United States v. Nine Packages of Linen.

clarations of witnesses, although delivered under the high and sacred sanctions of an oath, when opposed to presumptive circumstances, which it is not easy to reconcile with such testimony. A Court will not, however, easily suspect the truth of such declarations, when corroborated by many witnesses, who have a fair character, and who have no interest in the matter in controversy; but rather than reject, will do all in its power to reconcile them with such circumstances; and if that cannot be done, the latter must be numerous and of the most controlling and irresistible nature to justify an entire disregard of the positive testimony.

With respect to the linens, there are no circumstances to induce the Court to believe, that the mistake in this article may not have been accidental, and altogether unknown to the claimant, until after their examination in this country. These linens appear by the testimony of Mr. Despierres, jun. a merchant of Alençon, (which has been taken under a commission since the cause came from the District Court,) to have been purchased of him at a fair at Guibray for the claimant, for the sum of seven thousand four hundred and fifteen francs and ninety-two centimes, which is the price at which they were invoiced, and on which duties were calculated at the custom-house. This witness, in addition to the very important fact which he establishes of their being invoiced at the price of their actual cost, also proves that shortly after the sale, and as soon as they had recovered at Alençon from the fear of being pillaged by the foreign troops, he discovered errors against himself in the sale of the linens, of which he immediately apprized Madame Vintroux and claimed from her the difference. That lady begged his forbearance, in order to refer the matter to her husband, to whom the linens had been sent without examination of them. These mistakes proceeded, as the same witness informs us, from the precipitation under which they were packed, to withdraw them from the pillage, from which Alençon narrowly escaped,

United States v. Nine Packages of Linen."

having already experienced all the horrors of war. Relying on the probity of Mr. Vintroux, with whom he had had dealings before, Mr. Despierres consented to the delay.

That this story is no fabrication of recent date, to answer the purposes of the claimant, appears by a letter written by Madame Vintroux at Caen to her husband, on the 15th October, 1815, very shortly after his leaving France, and which it is proved, by witnesses on the spot, was received by him not many days after his arrival in this country, in which letter the reclamation of Mr Despierres is distinctly stated, and Mr. Vintroux is requested to take proper measures to ascertain the extent of the error that had taken place. On this testimony, although it does not appear what excess was claimed on the linens, yet as there is no contradictory evidence on this point deserving of any attention, the Court feels itself bound to order a restoration of the linens to the claimant. It is proved positively, that the linens cost no more than the sum at which they were invoiced, and of course, unless the mistake committed at the fair of Guibray, was known to Mr. Vintroux, at the time of the entry of them, which is not proved, his conduct as far as concerns this article is free from every imputation.

The allegation against the clocks will be next examined.

It is, that the twelve packages of clocks, marked and numbered W. No. 1, on to W. No. 12 inclusive, were found to differ in their contents from the entry, in this; that these packages were entered, as containing twelve clocks, and that the same contained nineteen. Another box containing six clocks and marked V. H. No. 1, was entered at the same time, so that in all eighteen clocks only were entered, and duties paid on them. On examination, however, it was found, that the whole number of clocks entered were found in the cases marked W. No. 1 to 12. Hence suspicions were excited, (V. H.

United States v. Nine Packages of Linen.

No. 1 having also been entered as containing six clocks,) that twenty-four clocks had been imported by the claimant instead of eighteen.

If the actual importation of that number had been proved, the libellant would have made out a clear case, so far as relates to this article; but although attempts were made to establish that fact, they were quite unsuccessful; and notwithstanding the pains which were taken with that view, there is no evidence in the cause, that any one of the persons, who were about the claimant after his arrival in this country, some of whom assisted in examining his goods, ever saw any of the six clocks, which it is supposed were fraudulently subtracted from an entry. Nor has any person, who deals in this article in this city, been found, who can fix on the claimant, or any agent of his, the sale of more clocks than were entered, although two witnesses, who were dealers in clocks, were examined with that intent.

If the allegation, therefore, in the libel be true, that in the twelve cases were more clocks than they were entered as containing; yet if it shall appear that no clocks were contained in any other case, which was entered as containing six, no fraud has been committed on the revenue, nor could any have been intended, and of course no forfeiture has been incurred. The claimant, not relying on the absence of all positive proof, on this point, has endeavoured to satisfy the Court, that all the clocks imported by him in the Ann Williams were regularly entered; and that, although in the cases which were supposed to contain only a dozen, eighteen or nineteen were found, not a single clock was discovered in any other package.

The Court is greatly mistaken if the claimant's proof on this part of his case, will not be found very satisfactory. There is no doubt, that the eighteen clocks were an adventure, belonging, not to the claimant, but to his father at Paris, by whom they were sent to Madame Vintroux at Caen to be forwarded

United States v. Nine Packages of Linen.

to the United States. The first we hear of them is in a letter written by the elder Mr. Vintroux to the wife of the claimant. Mr. Bellair, who put up the goods belonging to claimant, declares that he packed no clocks for him; and knows of none, except those in the box marked V. V. or W. No.1 to 12-and a wooden clock, and two which were entered on the invoice made by him as contained in the package marked V. H. No. 22. This witness also informs us how it happened, that each of the boxes from No. 1 to 12 were entered as containing each one clock, and another box as containing six. After he had packed the goods of the claimant, Madame Vintroux gave him the bill of parcels of the clocks, which came from Paris. By this he found there were eighteen clocks, and supposed that the cases marked from one to twelve contained only one clock each. The other six, therefore, he supposed were contained in a large case which was among the others, and although this case was one, which he had packed himself, yet not adverting to that circumstance at the time, he marked it V. H. No. 1; and entered it in the invoice, under that mark, as containing clocks.

This corresponds with the information which the claimant gave to another witness on his passage to this country, that he had only eighteen clocks which belonged to his father, which declaration, although it comes from a person now interested, is entitled to some attention, considering the time and circumstances under which it was made. This same witness, Mr. Collet, was also present when a box was opened, which the claimant expected to contain clocks, but in it were only Angora shawls or gloves. This box, he says, was opened in the street, because, as he supposes, the entry of the house, before which it stood, was too small to admit of its being taken up stairs.

Mr. Demolliens proves the same thing, although he is somewhat more particular in his relation, and unless we believe

United States v. Nine Packages of Linen.

him guilty of wilful perjury, we must be satisfied that the case marked No. 1, V. H., notwithstanding the invoice, did not contain a single clock. He was directed by Mrs. Vintroux, in order that the watchmakers might examine the clocks, to bring it to his chamber, where it was found, on examination, to contain articles which were invoiced as being in another package. Mr. Scheffelin also proves that two large cases were opened which contained Angora shawls, gloves, &c.

Mr. Bouchaud, whom all parties appear willing to believe, declares that he never saw any clocks in the possession of the claimant, except those which came from the public store. Considering how much Mr. Bouchaud had to do with this cargo, and how frequently he must have been with the claimant, after his arrival, this circumstance is entitled to very great consideration. It seems impossible that these clocks, which are now supposed to have been disposed of, should not have been seen by this gentleman before they were sold. Yet neither he, nor any other person about the claimant, ever saw them.

But without pursuing this subject farther, the Court is satisfied, that this part of the libellant's case is not made out, unless no explanation can be received to establish the innocence of a transaction, which unaccounted for, must have drawn after it all the consequences of a confiscation. But this explanation, in the opinion of the Court, has been given, and can only be got rid of by opposing to it some circumstances, which although sufficient to raise doubts, ought not to be permitted to outweigh so much of positive testimony, with which this part of the claimant's case abounds. If the Court does not stop to notice these circumstances, it is not because they have not been attended to, but because it is of opinion, after full consideration, that all of them together will not justify a sentence of condemnation. The clocks therefore must also be restored.

The case of the other articles libelled will now be considered.