Qgygggt Court or Penwlmdai 271 an Ameri;-an mmfuort in the I*i‘mrl• fervice, employed to car- rygy, ry Ilour- and {oldies to and from French ports. gd. That the hifi j vdkl had been gnploycd in carrying difpatchcs for the Fmmb I Gmgmmgm, ,th. T hit the vell`cl had been employed in trad- ' ing with the enemies of Gr¢·nt·Brimin, fupplying them with the · means of fulieuancc and of war. And, 5th. '1`hat the port from which the vcllil came was in a {tate of blockade. The judge of the Vice-Admiralty pronounced a general de- cree of condemnation, upon both vei`l`el and cargo,. without fpecifying any particular caufe of forfeiture. Under theft circumllances, Ingzrjéll and Du Pmceau, for the ` piaintii}, contended that they were entitled to {hew, that the brig and cvgo, were hm _/ide American property; that, if fo, the warranty had been complied with; and that no other ground alledged in the libel was a juli; caufe of capture and condemna- tion to iifcharge the underwriter. It is tmc, that the ancient cafes iiy, generally, that foreign judgments are conclulive, with- out dillinguilhing between the judgments of Courts of Admi- ralty, and of other Courts; but modern adj udications have more accurately fettled, that a foreign judgment {hall be deem- ed prima jireie evidence, but, like all other evidence, it is liable to examination. Doug. 6. 4 T Rep. 493. Bull. M P. o45. 2 Sbww. 23 2. {Leak: Edit. in 1mt.}* The fentence may jullly be concluiive between thafe who are parties to it, and mull: cx nujmze, be eonclulive upon the fubjeét to which it immediately applies: but it ought not to be binding on third perfons with collateral interells; nor upon objects which it ne- ver contemplated. There has been a great fluétuation in the Eugqb decilions upon points of commercial law. The infur- ance of enemy’s property has, at one time, been held lawful-; but Lord Jllangfvlzfs decilions on that point, have been recently over-ruled. Parke 239 {Inj} Edi!.) And it is well known, that the EngI_% courts of Vice-Admiralty do not decide according to the Law of Nations, but according to the inltruélions of the Crown. But there is not, in fait, any judicial determination of the Englyl: Courts, antecedent to the Amerimn revolution, which declares, that the {entence of a Court of Admiralty can- not be examined and controverted between perfons who were not parties to it. The cafe of Bcruardi ·v. Jllbiteux, Doug. 5 54. occurred lince the revolution; it has, therefore, no obligatory influence; and it carries the doétrine, refpeéting the conclulive character " M°K:.xt1.`Cb!¢f_7’us:i.·e. Tl.: idea that a fentence of a Court of Admiralty is conclulive, nrilbs from this conlideration, that the Court always proceeds in rem. The dccree naturally and necellarily binds the lirhjeét of the proceeding, a {hip, or cargo; and any perlbn pur. thaling under thc decree will, of ccurfe, be lecxe.
�
