United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred Semantic Analysis

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred

Decided On : May-02-1932

Court : US Supreme Court

Notice (8): Undefined index: topics [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36]Code Context

$shops2 = $shops['topics'];
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/meta.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred Semantic Analysis',
	'shops' => array(
		'LAW' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
			(int) 1 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
			(int) 2 => 'Title 46',
			(int) 3 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
			(int) 4 => 'the National Prohibition Act'
		),
		'GPE' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'United States',
			(int) 1 => 'United States',
			(int) 2 => 'United States',
			(int) 3 => 'the United States',
			(int) 4 => 'New York',
			(int) 5 => 'United States',
			(int) 6 => 'United States',
			(int) 7 => 'United States'
		),
		'WORK_OF_ART' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'The Ruth Mildred - 286',
			(int) 1 => 'The Ruth Mildred',
			(int) 2 => 'The Ruth Mildred
 



 No'
		),
		'DATE' => array(
			(int) 0 => '1932',
			(int) 1 => '1932',
			(int) 2 => 'April 15, 1932',
			(int) 3 => 'May 2, 1932',
			(int) 4 => '4377',
			(int) 5 => '4377',
			(int) 6 => 'March 1, 1928',
			(int) 7 => '46',
			(int) 8 => '4377'
		),
		'ORG' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'U.S. Supreme Court',
			(int) 1 => 'U.S. 67',
			(int) 2 => 'Syllabus',
			(int) 3 => 'U.S. 534',
			(int) 4 => 'the District Court',
			(int) 5 => 'Court',
			(int) 6 => 'the Coast Guard',
			(int) 7 => 'R.S. § 4377',
			(int) 8 => 'The District Court',
			(int) 9 => 'the Circuit Court of Appeals',
			(int) 10 => 'General Motors Acceptance Corporation',
			(int) 11 => 'American Motor',
			(int) 12 => 'Stowell'
		),
		'CARDINAL' => array(
			(int) 0 => '286',
			(int) 1 => '286',
			(int) 2 => '1',
			(int) 3 => '2',
			(int) 4 => '26',
			(int) 5 => '56',
			(int) 6 => '590',
			(int) 7 => '285',
			(int) 8 => 'two',
			(int) 9 => '325',
			(int) 10 => '26',
			(int) 11 => '47',
			(int) 12 => '336',
			(int) 13 => '56',
			(int) 14 => '590',
			(int) 15 => '54',
			(int) 16 => '502',
			(int) 17 => '325',
			(int) 18 => '26'
		),
		'PERSON' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Revised Statutes',
			(int) 1 => 'Stats',
			(int) 2 => 'Ruth Mildred',
			(int) 3 => 'Ruth Mildred'
		),
		'PRODUCT' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Certiorari'
		),
		'LOC' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Long Island Sound',
			(int) 1 => 'the East River'
		)
	),
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '95617',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => '286 U.S. 67',
			'appellant' => 'United States',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred',
			'casenote' => '',
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'US Supreme Court',
			'court_type' => 'FN',
			'decidedon' => '1932-05-02',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => null,
			'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div>


 United States v. The Ruth Mildred - 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
<br/>
<span>

 U.S. Supreme Court
 

 United States v. The Ruth Mildred, 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
</span>

