Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Contracts · MBE-tested
The Mars. United States v. The Brigantine Mars
12 U.S. 4178 Cranch 417·Supreme Court of the United States·1814
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
*The Mars. United States v. The Brigantine Mars.
Forfeiture. —Bona fide purchaser.
A forfeiture under the 3d section of 28th June 1809, oh. 9, will overreach a bond fide sale V, • purchaser, for a valuable consideration, without notice of the offence.
The Mars, 1 Gallis. 191, reversed.
This was an appeal from the sentence of the Circuit Court of Massacdusetts district, which affirmed the sentence of the district court, restoring the brig to the claimants.
An information was filed against the brig Mars, for a breach of the act of 28th of June 1800 (entitled “ an act to amend and continue in foice certain parts of the act, entitled an act to interdict the commercial intei course,” &c.), in departing from port without having given bond according to the 3d section of the act, which provides, that “ if any ship or vessel shall, contrary to the provisions of this section, depart from any port of the United States, without clearance, or without having given bond in the mannet .toove mentioned, such ship or vessel, together with her cargo, shall be wholly forfeited.”
The vessel, after her return to the United States, and bet seizure, was bond fide purchased by the claimants, for a full and valuable consideration, without notice of the offence. Upon this ground, she was, by the decree of the district court, ordered to be restored ; which decree was affirmed by the circuit court. Judge Story’s opinion in pronouncing that decree, will be found in the preceding case of the United States v. 1960 Bags of Coffee. This case having been submitted upon the arguments which were had in that case—
March 15th, 1814.
[MAJORITY — Johnson, J.,]
Johnson, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court, as follows : — This case depends upon the principle established in the case against the coffee, the Bohlens, claimants, *The decision, as in that case, was founded r*. 1 „ upon the ground of a sale to a bond fide purchaser, without notice. *- The decree of the circuit court of Massachusetts district, in this case, is, therefore, reversed, and the brigantine Mars adjudged forfeited to the United States.
Decree reversed.
The case of the United States v. 1960 Bags of Coffee, ante, p. 898.