"ther, agreeable to all cases, cannot well be laid down. The question must depend upon the particular circumstances

46

of each case. Perhaps the mere touching in the neu"tral country to take fresh clearances, may properly be con"sidered as a fraudulent evasion, and is in effect the direct "trade; but the high court of admiralty has expressly de"cided (and I see no reason to expect that the court of ad"peal will vary the rule) that landing the goods, and pay"ing the duties in the neutral country, breaks the continuity of the voyage, and is such an importation as lega"lizes the trade, although the goods be re-shipped in the same vessel, and on account of the same neutral proprietors, and be forwarded for sale to the mother country "or the colony."

The preceding part of this report had expressly stated the general principles of law arising on the royal instructions, as they have been stated in this work; and in what manner do the above passages, jar with the account which has been given of the judicial application of those principles ?

The question is not whether the advocate general, if he had foreseen the frauds which have since come to light, could have more explicitly guarded his opinion against any forced and artful construction which might be unfairly made in favour of those frauds; but whether his language can fairly be construed to mean, that landing the goods, and paying the duties, would legalize a transaction, the detected and indisputable object of which was, to use his own words, “ a fraudulent evasion" of the legal rules and principles which he had immediately before laid down. Now, what sense can possibly be put on the former part of the above extract, that will consist with this construction? How could the effect of an intermediate importation depend in point of law, " on the particular cir"cumstances of each case," if the general circumstances of landing and paying duties, were enough in every case, and without respect to the motive of the importer, to legalize the

subsequent voyage? The meaning undeniably is, that the legal effect of the importation, turned on the question of fact, whether the transaction was evasive or ingenuous; but that a recent decision had held the facts of landing and paying of duties to be, in general, sufficient evidence that it was ingenuous and not evasive, when the only circumstances leading to an opposite conclusion, were such as the report describes, namely, "a "reshipment in the same vessel, on account of the same "neutral proprietors, and a sending forward for sale to the "mother country, or the colony."

This is so far from implying that landing and paying duties would, under all circumstances, be sufficient, that it evidently implies the contrary. Can it be said, for instance, that the charty-party of the ship being for an entire voyage from the colony to Europe, (which was the case of the Enoch,) is not a circumstance, which, in conjunction with those which are here specified, might, consistently with this 'opinion, repel the favourable presumptions arising from the landing and paying duties in America? If not, into what can this part of the opinion be resolved, but a mere specification of the evidence which, under given circumstances, might suffice to satisfy our Courts of Prize of the fair intent of the importer?

Supposing, however, that the language would fairly bear a different construction, I am still at a loss to discover what benefit the American neutralizers can plausibly claim from this opinion. They have landed their cargoes; but have they truly performed the other condition? Have they paid the du

ties?

The King's advocate, like the court to whose decision he alluded, had been led by fallacious evidence to suppose that the large duties imposed on West India produce in America were really paid in that country by the importers, whose case he was considering; and the consequence was, a reasonable presumption that the importer, who submitted to

that charge originally, meant to take the benefit of it by a sale n the neutral country. But it turns out on better information, that the duties are not paid that a trifling per centage on them only, is received by the American custom-house. If the opinion therefore had meant to give a substantive effect to the payment of duties, still the trade in question can derive no sanction from this opinion; and it is preposterous to claim on this ground, any right of previous notice, before these fraudulent transactions can be equitably treated as illegal.

68, (D).

This contrivance has in fact already become very common: but it has been a still more frequent precaution, to prepare the means of sustaining, in case of need, that pretence which was found effectual in the case of the Eagle,

Weeks, (see supra, 56), by offering the vessels and cargoes for sale by public advertisement. Whoever will take the pains to examine the files of American newspapers published in the last summer, may find that the sale of a newly-arrived West Indiaman, with her entire cargo, had in that country, however strange it may seem to the English merchant, become ostensibly a very common transaction. Unluckily, in a late case at the Admiralty, newspapers were found on board, which offered the vessel and cargo for sale, after the date of those documents which were made up for the voyage to Europe.

I understand that in the insurances on the latter branch of these voyages, it is now beginning to be customary, to warrant that the goods were not imported into America on account of the assured.

(71, (E).

The author was not surprised to find that this great general fact, however notorious in our Prize Courts, and among the officers of our navy, excited astonishment in the minds of many of his readers. It has been the fate of the great subject of our maritime system in general, as well as the most important facts that relate to it, to be misrepresented abroad, and misunderstood and neglected at home.

In 1805, the British public was surprised to hear that there was not a hostile mercantile flag, a few coasters excepted, to be found on the ocean; yet so early as 1799, the fact was officially and publicly avowed, and in a less qualified way by our enemies themselves; for in an address of the Executive Directory of France to the Council of Five Hundred, in January, 1799, they distinctly stated, that not a single French ship had passed the Sound in the whole of the preceding year; and that there was not at that period a single merchant vessel navigating under their flag.

"Dans la dernier état publié par les gazettes du Nord du "nombre des vaisseaux qui ont passé le Sund, depuis un an, on "ne trouve pas un seul navire Francais.”

And again," Et quand il est malheureusement trop vrai, qu'il " n'ya pas un seul vaisseau merchand, naviguant sous pavillon Francais, quel autre moyen d'exportation avons nous, que "l'emploi des vaisseaux neutres ?" Code des Prises, Tom. II. p: 385.-See also a valuable note in the Appendix to Dr. Ro binson's 2d vol. of Admiralty Reports, p. 378, to which I am indebted for this extract.

74, (F).

Such is the flourishing state of the trade of Antwerp, that in the course of 1804 no fewer than 2142 vessels were entered

inwards: and during the three first quarters only of the last

HH

year, the trade had increased so much, that the number entered was 2513. Supposing the last quarter equally productive, the whole number of vessels during 1805 would be 3350. See these facts extracted from the Dutch Gazettes in the London Newspapers of October 30, 1805.

75, (G).

The following extract of a letter intercepted in its passage from the Havannah to St. Croix, will furnish some means of estimating the present importance of Cuba as a sugar colony. The letter is dated the 2d April, 1805, and is addressed by a Spanish house at the Havannah, to its confidential agent in the Danish Islands.

"Our products are uncommonly abundant, Our present crop will exceed 300,000 Boxes, and since the beginning of the year, the exportation has not exceeded 35,000 boxes. In a word we estimate our crop will amount to 12 millions of dollars."

[Extract of letter from the firm of WIDOW POEY and HERNANDEZ, to a merchant in St. Croix, found on board the CHARLES, STILES, master, a prize to H. M. S. L'EPERVIER, condemned at Tortola. The papers are now in the Registry of the Appellate Jurisdiction at Doctors' Commons.]

The average weight of boxes of sugar from the Havannah is about 4 cwt. 1 quarter English: 300,000 boxes therefore are about 1,275,000 cwt. and this it appears was the estimated produce of Cuba, in the present year, in sugar alone. Its other products, especially indigo and cotton, though comparatively small, are by no means inconsiderable; and its agriculture in general is very rapidly increasing.

But the quality of the produce is also to be considered: and here Jamaica is very inferior to its formidable neighbour.