, 8 Wheaton, 365. Nicholls v. Webb, 8 Wheaton, 326 Nueva Anna and Liebre, The, 6 Wheaton, 193. 0. ..... .483 .194 .447 .432 .57 Ogden (Gibbons v.) 6 Wheaton, 448.. Orr (Goldsborough v.) 8 Wheaton, 217..... P. Pacific Insurance Company (Dorr v.) 7 Wheaton, 581. 8 Wheaton, 699. .120 .390 .175 -338 .145 209 .523 547 Pitt, The, 8 Wheaton, 371 .450 Powell (Thacher v.) 6 Wheaton, 119. ..30 Pratt (Corporation of Washington v.) 8 Wheaton, 681. .538 174 Prevost v. Gratz, 6 Wheaton, 481. 131 Prevost (Gratz v.) 6 Wheaton, 481. 131 Pryor's Lessee (Newsom v.) 7 Wheaton, 7. 194 Society for the Prop. of the Gospel, &c. v. New Haven et al. 8 Wheaton, 464. 483 144 8 Wheaton, 268. Spring v. South Carolina Insurance Company, 6 Wheaton, 519. 8 Wheaton, 268. 411 144 .411 Sullivan v. Fulton S. B. Co. 6 Wheaton, 450.... .121 Union Bank of Alexandria (Holbrook v.) 7 Wheaton, 553.. .324 .420 157 United States Bank (Fleckner v.) 8 Wheaton, 338.. .405 437 .50 Wheaton (Sexton v.) 8 Wheaton, 229. . .396 Wheelright (Columbian Insurance Company v.) 7 Wheaton, 534. 316 Wister (Sneed v.) 8 Wheaton, 690... 543 Withers (Mechanics' Bank of Alexandria v.) 6 Wheaton, 106.. .24 469 Where a case involved the construction of a treaty, the court heard a third argument on the application of the executive government of the United States. Whether the capture is made by a duly commissioned captor or not, is a question between the government and the captor, with which the claimant has nothing to do. If the capture be made by a non-commissioned captor, the government may contest the right of the captor after a decree of condemnation, and before a distribution of the prize proceeds; and the condemnation must be to the government. The 17th article of the Spanish treaty of 1795, (8 Stats. at Large, 148,) so far as it purports to give any effect to passports, is imperfect and inoperative, in consequence of the omission to annex the form of passport to the treaty. By the Spanish treaty of 1795, free ships make free goods; but the form of the passport, by which the freedom of the ship was to have been conclusively established, never having been annexed to the treaty, the proprietary interest of the ship is to be [ 2 ] proved according to the ordinary rules of the prize court, and if thus shown to be Spanish, will protect the cargo on board, to whomsoever the latter may belong. By the rules of the prize court, the onus probandi of a neutral interest rests on the claimant. 'Mr. JUSTICE WASHINGTON was absent the whole of this term, from indisposition. The Amiable Isabella. 6 W. The evidence to acquit or condemn, must come, in the first instance, from the ship's papers, and the examination of the captured persons. Where these are not satisfactory, further proof may be admitted, if the claimant has not forfeited his right to it by a breach of good faith. On the production of further.proof, if the neutrality of the property is not established beyond reasonable doubt, condemnation follows. The assertion of a false claim, in whole or in part, by an agent, or in connivance with the real owner, is a substantive cause of condemnation. APPEAL from the circuit court of the United States for North . Carolina. This was the case of a ship and cargo, sailing under Spanish colors, and captured by the privateer Roger, Quarles, mas[* 3 ] ter, on an ostensible voyage *from Havana to Hamburg, but really destined for London, or with an alternative destination, and orders to touch in England for information as to markets, and further instructions. The ship sailed from the Havana, [ 4 ] on the 24th of November, 1814, under * convoy of the British frigate Ister, with which she parted company on the 1st of December, the frigate having gone in chase of an American privateer; and on the 3d of December, was captured by the privateer Roger, and carried into Wilmington, North Carolina, for adjudication. The ship and cargo were condemned as prize of war, in the district court of North Carolina, and the sentence was, after the admission of further proof in the circuit court, affirmed by that court. An appeal was then allowed to this court, with permission to introduce new proof here, if this court should choose to receive it. The original evidence consisted of the papers found on board the captured vessel, and delivered up to the captors by the master, at the time of the capture; and of certain other documents afterwards found concealed on board, or in the possession of Rahlives, the supercargo, or of one Masuco, alias Burr, a passenger on board The Isabella. Some of the ship's papers were mutilated, and attempted to be destroyed, and others were thrown overboard, and spoliated. The facts upon which the court rested its judgment are stated in the opinion. Gaston and Harper, for the appellant and claimant. Pinkney, was heard on the application of the executive. [65] STORY, J., delivered the opinion of the court. This cause was heard upon the whole evidence, introduced by both parties, at the last term; and as it embraced several |