Law Commons^™

People V. Croswell: Libelous Truth, The Common Law, And Battlefield Of The Bloodless Revolution, Samuel A. Schwartz

Legal History Publications

The case of People v. Croswell will forever stand for the spirited arguments by leading legal minds about the legality of using truth as a defense to criminal libel, establishing the common law, and determining the role of the jury. But it is the story of Harry Croswell, young firebrand Federalist editor of The Wasp, that provides an insightful view into the turbulent political scene that stormed fiercely across the United States at the turn of the nineteenth century.

United States V. The William And The Phenomena Of Jury Nullification In Early 19th Century America, Michael G. Lederman

Legal History Publications

In September 1808, Judge John Davis upheld the constitutionality of the Embargo Act of 1807 under the Constitution’s Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 Interstate Commerce power. Judge Davis’s original opinion curiously lacks any reference to Marbury v. Madison. Judge Davis defends judicial review and rejects the notion of jury nullification. While Judge Davis upheld the embargo’s constitutionality, a subsequent jury trial on the facts resulted in the return of The William to its rightful owners. This case reflects the attempts by early American judges to carve out the power of judicial review and maintain the appearance of an …

United States V. Klintock: Reconsideration Of United States V. Palmer As To General Piracy As Defined By The Law Of Nations Through The Applicable Standards Of Political Action Of Acknowledgement And Recognition And The Status Of Statelessness, Justin L. Sieffert

Legal History Publications

During the February 1820 Term, the Supreme Court of the United States decided four significant piracy cases, beginning with United States v. Klintock. Political, economic, and social pressures enhanced the problem of piracy affecting the interests of the United States. Responding to the criticism of his decision in United States v. Palmer and the passage of the Act of 1819 state Congressional intent for defining piracy by the “law of nations,” Marshall authored the decision in Klintock distinguishing Palmer and, upon reconsideration, interpreting the Act of 1790 to include general piracy as defined by the “law of nations.” With …

Martin V. Mott And The Establishment Of Executive Emergency Authority, Eli Berns-Zieve

Legal History Publications

In August of 1814, a New York farmer named Jacob E. Mott refused to rendezvous with the militia pursuant to the orders of Governor Daniel D. Tompkins as commanded by President James Madison. In 1818, Mott was court martialed and fined ninety-six dollars. One year later, Mott brought an action in replevin in the New York state courts to recover chattel taken from him by a deputy marshal in lieu of the ninety-six dollars. Both the New York trial and appellate courts sided with Mott. In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Joseph Story, the Supreme Court of the United …

Willson V. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co., 25 U.S. 245 (1829): An Early Test Of The Dormant Commerce Clause, Michael P. Collins Jr.

Legal History Publications

In 1822, Delaware authorized the Blackbird Creek Marsh Company to bank and drain the Blackbird Creek in New Castle County. Subsequently, Thompson Wilson and others destroyed the structure built by the marsh company. The marsh company subsequently sued Mr. Wilson for the damage to its property. The parties eventually appealed their dispute to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court held that Delaware’s authorization to bank and dam the creek did not conflict with the federal government’s exclusive authority to regulate commerce between the several states. Ultimately, the Court decided Willson in a manner inconsistent with its earlier …

Interest And Irritation: Brown V. Maryland And The Making Of A National Economy, Henry P. Callegary

Legal History Publications

This paper examines the United States Supreme Court case Brown v. Maryland, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 419 (1827), which struck down Maryland’s licensing fee on wholesalers of imported goods. In doing so, the Court reaffirmed its commitment to a national economic policy, instead of a state-centric system. This paper explores the context of the decision, including profiles of the parties involved, the attorneys for both sides, the lower court decisions, and the majority opinion and dissent from the United States Supreme Court. Additionally, this paper follows the lineage of the case through to the present day, examining its doctrinal impact …

United States V. Hodges: Treason, Jury Trials, And The War Of 1812, Jennifer Elisa Smith

Legal History Publications

In August 1814 a number of British soldiers were arrested as stragglers or deserters in the town of Upper Marlboro, Maryland. Upon learning of the soldiers’ absences the British military took local physician, Dr. William Beanes, and two other residents into custody and threatened to burn Upper Marlboro if the British soldiers were not returned. John Hodges, a local attorney, arranged the soldiers’ return to the British military. For this, Hodges was charged with high treason for “adhering to [the] enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” The resulting jury trial was presided over by Justice Gabriel Duvall, a Supreme Court …

The Bellona Company's Case, Casey Conrad

Legal History Publications

The Bellona Gunpowder Company of Maryland was one of Maryland’s most prominent gunpowder manufactories during the early nineteenth century. Founded in 1801, the gunpowder company become the second leading gunpowder producer for the American government, and supplied almost one-fifth of American domestic gunpowder. In 1828, the Baltimore and Susquehanna Railroad Company was incorporated by the State of Maryland to construct a railroad that would connect the City of Baltimore to the Susquehanna River. The legislature authorized the railroad company to initiate condemnation proceedings against private property owners, if it was unable to negotiate for the sale of such land. In …

