The Langdon Cheves.-Lamb, Claimant

(prize.) The Langdon Cheves.—Lamb, Claimant. A question of' fact upon a seizure in port, as a droit of admiralty, for trading with the enemy, and using his license. The circumstance of the vessel having been sent into an enemy’s port, for adjudication, and afterwards permitted to resume her voyage, held to raise a vior lent presumption that she had a license, which the Claimant not having repelled by explanatory evidence, condemnation was pronounced. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Rhode-Island. This cause was argued by Mr. .Hunter, and Mr. Wheaton for the appellant and claimant, and by the Attorney General for the United States. They cited the Imina, 3 Rob. 167. The Lisette, 8 Rob. 387. The Joseph, 8 Crunch, 451. to show, that the delictum, of contraband, of trading with the enemy, and navigating under his license, are all purged by the termination Of the voyage. [MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Story] Mr. Justice Story delivered the opinion of the Court. This case differs in no essential respect, from, that of the Caledonian. The'brig sailed from the United States on a voyage to Lisbon, with a cargo of provisions, in May, 1813, and was captured by a British sloop of war, and sent into Bermuda, where she was either not proceeded against as prize, or was acquitted on trial; and after a detention of about six weeks, was permitted to resume her original voyage; and on the return, voyage from Lisbon, with a cargo of salt, was, on her arrival at Newport, on the 16th of December, 1813, seized by the collector of that port, as forfeited tp the United States jure belli, for using a British license, and trading with the enemy. There is no positive proof, that the brig had a British license on board; but, we think, that under the. circumstances, there arises a violent presumption that she had such a license, and'that the burthen of proof to repel this presumption rests on the claimant. He has not attempted this in the slightest degree, there being a total absence of all evidence in his favour; and, therefore, as the case remains with all its original imperfections, the decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed, with costs. Decree affirmed, with costs.