<p>
<b>
 United States v. The Ruth Mildred
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 No. 795
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Argued April 15, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Decided May 2, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 286 U.S. 67
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
</b>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
</em>
<em>
 Syllabus
 </em>
</p>
<p>
 1. Revised Statutes, § 4377, which provides that any licensed vessel employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed shall be forfeited, applies to a vessel licensed only for the fishing trade which carries a cargo of intoxicating liquors. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#68">
 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 2. Forfeiture under Rev.Stats., § 4377, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem
 </em>
 and (unlike forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act) is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#69">
 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 56 F.2d 590 reversed.
 </p>
<p>
 Certiorari, 285 U.S. 534, to review the affirmance of a judgment of the District Court dismissing a libel brought
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="68">
 Page 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 by the United States to forfeit a vessel for breach of the navigation laws.
 <em>
 Cf.
 </em>
 the last two preceding cases.
 </p>
<p>
 MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO delivered the opinion of the Court.
 </p>
<p>
 The schooner
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed to engage in the cod and mackerel fisheries. On March 1, 1928, she was observed by the Coast Guard in Long Island Sound headed for New York. She was trailed by a patrol boat till she docked in the East River. The master admitted to the customs officers that his vessel was carrying intoxicating liquors, and, upon the search that followed, a stock of liquors was discovered. A libel of information was thereafter filed against the vessel praying a decree of forfeiture for breach of the navigation laws (R.S. § 4377, U.S.Code, title 46, § 325) in carrying on a business not permitted by the license. The master intervened in the suit, and pleaded that the remedy under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act was exclusive of any other. The District Court, upholding that defense, dismissed the libel, 47 F.2d 336, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. 56 F.2d 590. The case is here on a writ of certiorari granted on the petition of the Government.
 </p>
<p>
 Our decision in
 <em>
 General Motors Acceptance Corporation v. United States, ante,
 </em>
 p.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95615/general-motors-acceptance-corp-vs-united-states">
 286 U. S. 49
 </a>
</span>
 , would require a reversal of this judgment if the vessel had been seized for unlawful importation in violation of the tariff act. Even more
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="69">
 Page 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 plainly, that result must follow where the basis of the seizure is a breach of the navigation acts growing out of a departure by the vessel from the conditions of her license. Contrast with the decision below the decision of the same court in
 <em>
 United States v. American Motor Boat K-1231,
 </em>
 54 F.2d 502. By § 4377 of the Revised Statutes (U.S.Code, Title 46, § 325):
 </p>
<p>
 "Whenever any licensed vessel . . . is employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed, . . . such vessel with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, and the cargo, found on board her, shall be forfeited."
 </p>
<p>
 The
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed for the fishing trade, and not for any other. She would have been subject to forfeiture if her cargo had been wheat or silk or sugar. In a suit under this statute, her guilt was not affected, was neither enlarged nor diminished, by the fact that the cargo happened to be one of intoxicating liquors. The government made out a case of forfeiture when there was proof that the cargo was something other than fish. Forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act is one of the consequences of a successful criminal prosecution of a personal offender, and is ancillary thereto. Forfeiture under the Revised Statutes, § 4377, for breach of the navigation laws, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem,
 </em>
 and is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt.
 <em>
 United States v. Stowell,
 </em>
<span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell">
 133 U. S. 1
 </a>
</span>
 ,
 <span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell#16">
 133 U. S. 16
 </a>
</span>
 -17. In brief, the basis of the charge of guilt directed against this vessel is not a breach of the National Prohibition Act nor any movement of transportation, lawful or unlawful. It is the act of engaging in a business other than the fishing trade in contravention of a license.
 </p>
<p>
 The decree should be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
 </p>
<br/>
<br/>
</div></body></html>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The Ruth Mildred',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => '/cases/federal/us/286/67/',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '95617'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred Semantic Analysis'
$shops = array(
	'LAW' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
		(int) 1 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
		(int) 2 => 'Title 46',
		(int) 3 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
		(int) 4 => 'the National Prohibition Act'
	),
	'GPE' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'United States',
		(int) 1 => 'United States',
		(int) 2 => 'United States',
		(int) 3 => 'the United States',
		(int) 4 => 'New York',
		(int) 5 => 'United States',
		(int) 6 => 'United States',
		(int) 7 => 'United States'
	),
	'WORK_OF_ART' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'The Ruth Mildred - 286',
		(int) 1 => 'The Ruth Mildred',
		(int) 2 => 'The Ruth Mildred
 



