Page:United States Reports, Volume 1.djvu/369

358 1788.  would be neceary to tranport, not only the public tores, but alo uch private effects, as it might be thought expedient to remove.

Several intercepted letters having increaed the apprehenions of Congres, on the 16th of April, 1777, they reolved "that it be recommended to the Preident and Members of the executive authority of this State, to requet the commanding officer of the continental forces in this city, to take the mot effectual means, that all proviions, and every other article, which, by falling into the hands of the enemy, may aid them in their operations of war againt the United States, or the los of which might dutres the continental army, be immediately removed to uch places, as hall be deemed mot convenient and ecure."

This recommendation was tranmitted by the Executive Council to the Pennylvania Board of War, who, on the 18th of April, paed an order, that “ houes, barns, tores, &c. hould be hired or eized, for the reception of uch articles, as hould be ent out of the city by their direction or that of Congres;” and, accordingly, a very coniderable quantity of property was oon removed to Chenut Hill, and placed under the care of Mers. Laughead and Barnhill; who gave receipts to the owners, promiing “ to retore what belonged to them repectively, or to deliver the ame to their repective orders.”

The enemy, not approaching o rapidly as was expected, a coniderable part of this property had, accordingly, been re-delivered to the order of the owners, before the city was entered by the Britih troops, when, however, the depot at Chenut-Hill fell, likewie, into their hands,and, with it, 227 barrels of flour, belonging to Sparhawk; being the remainder of 323 barrels that had been originated removed thither, in conequence of the above mentioned proceedings.

For the price of thee 227 barrels of flour, with interet from the time of their being taken, Sparhawk exhibited an account, amounting to Ł919 6 6 againt the public; upon which the Comptroller-General reported to the Executive Council, that "neither the principal, the interet, nor any part of either, could be allowed," and againt this deciion the preent appeal was entered.

The quetion,therefore, on the motion for a new trial, was, whether this claim, under all the circumtances, ought to be admitted? and it was argued on the 28th of April,  by Ingerʃol, for the Appellant; and the Attorney General, for the Commonwealth.

On the part of the Appellant, it was premied, that, in a eaon of peace, the law had o great a regard for private property, that it would not authorize the leat violation of not even for the general good of the whole community. 1 ''Black. Com.'' 139. And, it was contended, that, although a tate of war entitled one nation to eize and lay wate the property of another, and their repective ubjects to moleft the perons, and to eize the effects of their opponents, yet, as between a tate and its own citizens, the principle, with repect to the rights of property, is immutably the ame, in war as well as peace. Sometimes, indeed, the value of the lic