« PreviousContinue »
19. The defendant, an alien within this country after the commence
the terms of the 38 G. 3, c. 50, s. ment of hostilities with Great kirit9, (which exempts from arrest for ain, in 1775, continuing with the debts contracted abroad, aliens re
British until the treaty of peace, siding in this country in consequence
and thence forward to his death, of a revolution in their own,) have became an alien. 2 Mass. 179. ing entered into an agreement with 24. The statute of 11 and 12 of Will. the plaintiff in a foreign country, 3, e. 6, providing that natural born the latter, in pursuance of the a- subjects may make their titles by greement, laid out money in Eng- descent through alien ancestors, land ; after which the parties came was adopted in Massachusetts before to an adjustment in England, and the establishment of the constituthe defendant acknowledged the tion. Ibid. debt. The defendant, having been 25. A person, who left this country kolden to bail for money laid out after the commencement of the rer. by the plaintiff in England, and on olutionary war, went to, and residan account stated in England, diselos- ed in the British territories for sev ed the above circumstances by affi- eral years, and returned to the U- . davit, whereupon the court dis- nited States before the treaty of charged him on a common appear- peace, is a citizen and not an alien. ance. Sinclair v. Charles Phillippe
2 Mass. 236. Monsieur de France. 2 Bos.f. 26. The absentee act of April 30,
1779, operates no disqualification 20. Whero a certain trading with an upon a person who was not prose
alien enemy for specie and goods to cuted and convicted under it. Ibid. be brought from the enemy's coun
and 214. try, in his ships, into our colonial 27. The polls of aliens may, within ports, was licensed by the king's the intent of the Constitution, be authority; held that an insurance rateable polls, when made liable by on the enemy's ship, as well on the the legislature to be rated to public goods and specie put on board for taxes. Mass. 523. the benefit of the British subjects, 28. The polls of male aliens, above was incidentally legalized ; and sixteen years of age, are now ratethat it was competent for the Brit- able polls within the meaning of ish agent of both parties, in whose the constitution. Ibid. name the insurance was effected, to 29. Rateable polls of aliens may consue upon the policy in time of war; stitutionally be included in estimat: the trust not contravening any rule ing the number of rateable polls, to of law or of public policy, and
determine the number of representathere being no personal disability tives any town may be entitled to in the plaintiff on the record to sue.
clect. Mass. 523. Kensington v. Inglis. 8 East, 273. 30. 1. conveyed land to B. in trust 21. 'I court would not stay judg- for C. who was an alien, C. after
ment and execution on a summary wards, and before any office found, beapplication, because the plaintiff's came duly naturalized, and B. then after verdict became alien enemies.
released to him the estate so held Vuntrymen v. Wilson. 9 East, 321. in trust ; it was held, that the con22. An alien can purchase and hold veyance to C. was valid. real estate until offee found; he er dem. ('ulrerhouse y.
Beach. can grant the same and his grantee
Johns. Cas. 399. can maintain an action to recover 31. No title, in case of alienism, vests it, and may declare on his own in the people of the state, until efseizes in fee. 1 Mass. 236.
ter office found. Ibid. 23. A native of Massachusetts leaving 32. Naturalization has a retroactiveef.
feet, and confirms the former title er and three sisters, living in Ireof the alien. Ibid.