Shreve V. Baltimore: A Municipal Misstep Leads To A City Forever Beautiful, Laura Tallerico

Legal History Publications

This paper explores municipal decision making in condemnation proceedings and whether or not the public use requirement protects individual property owners from poor municipal decision-making. When condemners are allowed to take in fee simple absolute, their decisions have lasting effects on property. The decisions of the Baltimore City government in its creation of a water system illustrate why some may be queasy about this. However, this may actually be desirable because it allows for municipalities, in particular, to both achieve the public purpose necessary at the time of condemnation and to improve in the future rather than go through the …

United States V. Gooding: The Imperfect Indictment That Created The Perfect Defense For The Illegal Slave Trade, Fernando D. Kirkman

Legal History Publications

In United States v. Gooding, the Supreme Court quashed an indictment against John Gooding for engaging in international slave trading, a violation of the Slave Trade Act of 1818. The Slave Trade Act of 1818 modified the penalties for engaging the in slave trading, and switched the burden of proof to the defendant, to disprove the presumption that the defendant had engaged in the slave trade. This article looks at how United States v. Gooding stands as a step backwards toward condoning and legitimizing the international slave trade. This paper also examines the moral relativism expressed in the United States’ …

The Gran Para: The Delicate Dance Of South American Privateering From Baltimore, Patrick R. Browning

Legal History Publications

The Consul General of Portugal filed a libel in the District Court of Maryland, alleging silver and gold coin had been taken out of the Portuguese ship, Gran Para, and the specie subsequently deposited in the Marine Bank of Baltimore. In 1818, The Gran Para was sailing to Lisbon from Rio de Janeiro when the privateer, La Irresistible, captained by John Daniel Danels, took her cargo as prize. The lower courts entered decrees in favor of the Consul of Portugal, restoring property to the original owners. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court decrees, finding it very clear …

Reddall V. Bryan And The Role Of State Law In Federal Eminent Domain Jurisprudence, Shannon Frede

Legal History Publications

Prior to 1875, the standard federal takings procedure had been for state governments to condemn property on behalf of the federal government. As a result, the majority of interpretative work in the early history of eminent domain jurisprudence was undertaken by state courts. In 1853, the Maryland General Assembly granted the United States Government the power to condemn land in Maryland for an aqueduct across the Potomac to supply water to two District cities. In Reddall v. Bryan, the Maryland Court of Appeals upheld the aqueduct supplying the city of Washington with water as a public use. The Court …

Baltimore V. Valsamaki: The Maryland Court Of Appeals' Response To Kelo, Jeff Shaw

Legal History Publications

In the years following the Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Kelo v. New London, state judges and legislators across the country responded with a tidal wave of reform to state eminent domain law. While legislative reform efforts largely floundered in the Maryland General Assembly, the Maryland Court of Appeals, in the case of Baltimore v. Valsamaki, curbed the City of Baltimore’s use of quick-take condemnation procedures, imposed additional planning requirements on condemning authorities, and emphasizing the fact that property rights are fundamental constitutional rights. This article will begin with an examination of quick-take procedures and the reasons why …

Public Takings By The State For Private Use: A Maryland Case Study In Georges Creek Coal & Iron Company V. New Central Coal Company (1871-1874), Joshua T. Carback

Legal History Publications

This paper examines the legal controversy concerning New Central Company’s attempt to execute a public taking of the land of the Georges Creek Coal and Iron Company for its private use to build a railroad. This paper analyzes the significance of the case within the social, economic, and political context of the town of Lonaconing in Allegany County, Western Maryland, where the parties were situated. This paper also traces the procedural history of the case, including its appearance before the Allegany Circuit Court in 1872, and before the Maryland Court of Appeals in 1873 and 1874. Finally, this paper presents …

Case Study: Webster V. Susquehanna Pole Line Company Of Harford County (1910), Alyssa E. Leonhardt

Legal History Publications

At the turn of the 20th century, the State of Maryland witnessed an increase in the demand for hydroelectricity. Several public utility companies raced to construct a hydroelectric facility on the Susquehanna River, by which they could distribute electricity to Baltimore, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and Wilmington. This case study examines the use of eminent domain by one such company, the Susquehanna Pole Line Company of Harford County, for the purpose of erecting a continuous transmission line, originating at McCall’s Ferry Dam, the first hydroelectric facility built on the Susquehanna River. This project was subsequently challenged by Harford County residents, whose property …

The Constitutional Dimensions Of Sports Franchise Takings: Lessons Learned From The Baltimore Colts, Travis Bullock

Legal History Publications

This paper chronicles the history of the Baltimore Colts up to and during that franchises’ relocation from Baltimore City to Indianapolis. Although Baltimore City attempted to prevent the relocation by taking the franchise through eminent domain, the Colts were no longer subject to Maryland’s, and therefore the city’s, jurisdiction. By moving, the Colts exposed an important limitation on State eminent domain authority; that condemned property must be located within a state’s territory in order to be subject to eminent domain. Further, the commerce clause would likely have prevented the city from condemning the Colts.