 No'
	),
	'DATE' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1932',
		(int) 1 => '1932',
		(int) 2 => 'April 15, 1932',
		(int) 3 => 'May 2, 1932',
		(int) 4 => '4377',
		(int) 5 => '4377',
		(int) 6 => 'March 1, 1928',
		(int) 7 => '46',
		(int) 8 => '4377'
	),
	'ORG' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'U.S. Supreme Court',
		(int) 1 => 'U.S. 67',
		(int) 2 => 'Syllabus',
		(int) 3 => 'U.S. 534',
		(int) 4 => 'the District Court',
		(int) 5 => 'Court',
		(int) 6 => 'the Coast Guard',
		(int) 7 => 'R.S. § 4377',
		(int) 8 => 'The District Court',
		(int) 9 => 'the Circuit Court of Appeals',
		(int) 10 => 'General Motors Acceptance Corporation',
		(int) 11 => 'American Motor',
		(int) 12 => 'Stowell'
	),
	'CARDINAL' => array(
		(int) 0 => '286',
		(int) 1 => '286',
		(int) 2 => '1',
		(int) 3 => '2',
		(int) 4 => '26',
		(int) 5 => '56',
		(int) 6 => '590',
		(int) 7 => '285',
		(int) 8 => 'two',
		(int) 9 => '325',
		(int) 10 => '26',
		(int) 11 => '47',
		(int) 12 => '336',
		(int) 13 => '56',
		(int) 14 => '590',
		(int) 15 => '54',
		(int) 16 => '502',
		(int) 17 => '325',
		(int) 18 => '26'
	),
	'PERSON' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Revised Statutes',
		(int) 1 => 'Stats',
		(int) 2 => 'Ruth Mildred',
		(int) 3 => 'Ruth Mildred'
	),
	'PRODUCT' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Certiorari'
	),
	'LOC' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Long Island Sound',
		(int) 1 => 'the East River'
	)
)
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '95617',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => '286 U.S. 67',
		'appellant' => 'United States',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'US Supreme Court',
		'court_type' => 'FN',
		'decidedon' => '1932-05-02',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => null,
		'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div>


 United States v. The Ruth Mildred - 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
<br/>
<span>

 U.S. Supreme Court
 

 United States v. The Ruth Mildred, 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
</span>

<p>
<b>
 United States v. The Ruth Mildred
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 No. 795
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Argued April 15, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Decided May 2, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 286 U.S. 67
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
</b>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
</em>
<em>
 Syllabus
 </em>
</p>
<p>
 1. Revised Statutes, § 4377, which provides that any licensed vessel employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed shall be forfeited, applies to a vessel licensed only for the fishing trade which carries a cargo of intoxicating liquors. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#68">
 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 2. Forfeiture under Rev.Stats., § 4377, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem
 </em>
 and (unlike forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act) is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#69">
 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 56 F.2d 590 reversed.
 </p>
<p>
 Certiorari, 285 U.S. 534, to review the affirmance of a judgment of the District Court dismissing a libel brought
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="68">
 Page 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 by the United States to forfeit a vessel for breach of the navigation laws.
 <em>
 Cf.
 </em>
 the last two preceding cases.
 </p>
<p>
 MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO delivered the opinion of the Court.
 </p>
<p>
 The schooner
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed to engage in the cod and mackerel fisheries. On March 1, 1928, she was observed by the Coast Guard in Long Island Sound headed for New York. She was trailed by a patrol boat till she docked in the East River. The master admitted to the customs officers that his vessel was carrying intoxicating liquors, and, upon the search that followed, a stock of liquors was discovered. A libel of information was thereafter filed against the vessel praying a decree of forfeiture for breach of the navigation laws (R.S. § 4377, U.S.Code, title 46, § 325) in carrying on a business not permitted by the license. The master intervened in the suit, and pleaded that the remedy under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act was exclusive of any other. The District Court, upholding that defense, dismissed the libel, 47 F.2d 336, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. 56 F.2d 590. The case is here on a writ of certiorari granted on the petition of the Government.
 </p>
<p>
 Our decision in
 <em>
 General Motors Acceptance Corporation v. United States, ante,
 </em>
 p.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95615/general-motors-acceptance-corp-vs-united-states">
 286 U. S. 49
 </a>
</span>
 , would require a reversal of this judgment if the vessel had been seized for unlawful importation in violation of the tariff act. Even more
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="69">
 Page 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 plainly, that result must follow where the basis of the seizure is a breach of the navigation acts growing out of a departure by the vessel from the conditions of her license. Contrast with the decision below the decision of the same court in
 <em>
 United States v. American Motor Boat K-1231,
 </em>
 54 F.2d 502. By § 4377 of the Revised Statutes (U.S.Code, Title 46, § 325):
 </p>
<p>
 "Whenever any licensed vessel . . . is employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed, . . . such vessel with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, and the cargo, found on board her, shall be forfeited."
 </p>
<p>
 The
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed for the fishing trade, and not for any other. She would have been subject to forfeiture if her cargo had been wheat or silk or sugar. In a suit under this statute, her guilt was not affected, was neither enlarged nor diminished, by the fact that the cargo happened to be one of intoxicating liquors. The government made out a case of forfeiture when there was proof that the cargo was something other than fish. Forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act is one of the consequences of a successful criminal prosecution of a personal offender, and is ancillary thereto. Forfeiture under the Revised Statutes, § 4377, for breach of the navigation laws, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem,
 </em>
 and is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt.
 <em>
 United States v. Stowell,
 </em>
<span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell">
 133 U. S. 1
 </a>
</span>
 ,
 <span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell#16">
 133 U. S. 16
 </a>
</span>
 -17. In brief, the basis of the charge of guilt directed against this vessel is not a breach of the National Prohibition Act nor any movement of transportation, lawful or unlawful. It is the act of engaging in a business other than the fishing trade in contravention of a license.
 </p>
<p>
 The decree should be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
 </p>
<br/>
<br/>
</div></body></html>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The Ruth Mildred',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => '/cases/federal/us/286/67/',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '95617'
)
$pattern = '/\(((0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])[.](0[1-9]|1[012])[.](17|18|19|20)[0-9]{2}).*\)/'
include - APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Warning (2): Invalid argument supplied for foreach() [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39]Code Context//$shops = $shops['entities'];

