Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Baltimore (4)
- Privateer (4)
- Joseph Almeida (2)
- Merchant (2)
- Prize law (2)
-
- South American Revolution (2)
- Spain (2)
- War of 1812 (2)
- 1817 (1)
- 1825 (1)
- 1831 (1)
- Admiralty (1)
- Agent (1)
- Assignees (1)
- Attachment in rem (1)
- Bankruptcy (1)
- Blockade (1)
- Bolivar (1)
- Brockholst Livingston (1)
- Buchanan (1)
- Buenos Aires (1)
- Captain (1)
- Carthagena (1)
- Commissioning (1)
- Consul (1)
- Contraband (1)
- Covenant (1)
- David Hoffman (1)
- Don Juan Bautista Bernabeu (1)
- Early 19th century (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Santissima Trinidad: The Role Of Baltimore's Privateers With The Independence Of The United Provinces, Shannon Price
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.