Condemnation Of Fairfield During World War Ii: A City's Quest For Just Compensation, Fernando Papakonyang

Legal History Publications

During World War II, when allied cargo ships were being sunk by German U-boats, the

Federal government in a bid to expand its ship building capabilities, condemned land in Fairfield, Baltimore, Maryland. The land was given to Bethlehem Steel Corporation, primarily to build and repair ships. After the owners of property in the condemned area were compensated, the District Court in the District of Maryland convened to determine what compensation if any the Mayor and City of Baltimore were entitled to for the alleys that were condemned.

The Court granted the Mayor and City of Baltimore only nominal damages as …

Great Falls Mfg. Co. V. Garland, 124 U.S. 581 (1888): The Final Battle After Thirty Years Of Litigation Over The Rights To Great Falls On The Potomac, Julia Carbonetti

Legal History Publications

The Great Falls Manufacturing Company owned extensive land and water rights at the Great Falls on the Potomac River at the time the United States decided to use the Great Falls as a water supply to the new capital in the City of Washington. In order to use its power of eminent domain, the federal government passed two Acts between 1858 and 1888. During that time, the United States and the Great Falls Manufacturing Company pursued 30 years of litigation to argue the just compensation that was due for the property taken at Great Falls. The 30 years ended in …

The Santissima Trinidad: The Role Of Baltimore's Privateers With The Independence Of The United Provinces, Shannon Price

Legal History Publications

After the War of 1812, the maritime industry began to decline and merchants and mariners began serving as privateers for Latin American colonies ceding from Spain. This paper examines the Supreme Court decision in an action filed on behalf of the Spanish government seeking restitution for cargo seized from a Spanish vessel, the Santissima Trinidad, on the high seas by the Independencia Del Sud, a public vessel of Buenos Ayres. The Court holds that jurisdiction exists for neutrality violations as the goods were landed at Norfolk, Virginia and the public vessel had an illegal augmentation of force in a U.S. …

Livingston & Gilchrist V. The Maryland Insurance Co. (1813): A Testament To Judicial Flexibility, Kathleen Lord Fallon

Legal History Publications

Barely a month before Justice Brockholst Livingston joined the Supreme Court of the United States, a ship he commissioned with a cargo of $50,000, was captured by the British and condemned. The circumstances of the vessel’s voyage led to its capture; she sailed as an American merchant ship under a Spanish license with an American crew. When seized as a prize, the British found papers showing conflicting information concealed amongst the crew belongings. Justice Livingston tried to recoup his losses through an insurance policy with the Maryland Insurance Company, but was denied on the grounds that the voyage had been …

Locke V. United States And The Definition Of Probable Cause In U.S. Civil Forfeiture Proceedings, Benjamin Groff

Legal History Publications

United States civil forfeiture laws are rooted in admiralty in rem forfeiture proceedings that go back to mid-1700s English customs law, and a statute called the Act of Frauds. The procedure was born of the necessity of international marine trade. Similarly, when it came to using in rem seizure to enforce the customs laws, the Crown used a burden shifting presumption that was also born of necessity. Vessel owners were required to come forward and exculpate their vessel once the Crown showed probable cause of a violation. In Locke v. United States, Justice Marshall upheld that burden shifting presumption and …

Manella, Pujals & Co. V. Barry, 7 U.S. 415 (1806), Nicole Whitecar

Legal History Publications

Manella v. Barry highlights issues of agency and contract interpretation in the international maritime trade context. In the midst of America’s entry into the Quasi-War with France, a Baltimore shipping merchant brokered a large tobacco trade with a Spanish firm and experienced the risks of conducting trade over the high seas during wartime. Three out of seven ships were captured, and the Spanish firm sought to recover from the Baltimore merchant for the price of the lost cargo. Both the Circuit Court of Maryland and John Marshall’s Supreme Court sided with James Barry, holding that the Baltimore merchant was not …

Maryland Insurance Co. V. Woods, Andrew Weissenberg

Legal History Publications

Maryland Insurance Company v. Woods, 10 U.S. 29 (1810). In 1803, Britain utilized France’s interference in the Civil Swiss Strife as a pretext to continue its occupancy of Malta, effectively ending the short-lived Treaty of Amiens. As the most impressive Naval Power in the world, Britain proceeded to blockade French, Spanish, and Dutch ports. In 1805, Williams Woods purchased two insurance policies from The Maryland Insurance Company, a successful and lucrative Baltimore marine insurance institution. The two policies covered the ship, The William and Mary, and its cargo. The policy assured the journey from Baltimore to Laguira, with “liberty at …

