Faulkner v. United States

5 Ct. Cl. 612
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedDecember 15, 1869
StatusPublished

This text of 5 Ct. Cl. 612 (Faulkner v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Faulkner v. United States, 5 Ct. Cl. 612 (cc 1869).

Opinions

Casey, Oh. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The claimant was a resident of McMinnville, Tennessee, and had a cotton factory there, which was destroyed in the spring of 1862, by order of General Bosecrans. From the spring of 1862 till the end of the war, McMinnville was alternately in the hands of the Union and insurgent forces. In the fall of 1863, he went to reside in Nashville, and continued to reside there till the end of the rebellion. He employed Ira G. Wood, who lived near Winchester, Tennessee, in 1863 and 1864, to buy cotton for him. Wood had this cotton, ten bales, bought for him, and stored at Point Bock, Jackson County, Alabama, and which were taken and seized by the military authorities and [615]*615shipped. Other cotton belonging to the claimant was taken at the same time, but upon application by Mr. Faulkner to the military commander, and satisfying Him that he was a loyal’ man, the other cotton was delivered up to him. These ten bales were shipped to the Treasury agent and sold, and the net proceeds amount to the sum of $2,301 15, and these are claimed in this case.

The loyalty of Faulkner is abundantly proved. The ownership and seizure, and payment of the proceeds into the Treasury, are all fully made out. And the only defence set up is that McMinnville and Nashville, where the claimant resided, were within the Union lines, and Point Bock, where the cotton was bought, stored, and seized, was within the rebel lines, and so its purchase for the claimant was a breach of the non-intercourse laws, and rendered the property subject to capture and forfeiture.

Whether trade between the inhabitants of the places designated at the times referred to was illegal and interdicted, must depend upon the acts of Congress forbidding commercial intercourse between the belligerents, the proclamations of the President issued in pursuance of these acts, the actual occupation by the one or the other of the forces at any particular time, the nature of the occupation, and the true construction to be given to thé acts and proclamations on this subject.

By the proclamation of April 15,1861, it was declared that the laws of the United States were opposed by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceeding in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, and Louisiana, and the militia of the several States was called forth for that purpose. (See 12 Stat. L., p. 1258.) By another proclamation, on the 19th of the same -month, a blockade of all the ports of those States was declared; and vessels attempting to violate the blockade were declared to be subject to capture, and to be sent to the nearest and most convenient port for proceedings against them and their cargo, as prize of war. On the 27th April, 1861, the blockade was extended to the ports of Virginia and North Carolina.

By the act of July 13, 1861, sec. 5, it was provided “that it may and. shall be lawful for the President by proclamation to declare that the inhabitants of such State, or any section or part thereof, where such insurrection exists, are in a state of [616]*616insurrection against the United States; and thereupon all commercial intercourse by and between the same and the citizens thereof, and the citizens of the rest of the United States, shall cease and be unlawful, so long as such condition of hostility shall continue; and all goods and chattels, wares and merchandise, coming from said State or section into the other parts of the United States, and all proceeding to such State or section, by land or water, shall, together with the vessel or vehicle conveying the same, or conveying- persons to or from such State or section, be forfeited to the United States.” (12 Stat. L., p. 257.)

By an addition to this act passed on 31st July, 1861, it was further provided u that the power of the President to declare the inhabitants of any State, or any part thereof, in a state of insurrection, as provided in the fifth section of the act to which this is in addition,-, shall extend to, and include the inhabitants of any State or part thereof, where such insurrection against the United States shall be found by the President at any time to exist.”

On the 16th August, 1861, the President issued his proclamation, declaring “that the inhabitants of the said States of Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Florida, (except the inhabitants of that part of the State of Virginia lying west of the Alleghany Mountains, and of suoh oilier parts of that State and the other States hereinbefore named as may maintain a loyal adhesion to the Union and the Constitution, or may be, from time to time, occupied and controlled by forces of the United States, engaged in the dispersion of such insurgents,) are in a state of insurrection against the United States, and that all commercial intercourse between the same and the inhabitants thereof, with the exceptions aforesaid, and the citizens of other States, and other parts of the United States, is unlawful, and will remain unlawful, until such insurrection shall cease, or has been suppressed.” All goods passing to or fro in violation of this proclamation, and the vessel or vehicle conveying the same, were made liable to capture and forfeiture.

By the act 2d June, 1862, for collection of-direct taxes, Ssc., it was made the duty of the President, on or before the 1st July, 1862, to declare by proclamation in what States or parts of States insurrection exists. (12 Stat. L., p. 422.) On July 1, 1862, a [617]*617proclamation was issued by the President, in pursuance of this statute, in which the entire States of Tennessee and Alabama, without exception, are included. (12 Stat. L., p. 1266.)

On the 12th May, 1862, the President by proclamation declared the ports of New Orleans, Port Boyal, and Beaufort open, and trade under certain regulations there allowed. (12 Stat. L., p. 1263.)

On the 2d April, 1863, President Lincoln issued a proclamation, reciting that “experience has shown that the exceptions made in and by said proclamation, (16th August, 1861,) embarrass the due enforcement of said act of 13th July, 1861, and the proper regulations of the commercial intercourse authorized by said act, with the loyal citizens of said States.” This proclamation then designates the States in insurrection, including Alabama and Tennessee, without exception. He then declares that the inhabitants of the.States named “ are in a state of insurrection against the United States, and that all commercial intercourse, not. licensed and-conducted as provided in said act, (13th July, 1861,) between the said States and the inhabitants thereof, with the exceptions aforesaid, and the citizens of other States, and other parts of the United States, is unlawful, and will remain unlawful, until such insurrection shall cease or has been suppressed, and notice thereof has been duly given by proclamation; and all cotton, tobacco, and other products, and all other goods and chattels, wares and merchandise, coming from any of said States, with the exceptions aforesaid, into other parts of the United States, or proceeding to any of said States, with the exceptions aforesaid, without the license and permission of the President, through the Secretary of the Treasury, will, together with the vessel or vehicle conveying the same, be forfeited to the United States.”

This proclamation clearly annulled and avoided all the previous exceptions not continued.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Ct. Cl. 612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faulkner-v-united-states-cc-1869.