foreach ($shops2 as $key => $val) {
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/meta.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred Semantic Analysis',
	'shops' => array(
		'LAW' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
			(int) 1 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
			(int) 2 => 'Title 46',
			(int) 3 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
			(int) 4 => 'the National Prohibition Act'
		),
		'GPE' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'United States',
			(int) 1 => 'United States',
			(int) 2 => 'United States',
			(int) 3 => 'the United States',
			(int) 4 => 'New York',
			(int) 5 => 'United States',
			(int) 6 => 'United States',
			(int) 7 => 'United States'
		),
		'WORK_OF_ART' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'The Ruth Mildred - 286',
			(int) 1 => 'The Ruth Mildred',
			(int) 2 => 'The Ruth Mildred
 



 No'
		),
		'DATE' => array(
			(int) 0 => '1932',
			(int) 1 => '1932',
			(int) 2 => 'April 15, 1932',
			(int) 3 => 'May 2, 1932',
			(int) 4 => '4377',
			(int) 5 => '4377',
			(int) 6 => 'March 1, 1928',
			(int) 7 => '46',
			(int) 8 => '4377'
		),
		'ORG' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'U.S. Supreme Court',
			(int) 1 => 'U.S. 67',
			(int) 2 => 'Syllabus',
			(int) 3 => 'U.S. 534',
			(int) 4 => 'the District Court',
			(int) 5 => 'Court',
			(int) 6 => 'the Coast Guard',
			(int) 7 => 'R.S. § 4377',
			(int) 8 => 'The District Court',
			(int) 9 => 'the Circuit Court of Appeals',
			(int) 10 => 'General Motors Acceptance Corporation',
			(int) 11 => 'American Motor',
			(int) 12 => 'Stowell'
		),
		'CARDINAL' => array(
			(int) 0 => '286',
			(int) 1 => '286',
			(int) 2 => '1',
			(int) 3 => '2',
			(int) 4 => '26',
			(int) 5 => '56',
			(int) 6 => '590',
			(int) 7 => '285',
			(int) 8 => 'two',
			(int) 9 => '325',
			(int) 10 => '26',
			(int) 11 => '47',
			(int) 12 => '336',
			(int) 13 => '56',
			(int) 14 => '590',
			(int) 15 => '54',
			(int) 16 => '502',
			(int) 17 => '325',
			(int) 18 => '26'
		),
		'PERSON' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Revised Statutes',
			(int) 1 => 'Stats',
			(int) 2 => 'Ruth Mildred',
			(int) 3 => 'Ruth Mildred'
		),
		'PRODUCT' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Certiorari'
		),
		'LOC' => array(
			(int) 0 => 'Long Island Sound',
			(int) 1 => 'the East River'
		)
	),
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '95617',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => '286 U.S. 67',
			'appellant' => 'United States',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred',
			'casenote' => '',
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'US Supreme Court',
			'court_type' => 'FN',
			'decidedon' => '1932-05-02',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => null,
			'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div>