land. Iu 1801, an act of the legis83. A widow, whose husband, emi- lature was passed, vesting the real
grated from Ireland to Newyork in estate of which N. died seized, in 1760, and died possessed of lands in L. one of his sisters, who had mar1799, who had herself continued to ried an alien, in like manner as if reside in Ireland, being an alien, is she had been a citizen of this state, entitled to cover in lands of which at the death of N. In an action of eher husband was seized prior to the jectment, it was held that N. having American revolution, or the 4th of emigrated to this country after the July, 1776, but not in such lands as declaration of independence, was to he acquired after that periud. Kel- be considered as an alien, and that
ley v. Harrison. 2 Johms. Cas. 29. the land held by him, was, by the 34. Where J. a British subject became 9th article of the treaty of 1794, be
a naturalized citizen of this state, tween Great Britain and the United and took the oaths of abjuration and States, vested in him and his heirs, allegiance in 1784, and afterwards, notwithstanding they were aliens; in 1795, took an oath of allegiance and that the act of the legislature to the king of Spain, and was ap- of 1804, giving the whole of his repointed a consul for the Spanish al estate to L. one of his four heirs, king, and continued to reside in in exclusion of the rest, being conNewyork, without ever changing trary to the treaty, was inoperative. his doinicil ; it was held lie was
Jackson ex dem. Folliard and Walstill to be considered as an Ameri
Wright. 4 Jolins. Rep. 75. can citizen, and not a Spanish sub- 37. Aliens, though free-holders and jeet or alien. Fish v. Stoughton. inhabitants of the town, are not 2 Jolins. Cas. 407.
qualified to serve as jurors, in suits 35. Though in case of a purchase, the before justices of the peace, as they
law will recognize the title of an are not a good and lawful men," alien in lands, until office found ; within the meaning of the statute. yet in case of a descent, the law Borst v. Beecker. 6 Johns. Rep. takes no notice of an alien heir, on 432. whom, therefore, the inberitance is 38. Where there is a falure of inhernot cast. But where the title to itable blood by reason of alienism, land in this state was acquired by a the lands do not escheat, but go to British subjeet, prior to the Ameri- the next heir at law, Jackson ex can revolution, it seems that the dem. Elinendorf and others, v. right of such British subject to Jackson. 7 Johns. Rep. 214. transmit the same, by descent, to an 39. An alien enemy has no right of heir, in esse, at the time of the rev. action during a war ; but the rights olution, continued unaltered and un- which the subjects of either power impaired; the case of a revolution had against the other, are revived or division of an empire, being an at the end of it. í Dallas, 71. exception to the general rule of law 40. Whether an alien can take and on this subject. The objection of hold real estate by devise, under alienism is not to be favoured. the protection of the treaty of peace Jackson ex dem. Ganescoort and with Great Britain. Quere. 3 others. v. Lunn. 3 Johns. Cas. Dallas, 305, 0; in note. 109.
41. Whether an alien can be juror. 36. N. a native of Ireland, emigrated 4 Dallas, 353.
to the United States, in 1778 or 42. An American citizen residing in a 1779. In 1784, he purchased a lot foreign country may acquire the of land in this state, and died in commercial privileges attached to 1799, without issue, leaving a broth- his domicil; and by making his
self the subject of a foreign power, sey by descent. M'Ilvuine v. Coxe. he places himself out of the protec- 4 Cranch, 209. tion of the United States, while 49. A person born in England before within the territory of the new sove- 1775, and who always resided there, reign, to whom he has sworn allegi- and never was in the United States, ance. Jurray v. Charming Betsey. is an alien, and could not, in the 2 Cranch, 61.
year 1793, take lands in Maryland, 43. Whether a citizen of the United by descent, from a citizen of the U
States can devest himself of nited States. Dawson's lessee y. that character otherwise than in Godfrey. 4 Cranch, 321. such manner as may be prescribed 50. A certificate, by a competent by law ? Ibid.
court, that an alien has taken the 44. Whether by becoming the subject oath prescribed by the act respect
of a foreign power he is rescued ing naturalization, raises a prefrom punishment for a crime t- sumption that the court was satisgainst his allegiance to the United fied as to the moral character of the States ? Murray v. Charming Bet- alien, and of his attachment to the sey. 2 Cranch, 64.
principles of the constitution of the 43. Whether a person, born in the United States, &c. Campbell v.
colony of New Jersey before the Gordon. 6 Cranch, 176. revolution, and who resided there 51. The oath of naturalization when until 1777, when he joined the Brit- taken, confers the rights of a citiish army, and went with them to zen. Ibid. England, where he has resided ev- 52. It is not necessary that there er since, claiming always to be a should be an order of court adinitloyal subject of Great Britain, can ting him to become a citizen. Ibid. now take and hold land in New 53. The children of persons duly natJersey, by descent, from a citizen uralized before the 14th of April, of the United States ? Whether he 1802, being under age at the line became a subject of New Jersey of the naturalization of their parent, against his will ? Whether he has were, if dwelling in the United expatriated himself and become an States, on the 14th of April, 1802, alien ? M'Ilvaine v. Coxe's lessee. to be considered as citizens of the 2 Cranch, 280.
United States. Campbell v. Gordon. 46. Whether the courts of the United 6 Cranch, 177.
States have jurisdiction where all the parties are aliens ? Mason et. al. v. Blaireau. 2 Cranch. 264.
ALIMONY. Bailiff'v. Tipping, 406. 17. When both parties are aliens, the 1. Upon a decree of alimony, the
courts of the United States have court may order execution to issue not jurisdiction. Lontalet v. Mur- against the husband for the sum ray. 4 Cranch, 46.
decreed. 1 Mass. 341. 13. A person born in the colony of 2. A citizen of this state, marriedka
New Jersey before the year 1775, wife in this state, and after living and residing there till the year together for more than a year, the 1777, but who then joined the Brit- wife left her husband and went iuto ish army, and ever since adhered the state of Vermont, and there olto the British, claiming to be a Brit- tained a divorce, under the laws of ish subject, and demanding and re- that state, on the ground of ill trealceiving compensation from that ment and severe temper, and then government for his loyalty, and his returned to this state, where she enfferings as a refugee, is not an al- has since resided. In an action jer, but may take lanets in New Jers brought by her against her husband,
to recover the alimony, adjudged to
AMENDMENT. her by the decree of the court in Vermont, which granted the divorce,
General Rules as to. it was beld, that the domicil of the I. At what Time allowed. wife was not changed by her going II. In Writs, Executions, fc. into Vermont, and residing there; III. In Judgments. that such conduct was an evasion IV. In intermediate Proceedings. of the laws of this state, which does V. In Kecords. not allow of a divorce except for adultery; and that no action could
General Rules. be maintained here on the decree of the court of Vermont. Jackson 1. The statutes 16 and 17 Charles 2. V. Jackson. 1 Johns. Rep. 424. and 4 and 5. An. c. 16. only extend
to mistakes in the names of the
plaintiff or defendant, not of third ALLEGIANCE,
persons; and therefore where to
debt on a replevin bond brought by Allegiance and the right of abandon- the sheriff against a surety, the de
ing it, discussed. 3 Dallas, 133 to fendant pleaded that A. (the party 169.
replevying,) prosecuted his suit &c. and that no return of the goods was
adjudged to B. (the party distrainAMBASSADOR'S SERVANTS. ing;) and the plaintiff replied that
a return was adjudged to B., yet the 1. An ambassador's protection does said B. did not make return, and
not extend to his interpreter, not this, on a general demurrer, was living in the house. Malachi Caro- holden to be a fatal defect. Harlino's Case. 1 Wils. 78.
Willes, 5. 2. An ambassador’s domestic servant, 2. Inferiour courts cannot amend er
in order to entitle him to privilege, rors in process under the statutes 8 most shew himself to be in the ser- Henry 6. C. 12 and 15. Merse v. vice at the time of arrest. Heath- James. Willes, 125. field v. Chilton. 4 Burr. 2013. Some of the statutes of amendment are 3. Protection of an ambassador to his confined to the superiour courts, and
English seeretary was disallowed, some extend to all courts of record. because it appeared he was a purs
Ibid. er of a ship of war. Darling, Knt. 3. All rules to amend are upon payv. Atkins. 3 Wils. 33.
ment of costs. Anon. Lojft, 155. 4. Rule upon hearing council of both 4. Amendment by adding continu
sides was made to discharge the de- ances. There can be no issue offerfendant out of execution, by virtue ed that is contrary to the record. of the statute 7 Ann e. 12. it being A latitat prevents the statute of limmade appear to the court, that itations without a bill of Middlesex. he was a domestic servant of the Crokatt v. Jones. 2 Str. 734. 2 Envoy from the Elector Palatine, L. Raymond, 1441. riz. his secretary, and that all the 5. Bill by the son, remainder man in steps prescribed by the act were tail, against his father's tenant for pursued. Evans v. Hicks. 2 L.
life to have title deeds deposited in Raymond, 1524. S. C. rather more court for safe custody, and against at large, Str. 797.
trustees to oblige them to make such settlement as is directed by the plaintiff's grandfather's will, it appeared on the hearing that plaintif had covenanted to grant annuities
vey v. Stokes.
out of such lands as should come the testator's effects, to be amended to him after his father's death. after demurrer. 1 H. Black. 37. Cause stood over for the annuitants 14. The defendants appealed to the to be made parties. Pinsent v. Pin- sessions against a conviction on a sent. 1 Wils. 179.
penal statute, where the conviction 6. The christian name of the plain- was affirmed: afterwards the record
tiff cannot be amended in a declar- was removed into the court of K. B. ation in K. B. by the by.
by certiorari, where the conviction The reason is plain; for if the plain- was quashed for a defect in the in
tiff's name is mistaken, it is no de- formation; then the prostcutor claration at his suit; and if Peter moved either that the certiorari will deelare, by the by, in the name should be sent back to the magisof Jolin, it is not Peter's suit, so he trates, in order that they might rehas no right to move to amend. turn the original information, (which Poitrin v. Tregeagle. 2 L. Kaym. had not the defect,) or that a man771.
damus might issue to compel the 7. There is no difference between magistrates to proceed on the orig
civil and penal actions as to amend- inal information : but the court of ments at common law. Gof (qui K. B. refused to make such a rule. tan, fc.) v. Popplewell. 1 Douglas, R. v. Jukes et al. 8 Term Rep. 625.
and dates in the declaration to be
2. Declaration may be amended af8. Amendment not allowed in crim- ter plea. Havers v. Bannister. 1
inal cases. Hoyle v. Pitt. . 3 Salk. Wils. . 38.
3. Declaration amended in an action 9. Information for killing a hare a- for usury, after the record was made
mended. Houell qui tam, V. James. up, carried down to trial, and with1 Wils. 163.
drawn by plaintiff. Mace qui tam, 10. All amendments are within the v. Lovett. 5 Burr. 2833.
discretion of the court, and are al. 4. Amendment in ejectment may be lowed in furtherance of justice un- made even in the time of the demise, der the particular circumstances of to prevent being barred. Doe Lesthe case. R. v. Grampons Corpo- see of Hardman v. Hilkington and ration. Term Rep. 699.
another. 4 Burr. 2417. 11. After a party has once amended 5. An information can be amended
on a demurrer, the court will not in a point to which the defendant give him leave to amend again on a has excepted by a plea in abatesecond demurrer. Kinder v. Paris. ment. The Queen v. Stedman. 2 2 H. Black. 561.
L. Raymond, 1307. 12. Such mistakes as are inade by the The same point, The King v. Seaward.
clerk in court may be amended; but 2 L. Rain. 1472. 2 Str. 739. those in the piealings being made 6. Amendment after a special deby the party himself cannot. Græn murrer. Hatton v. Walker. 2 Str. v. Rennet. 1 Torm Rep. 783.
816. 13. The court of C.P. refused to per- ". Amendment on the crown side al
mit a declaration in an action of lowed. The King v. Betts and ancovenant brought against executors other. 2 Str. 696. in their own right, and who had 8. The title of a declaration may
be inerely acted in the disposition of amenderi. Etorke 1. Herlert. 1