Sheppard V. Taylor, 5 Peters 675 (1831): Deception On The High Seas And The Quest For Lost Wages, Steven Zerhusen

Legal History Publications

This Article follows the case of the ship Warren, which set sail in 1806 to take part in illicit trade with the Spanish colonies, unbeknownst to all on board except for the supercargo. After dealing with the suicide of the captain and capture in Concepcion Bay, Chile, the crew languished for years in Spanish prison. After trying for almost 20 years the proceeds of the ship were finally returned to the owners, and the crew filed petition. Not until 1831 was their libel upheld, and wages from their voyage 25 years earlier to be paid to the crew. This article …

Baltimore's Piratical Patriot Privateers: The Arrogante Barcelones, 20 U.S. 496 (1822), Shannon Byrne

Legal History Publications

The case of The Arrogante Barcelones involved a complicated story of facts, due in part to the cunningness of one of the main players, Joseph Almeida. Almeida’s maneuvers make sense when viewed through the lens of nineteenth century Baltimore, the War of 1812, and U.S. citizens’ involvement in South American privateering. At first glance, this case seems to hinge on issues regarding the validity of Almeida’s commission, the authority of the condemnation, and the sufficiency of the documentation produced to prove it. However, the United States Supreme Court ultimately avoids untangling those maritime issues and instead bases its opinion in …

Manro V. Almeida: Piracy, Maritime Torts, And Attachment In Rem, Stephanie Owen

Legal History Publications

In 1820, Captain Joseph Almeida, on the Bolivar and under South American colors, pursued and captured the Spanish ship Santiago off the coast of the Chesapeake Bay. On board was $5000 in specie owned by a small group of Baltimore merchants. The Baltimore merchants brought a libel against Captain Almeida and requested an attachment in rem to force Captain Almeida to answer for the maritime tort. Although the attachment initially issued, the lower court restored Captain Almeida’s goods. In 1825, the United States Supreme Court ruled that attachment in rem was a proper remedy for a maritime tort.

Mason V. The Ship Blaireau: Salvage, Slaves, And The Law Of Nations, Kristin Burnworth

Legal History Publications

In March 1803, French ship Le Blaireau ran into Spanish ship of war St. Julien in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, severely damaging the Blaireau such that her captain and crew abandoned ship and boarded the St. Julien, with the exception of seaman Thomas Toole. The next day, British ship The Firm found and temporarily repaired the Blaireau, and helped Toole bring her into port in Baltimore, which was The Firm’s destination. The case addressed the question of awarding salvage; specifically, to whom should there be salvage, and in what amounts? It also raised questions about …

Issues Of Delay & Deviation In Marine Insurance: A Case Study Of Oliver V. The Maryland Insurance Company, 7 Cranach 487 (1813), Kyle Hildreth

Legal History Publications

An examination of the case Oliver v. The Maryland Insurance Company, 7 Cranch 487 (1813). In Oliver, Robert Oliver, the plaintiff, sued the Maryland Insurance Company, the defendant, in an attempt to recover on an insurance policy he had purchased for a shipment of goods aboard the snow Comet. The Comet was seized by a British ship on its return from Spain, and was condemned under the Orders in Council of 1807. The Court affirmed a lower court judgment that Oliver was not entitled to recover, because the Comet had engaged in an unreasonable delay and deviation …

The Merrimack, 12 U.S. 317 (1814): Transatlantic Trade And The Transfer Of Property During The War Of 1812, Jeremy Esperon

Legal History Publications

A key prong of American strategy during the War of 1812 was to enlist the aid of privateers – private actors licensed by the government to use force against the enemy. Among the ships American privateers seized during the war pursuant to this strategy was the Merrimack, an American-owned vessel returning from Liverpool, England to Baltimore, Maryland carrying on board a cargo of British goods. Her seizure led to the Supreme Court case The Merrimack, 12 U.S. 317 (1814), a seemingly banal case that in fact is a cautionary tale for merchants of one belligerent nation seeking to …

The Anne, 16 U.S. 435 (1818): The Fate Of Vessels Captured After The War Of 1812, Kimberly Schindel

Legal History Publications

The War of 1812 officially ended in 1815 with the Treaty of Ghent, but many vessels were captured and condemned as prizes after the Treaty was ratified. One of those ships was The Anne. This paper describes The Anne's capture and analyzes it within its place in history. Particularly, it looks at the role of neutral nations during wartime, and the effect they had on prizes captured within their territory. Finally, it analyzes the legal aspects of the case, including the arguments and opinions and discusses the impact that The Anne had on principles of maritime law.