 United States v. The Ruth Mildred - 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
<br/>
<span>

 U.S. Supreme Court
 

 United States v. The Ruth Mildred, 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
</span>

<p>
<b>
 United States v. The Ruth Mildred
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 No. 795
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Argued April 15, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Decided May 2, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 286 U.S. 67
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
</b>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
</em>
<em>
 Syllabus
 </em>
</p>
<p>
 1. Revised Statutes, § 4377, which provides that any licensed vessel employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed shall be forfeited, applies to a vessel licensed only for the fishing trade which carries a cargo of intoxicating liquors. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#68">
 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 2. Forfeiture under Rev.Stats., § 4377, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem
 </em>
 and (unlike forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act) is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#69">
 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 56 F.2d 590 reversed.
 </p>
<p>
 Certiorari, 285 U.S. 534, to review the affirmance of a judgment of the District Court dismissing a libel brought
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="68">
 Page 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 by the United States to forfeit a vessel for breach of the navigation laws.
 <em>
 Cf.
 </em>
 the last two preceding cases.
 </p>
<p>
 MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO delivered the opinion of the Court.
 </p>
<p>
 The schooner
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed to engage in the cod and mackerel fisheries. On March 1, 1928, she was observed by the Coast Guard in Long Island Sound headed for New York. She was trailed by a patrol boat till she docked in the East River. The master admitted to the customs officers that his vessel was carrying intoxicating liquors, and, upon the search that followed, a stock of liquors was discovered. A libel of information was thereafter filed against the vessel praying a decree of forfeiture for breach of the navigation laws (R.S. § 4377, U.S.Code, title 46, § 325) in carrying on a business not permitted by the license. The master intervened in the suit, and pleaded that the remedy under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act was exclusive of any other. The District Court, upholding that defense, dismissed the libel, 47 F.2d 336, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. 56 F.2d 590. The case is here on a writ of certiorari granted on the petition of the Government.
 </p>
<p>
 Our decision in
 <em>
 General Motors Acceptance Corporation v. United States, ante,
 </em>
 p.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95615/general-motors-acceptance-corp-vs-united-states">
 286 U. S. 49
 </a>
</span>
 , would require a reversal of this judgment if the vessel had been seized for unlawful importation in violation of the tariff act. Even more
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="69">
 Page 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 plainly, that result must follow where the basis of the seizure is a breach of the navigation acts growing out of a departure by the vessel from the conditions of her license. Contrast with the decision below the decision of the same court in
 <em>
 United States v. American Motor Boat K-1231,
 </em>
 54 F.2d 502. By § 4377 of the Revised Statutes (U.S.Code, Title 46, § 325):
 </p>
<p>
 "Whenever any licensed vessel . . . is employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed, . . . such vessel with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, and the cargo, found on board her, shall be forfeited."
 </p>
<p>
 The
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed for the fishing trade, and not for any other. She would have been subject to forfeiture if her cargo had been wheat or silk or sugar. In a suit under this statute, her guilt was not affected, was neither enlarged nor diminished, by the fact that the cargo happened to be one of intoxicating liquors. The government made out a case of forfeiture when there was proof that the cargo was something other than fish. Forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act is one of the consequences of a successful criminal prosecution of a personal offender, and is ancillary thereto. Forfeiture under the Revised Statutes, § 4377, for breach of the navigation laws, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem,
 </em>
 and is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt.
 <em>
 United States v. Stowell,
 </em>
<span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell">
 133 U. S. 1
 </a>
</span>
 ,
 <span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell#16">
 133 U. S. 16
 </a>
</span>
 -17. In brief, the basis of the charge of guilt directed against this vessel is not a breach of the National Prohibition Act nor any movement of transportation, lawful or unlawful. It is the act of engaging in a business other than the fishing trade in contravention of a license.
 </p>
<p>
 The decree should be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
 </p>
<br/>
<br/>
</div></body></html>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The Ruth Mildred',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => '/cases/federal/us/286/67/',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '95617'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred Semantic Analysis'
$shops = array(
	'LAW' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
		(int) 1 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
		(int) 2 => 'Title 46',
		(int) 3 => 'the National Prohibition Act',
		(int) 4 => 'the National Prohibition Act'
	),
	'GPE' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'United States',
		(int) 1 => 'United States',
		(int) 2 => 'United States',
		(int) 3 => 'the United States',
		(int) 4 => 'New York',
		(int) 5 => 'United States',
		(int) 6 => 'United States',
		(int) 7 => 'United States'
	),
	'WORK_OF_ART' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'The Ruth Mildred - 286',
		(int) 1 => 'The Ruth Mildred',
		(int) 2 => 'The Ruth Mildred
 



 No'
	),
	'DATE' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1932',
		(int) 1 => '1932',
		(int) 2 => 'April 15, 1932',
		(int) 3 => 'May 2, 1932',
		(int) 4 => '4377',
		(int) 5 => '4377',
		(int) 6 => 'March 1, 1928',
		(int) 7 => '46',
		(int) 8 => '4377'
	),
	'ORG' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'U.S. Supreme Court',
		(int) 1 => 'U.S. 67',
		(int) 2 => 'Syllabus',
		(int) 3 => 'U.S. 534',
		(int) 4 => 'the District Court',
		(int) 5 => 'Court',
		(int) 6 => 'the Coast Guard',
		(int) 7 => 'R.S. § 4377',
		(int) 8 => 'The District Court',
		(int) 9 => 'the Circuit Court of Appeals',
		(int) 10 => 'General Motors Acceptance Corporation',
		(int) 11 => 'American Motor',
		(int) 12 => 'Stowell'
	),
	'CARDINAL' => array(
		(int) 0 => '286',
		(int) 1 => '286',
		(int) 2 => '1',
		(int) 3 => '2',
		(int) 4 => '26',
		(int) 5 => '56',
		(int) 6 => '590',
		(int) 7 => '285',
		(int) 8 => 'two',
		(int) 9 => '325',
		(int) 10 => '26',
		(int) 11 => '47',
		(int) 12 => '336',
		(int) 13 => '56',
		(int) 14 => '590',
		(int) 15 => '54',
		(int) 16 => '502',
		(int) 17 => '325',
		(int) 18 => '26'
	),
	'PERSON' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Revised Statutes',
		(int) 1 => 'Stats',
		(int) 2 => 'Ruth Mildred',
		(int) 3 => 'Ruth Mildred'
	),
	'PRODUCT' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Certiorari'
	),
	'LOC' => array(
		(int) 0 => 'Long Island Sound',
		(int) 1 => 'the East River'
	)
)
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '95617',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => '286 U.S. 67',
		'appellant' => 'United States',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'United States Vs. the Ruth Mildred',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'US Supreme Court',
		'court_type' => 'FN',
		'decidedon' => '1932-05-02',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => null,
		'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div>


 United States v. The Ruth Mildred - 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
<br/>
<span>

 U.S. Supreme Court
 

 United States v. The Ruth Mildred, 286 U.S. 67 (1932)
 
</span>

<p>
<b>
 United States v. The Ruth Mildred
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 No. 795
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Argued April 15, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 Decided May 2, 1932
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
 286 U.S. 67
 </b>
</p>
<p>
<b>
</b>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
 </em>
</p>
<p>
<em>
</em>
<em>
 Syllabus
 </em>
</p>
<p>
 1. Revised Statutes, § 4377, which provides that any licensed vessel employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed shall be forfeited, applies to a vessel licensed only for the fishing trade which carries a cargo of intoxicating liquors. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#68">
 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 2. Forfeiture under Rev.Stats., § 4377, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem
 </em>
 and (unlike forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act) is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt. P.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95617/united-states-vs-ruth-mildred#69">
 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</span>
 .
 </p>
<p>
 56 F.2d 590 reversed.
 </p>
<p>
 Certiorari, 285 U.S. 534, to review the affirmance of a judgment of the District Court dismissing a libel brought
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="68">
 Page 286 U. S. 68
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 by the United States to forfeit a vessel for breach of the navigation laws.
 <em>
 Cf.
 </em>
 the last two preceding cases.
 </p>
<p>
 MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO delivered the opinion of the Court.
 </p>
<p>
 The schooner
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed to engage in the cod and mackerel fisheries. On March 1, 1928, she was observed by the Coast Guard in Long Island Sound headed for New York. She was trailed by a patrol boat till she docked in the East River. The master admitted to the customs officers that his vessel was carrying intoxicating liquors, and, upon the search that followed, a stock of liquors was discovered. A libel of information was thereafter filed against the vessel praying a decree of forfeiture for breach of the navigation laws (R.S. § 4377, U.S.Code, title 46, § 325) in carrying on a business not permitted by the license. The master intervened in the suit, and pleaded that the remedy under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act was exclusive of any other. The District Court, upholding that defense, dismissed the libel, 47 F.2d 336, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. 56 F.2d 590. The case is here on a writ of certiorari granted on the petition of the Government.
 </p>
<p>
 Our decision in
 <em>
 General Motors Acceptance Corporation v. United States, ante,
 </em>
 p.
 <span>
<a href="/case/95615/general-motors-acceptance-corp-vs-united-states">
 286 U. S. 49
 </a>
</span>
 , would require a reversal of this judgment if the vessel had been seized for unlawful importation in violation of the tariff act. Even more
 </p>
<p>
<a class="page-number" id="69">
 Page 286 U. S. 69
 </a>
</p>
<p>
 plainly, that result must follow where the basis of the seizure is a breach of the navigation acts growing out of a departure by the vessel from the conditions of her license. Contrast with the decision below the decision of the same court in
 <em>
 United States v. American Motor Boat K-1231,
 </em>
 54 F.2d 502. By § 4377 of the Revised Statutes (U.S.Code, Title 46, § 325):
 </p>
<p>
 "Whenever any licensed vessel . . . is employed in any other trade than that for which she is licensed, . . . such vessel with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, and the cargo, found on board her, shall be forfeited."
 </p>
<p>
 The
 <em>
 Ruth Mildred
 </em>
 was licensed for the fishing trade, and not for any other. She would have been subject to forfeiture if her cargo had been wheat or silk or sugar. In a suit under this statute, her guilt was not affected, was neither enlarged nor diminished, by the fact that the cargo happened to be one of intoxicating liquors. The government made out a case of forfeiture when there was proof that the cargo was something other than fish. Forfeiture under § 26 of the National Prohibition Act is one of the consequences of a successful criminal prosecution of a personal offender, and is ancillary thereto. Forfeiture under the Revised Statutes, § 4377, for breach of the navigation laws, is strictly
 <em>
 in rem,
 </em>
 and is not dependent upon a preliminary adjudication of personal guilt.
 <em>
 United States v. Stowell,
 </em>
<span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell">
 133 U. S. 1
 </a>
</span>
 ,
 <span>
<a href="/case/86579/united-states-vs-stowell#16">
 133 U. S. 16
 </a>
</span>
 -17. In brief, the basis of the charge of guilt directed against this vessel is not a breach of the National Prohibition Act nor any movement of transportation, lawful or unlawful. It is the act of engaging in a business other than the fishing trade in contravention of a license.
 </p>
<p>
 The decree should be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
 </p>
<br/>
<br/>
</div></body></html>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The Ruth Mildred',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => '/cases/federal/us/286/67/',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '95617'
)
$pattern = '/\(((0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])[.](0[1-9]|1[012])[.](17|18|19|20)[0-9]{2}).*\)/'
$shops2 = null
include - APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

LAW: the National Prohibition Act, the National Prohibition Act, Title 46, the National Prohibition Act, the National Prohibition Act

GPE: United States, United States, United States, the United States, New York, United States, United States, United States

WORK_OF_ART: The Ruth Mildred - 286, The Ruth Mildred, The Ruth Mildred No

DATE: 1932, 1932, April 15, 1932, May 2, 1932, 4377, 4377, March 1, 1928, 46, 4377

ORG: U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. 67, Syllabus, U.S. 534, the District Court, Court, the Coast Guard, R.S. § 4377, The District Court, the Circuit Court of Appeals, General Motors Acceptance Corporation, American Motor, Stowell

CARDINAL: 286, 286, 1, 2, 26, 56, 590, 285, two, 325, 26, 47, 336, 56, 590, 54, 502, 325, 26

PERSON: Revised Statutes, Stats, Ruth Mildred, Ruth Mildred

PRODUCT: Certiorari

LOC: Long Island Sound, the East River