Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/35

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Federal Court of Appeals.
29

1781.

the cargo were shipt by Henderson, as agent and attorney for the British capitulants; the residue of the cargo was shipt, partly by James Morson, agent and attorney for British capitulants, partly by Morson & Co. and partly by others, in their own right, as agents and attornies for others.

The letter of correspondence, which Henderson addressed to Brantlight & Son, to whom the ship and cargo were consigned, and his letters of correspondence, addressed to the gentleman at London for whom he was agent and attorney; the bill of lading he took for the property shipt, and his deposition annexed to the said bill, give a fair history of such part of the cargo, as was shipt by him: They prove it to be the property of British capitulants and not the property of Kender Mason.

The depositions of James Morson, the bills of lading, and the certificates of the Chief Justice, point out and ascertain, what part of the cargo he shipt as agent and attorney, and prove it to be the property of British capitulants, and not the property of Kender Mason.

The depositions, bills of lading, manifest, letters of correspondence, the Governor’s passport and certificate, and the deposition of Morson and Fitzgerald prove that the residue of the cargo, except what was shipt by Morson, & Co. Morson, Vance, & Co. and Lovel, Morson & Co. was the property of British capitulants, and not the property of Kender Mason.

If Mason, then, had any property on board, that property must have been such parts of the cargo as were shipt by Morson, & Co. Vance, & Co. and Lovel, Morson & Co. With regard to this part of the cargo, the evidence is not full and compleat: For altho’ Morson is proved to be a capitulant, yet the company is neither ascertained, nor proved to consist of capitulants.

But it is contended, that the property shipt by Henderson was the property of Kender Marson.

On what ground is the idea taken up, that Mason had any property at all on board? It is founded solely on that part of Morson & Co.’s letter, which mentions Kender Mason as a shipper. Exclusively of this letter, there is nothing, besides mere conjecture and possibility, to prove that he had any property at all on board.

This much must be clear; that if Henderson was meant, then Mason was not meant.

Morson & Co. say in their letter, “that even after the arrival of the British proclamation, no one but Kender Mason, and ourselves, would immediately ship.” If Henderson was not meant for Kender Mason, then Henderson was amongst those who were still alarmed, and would not immediately ship, on the arrival of the British proclamation; and, consequently, Kender Mason could have no property in what was shipt by Henderson:

for