BIX HUfiDBBD TONS OP IKON OEE. 599 �and that the merchandise, without notice, falls within the intention and apirit of the law. He regards the act as the e?;pression of the legis- lative intent to preserve and give effect to the ship'Owner'slien in all cases of forfeiture to the government, acd ctuotes Potter's Dwarris on Statutes, etc^ p. 14e, in support of his position: "The intention of the legislature may be found from the act itself, from other acts in pari materia, and sometimes from the cause, oi' uecessity of the stat- ute; and wherever the intent ean be discovered, it should be followed with reason and discretion, though such construction seems contrary to the letter of the statute." But these are rules of interpretation; when the words of the law are obscure, and there is no obscurity in thc act under consideration. I am not prepared to affirm that when ppugress explicitly gives to parties certain rights, upon their perform- ance of certain antecedent acts and conditions, they are entitled to claim the rights, without showipg.that they have performed the acts and conditions. , �■ , But this question tums, in my judgnaent, upon other considerations, towhich I shall now ad vert. There are a large numberof statutes in both the customs and internal-revenue acts whicbsubject property, used in violation of the law, to forfeiture. It is sufficient, for my present purpose, to divide these statutes into two classes, — one class forfeiting the offonding res absolutely, without reference to liens of innocent holders, or the claims of honafide purchasers without iibticci; and the other only eondemning the interest of the guilty owner, and preserving the rights of honest lienors or purchasers. Moat of the sections for forfeiture, under the internal-revenue laws, belong to the former classs, and many of those under the ■customs laws to the lat- ter. Whether the statute falls within one class or the other depends upon the phraseology used by congress in its enactment. Where it makes the forfeiture absolute, it is within the former class, and the forfeiture is incurred at the time of the, commission of the act which Works the oondemnation, and the title is vested in the United States from that date. No matter how long afterwards proqe^dingB are taken to enforce the forfeiture, the right of the government runs back, by relation, to the time of the commission of the wrongfulaots, and cuts ont all intervening claimants, however innocent. But when a stat- ute. gives an alternative to the United States, either to.fprfeit the offeuding thing or its value by suit against the ofifeading person, it cornes within the latter class; beoause the government acguires no title to the property until its proper officers make an election whether they willproceed against there* or. aga.inst the offenderfor itavalue» ��� �
