delivered the opinión of the court.
It has been contended, that this vessel and, cargo were bom fide the' property of the appellant, a subject of Sweden, who had a right to trade with the enemy of the United States; and that having done nothing to forfeit his neutral character, both the sen- ' tences below were erroneous, and ought to be reversed. To entitle himself to such revеrsal, the claimant has undertaken to show, arid insists that he has shown, that at the time of, arid previous to, the departure of the Rugen from the United States, she, as well as the cargo on board, was his property, and that he was then, and still ife, a subject of the king of Sweden, with whom the United States were at peace.
The court will now proceed to inquire how %■ Mr. *67 Buhring has succeeded in establishing the facts on which he relies for a restitution of this property, fn pursuing this inquiry, it may become unnecessary to decide whether the papers which wére on. board were sufficient to entitle the Rugen to'fhe privilegеs or national character of a Swedish vessel; because, whatever may be their regularity and effect, yet, if the court shall be of opinion that they were only colourable, and that an American citizen, and not the claimant, was owner of the vessel and cаrgo, it will nob be pretended that belligerent' rights can be eluded in this way; or that the subject of a state at war can, urder cover of neutral muniments, however regularly procured, or formal they may be, violate, with impunity, his duty and allegiance to his own country. . So far from such documents, .when intended only as a cover, affording any protection to the property, they render the party resorting to then! doubly criminal, by the scene of fraud and perjury which must be waded, through in order to obtain them; and then, in case of disaster, to make a court believe thаt such papers disclose .nothing but the real truth of the case. The whole controversy will then be resolved into the. single question,, whether, in point of fact, Mr. Buhring, or Messrs. Sámuel and Charles Howard, who are citizens of the United States, were owners of the Rugen and her cargo at the timе of- her sailing from Savannah, and on her return to the United States. It must ever be a painful task to investigate testimony Where a result unfavourable to the claimant can only proceed from a conviction that the principal agents in the transac *68 tion have actеd either fraudulently, or contrary to their known duty as good citizens; Such is the düty now imposed on the eourt.
't’he claimant is said to be a Swede. If this be admitted, and it seems not to be denied, we are compelled, by the very suspicious circumstances of this case, to look beyоnd his national character, and to inquire very particularly into his situation at the time he embarked, or became connected with this adventure. Had he ever been a merchant in his own couhtiy* dr elsewhere ? Had he ever resided in any of our seaports, or carried on business of any kind there, or in any other place ? Had he, at any time» means to purchase this vessel and cargo; or was he sufficiently known to have acquired a credit to that extent? These questions were all asked by the advocate of the captors, to which no satisfactory answer was given on the argument ; and it is in vain that the proceedings are searched for a solution of either of them at all favourable to the present claim. On the contrary, easily as every difficulty on these points might have been dispelled, if this were á fáir proceeding, no attempt of: the kind has been made, or if it has, it has terminated in establishing that Mi, Buhring’s situation, and circumstances were such as preclude all reasonable doubt of his being any other than the ostensible owner of the vessel and cargo. He was a young man, only twenty-one . yеars old, residing, as well as his brother William, in South Carolina, with-Mr. .Scarborough, Vice Commercial Agent of the king of Sweden, for the state of Georgia, From this retirement he is drawn, and, for the *69 first time, introduced to the notice of the mercantile world by the Messrs. Howards, who appear hr be merchants oí considerable property and credit, résiding.at Sávannah, in the State of Georgia., -Between these gentlemen and Mr. Buhring there could have been but very little previous acquaintance ; for the latter arrived at Savannah from Europe only two or three months before wé find him engaged m tb com cetns of the Rugen; and after remaining not more than three or four days in that city he went to reside in the country of South Carolina, whence he did not return to Savannah until he came back with Mr. Q. Howard, a very few days before the Rugen sailed. It is/not, then, harsh tо presume, that the strongest and only recommendation of Mr. Buhring was his national character. The Messrs. Howards appear,'at the time, to. have been in search of a Swede, and were not long in meeting with one whose youth and inexperience well fitted him for the purposes for which, there is so much reason to believe, he was wanted. A feeble attempt, however, has been made to show that Mr,. Buhring was not without credit as well as ftmds. To the former point one witness has been examined, and to establish that he was. not entirely destitute of property, it has been shown that fie actually gave two notes, amounting, together, to about 4,3.00. dollars, for the Rugen and her cargo,, in the month óf May, 1813, payable in four'months after date; that these notes, ás they became due, were taken up by him with great punctuality "at, one of the bаnks in Savannah. Whether these notes were really made at the time when they bear date, may *70 well be doubted; but it admits of no doubt, that they were discharged with the proper moneys of the Messrs. Howards, wh’di, had almost the moment before been drawn, by one of them, out of the bank, and рut into the hands of Mi1. Buhring for that purpose. With the funds, then, of Mr. Howard, and not with those of Mr. Buhring, were these notes taken up; and a contrivance, which was intended to make Mr. Buhring appear as a man of property, has not only altogether failed, but has added very considerable weight to the suggestion of the captors, that he was a young man. totally destitute of the means of purchasing and paying for the property which, it is now alleged, belonged to him. But we now find Mr. Buhring at Savannah; and what is done with him ? or what does hé do with himself, on his arrival there ? Does he go about to purchase a vessel? Does he, when he is told that the Rugen belongs to him, take any measures to fit her out ? Does he provide a crew ? Does he agree for their wages ? Does he purchase a cargo ? Does he see to its being put on board ? Does he еffect insurance ? or is he found doing any one act which might naturally be expected from an owner ? All this trouble had already been most-kindly taken off his hands by his new friend and acquaintance, Mr. Howard. This gentleman had already (if we are to believe the history of this transaction as it is narrated by the claimant) provided him with a vessel and cargo, although it does hot appear that he had instructions or funds of Mr. Buhring for the purpose. It is true, that with a caution-that was very excusable, consider- *71 i'ng ihe circumstances' of Mr. Buhring, the bill of sale which had been executеd by the marshal, with ’ . a blank for the name of the vendee, was not put mto the possession of Mr. Buhring, but carefully retained by the Messrs. Howards, they executing to him one in their own names, although they no*w say they never were the owners of the vessel. And even this bill of sale, it is very probable, remаined in the custody of Mr. Samuel Howard during the whole of the voyage to Jamaica and back to the United States. Every thing being now in readiness for their departure from Savannah, Mr. Buhring appears on board, and is introduced to the mate and crew, not merely as owner of vessеl and cargo, blit as master for the' voyage. Whether any surprise were excited on board by the new character in which the claimant appeared, or whether they expressed any reluctance at placing themselves under his command, we know not; nor is it a fact very necessary to ascertain, because they must soon have discovered that Mr. Samuel Howard, whose friendship for,Mr. Buhring seems to have had no.limit, and in whose seamanship they may have had full confidence, intended to go. with the vessel, and relieve Mr. Buhring from the troublesоme task, if he were equal to it, of navigating the Rugen. For this conduct, on the part of Mr. Howard, no other reasonable motive can be assigned than an interest in the vessel and cargo. The allegation of his going after certain funds in Carthagena is not at all made out. The Rugen'leaves Savannah on the 5th or 6th of May, bound, as is alleged, for Carthagena. but arrives at .Kingston, in *72 the island of Jamaica. The court is not at all satis» fied with the excuses which have been made for her going there. It does not appear that a vis major of any kind existed. She was neither forced in by adverse . winds, nor was shé under any restraint from capture. - When within only four leagues of the island she whs boarded by a British brig of war called La Decouverte, whose commander ordered her into Kingston. He put no prize-master on board; nor did hé endorse any of her paрers; nor,did he keep, company with her: and yet we find her. doing exactly vhat she was verbally directed to do. It is. faintly pretended, that -if she had' attempted, after that, to go to Carthagena, she could not have escaped the British cruisers which swarmed about the island. But what greater danger, if the property were neutral, would ensue on a capture by any other British vessel than by her going to a British port as prize to the Decouverte, or by her orders ? it is believed, then, that her going to Jamaica was voluntary, and formed part, of the original plаn; which opinion derives considerable support.from the fact of insurance having been made, not only for Carthagena, but also for a port in the West Indies; from the nature of the outward cargo; from the readiness with which they consented to dispose of it at that place, аnd procured another for this country promising a much greater profit than áhy which at that time could have been imported from Carthagena, There is yet a still stronger circumstance to prove that the destination of the Rugen to Carthagena was fictitious; and that is, her meеting at Kingston a ship called the Wan *73 schopi which had sailed from Savannah but a little before the Rügen." On board qf that vessel we find Mr. William Buhring, a brother qf the claimant, and ■we have every reason tq' believe .that she belonged, with her cargo, to the same concern. The Wanschop, it is also said, was destined for' Porto Bello, on the Spanish Main; but by a strange coincidence of events, which can scarcely have been the .affect of chance alone, she' also gets out’of her course, falls in with the same British vessel of war which afterwards board-., éd the Rugen; reсeives" the like order to proceed to Kingston, which she also very' promptly, and without any apparent reluctance, complied with. The business of these twoVessels is managed by the same house in Kingston, and tl)e proceeds of both of their cargoes are invеsted in'molasses, rum, &c., which composed the return cargo of the Rugen. If the property claimed were bona fide Swedish j it would be superfluous to inquire . whether the Rugen’s going to Jamaica were voluntary, or by coercion, a subject, of Sweden ha.ving,; for aught that appears', as good right to trade there as at Carthagéna. But if it belonged to. the American gentlemen^ who have had an agency so' conspicuous in the whole of this business, (and that it did is oür dnaniiñous Opinion,) it will not'be pretended that they Could go to Kingston Unless by compulsion,' or. "that they had any right during the late wаr to purchase and bring a cargo from any British port to this or any ¡other country.
The court haying already expressed" its opinion, that this, vessel and cargo did not belong to'the *74 claimant, but to citizens of the United States,, the latter having been purchased at Kingston, as is beliéyed, with thеir funds; it becomes quite unnecessary to inquire what was the real destination of the Rugen on her leaving Kingston; whether she were bound, in fact, to Amelia island, or to the United States; although it might not be very difficult to come to a satisfactory conclusion that Hardwicke, in Georgia, was hеr real port of destination. But this examination is unnecessaryfor the owners, being American citizens, are equally guilty of trading with the enemy, whether that trade were carried on between a British port and the JCJnited States, or between such-port and any foreign nation; and in the prеsent case, if the court be correct in the view which it has taken of the evidence, the offence,of trading with the enemy was . complete the moment the Rugen sailed from Savannah with an intention to carry her cargo to Kingston, in Jamaica. Upon the whole, without taking notice of many of the' arguments urged by the 'advocates of the captors in favour of condemnation, and which are" entitled to great consideration, the court is unanimously of opinion, that the decree of the circuit court, rejecting the claim of Mr. Buhring, was correct, and must, in all things, be affirmed.
Sentence affirmed with costs.
1 Rob. 111. 1.31. The Two Brothers.
A neutral subject domiciled in the belligerant state, is considered as a merchant of that country, go as to render his property taken in' trade with the. enemy liable to capture And confiscation, in the same manner as that of persons owing permanent allegiance to the state. 3- Rob. - 26. The Indian Chief. The converse of the rule is also applied; to subjects or citizens of the belligerant 'state resident in . a. neutral country, whose trade with the enemy is considered as lawful ; except in contraband of -war, which is deemed inconsistent with their permanent allegiance, and, it may be added, is equally prohibited to them in their character of neutral merchants. Vide 6 Rob. 408. The Neptunus.