Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!

Sign up free
Page thumbnail for The Kentucky Gazette
Domestic News August 10, 1793

The Kentucky Gazette

Lexington, Fayette County, Kentucky

What is this article about?

The Federal Court in Richmond, Virginia, issued opinions on the recoverability of British debts, ruling in favor of the plaintiff on most points, considering the U.S. Constitution as supreme law repealing conflicting Virginia acts, but divided on whether prior payments barred recovery.

Clipping

OCR Quality

95% Excellent

Full Text

On Friday the 7th inst. the honorable the Judges of the Federal Court, held in Richmond, Virginia, gave their opinion on the important subject of the payment of the BRITISH DEBTS.

The points before the Court were:

1st. Whether the British debts were recoverable in that state the acts of the Virginia Assembly having prohibited the recovery, which acts passed prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States?

2d. Whether the payments made into the Loan-office were not complete bars to the Plaintiff's action for so much as was paid?

3d. As the definitive treaty had been broken by the government of Great Britain, whether the treaty of peace should be carried into effect on the part of America?

And, lastly, whether the debt was annihilated by the dissolution of the government, on the 4th day of July, 1776?

The Court were unanimously of opinion on the first, third, and last points, for the plaintiff, considering the adoption of the constitution as a repeal of all laws in opposition to the treaty of peace, which by that adoption had become the supreme law of the land: and upon this ground gave judgment for the plaintiff on the first point. On the third they were of opinion, that the court could not take notice of a breach of a treaty if such did exist, without a declaration to that effect from the Congress of the United States. On the last, they gave judgment for the plaintiff, as the plea of the defendant could not be supported by the laws and usages of nations.

On the second point, the court divided, Mr. Jay, chief Justice of the United States, for the plaintiff, Mr. Iredell and Mr. Griffin, for the defendants—upon the plea then, judgment was entered for the defendants, a majority of the court supporting, that as that judgment had been carried into complete effect before the treaty of peace, and by that law, the defendant was discharged from the debt, the treaty of peace could not again charge him.

What sub-type of article is it?

Legal Or Court Politics

What keywords are associated?

British Debts Federal Court Richmond Virginia Treaty Of Peace Us Constitution

What entities or persons were involved?

Mr. Jay Mr. Iredell Mr. Griffin

Where did it happen?

Richmond, Virginia

Domestic News Details

Primary Location

Richmond, Virginia

Event Date

On Friday The 7th Inst.

Key Persons

Mr. Jay Mr. Iredell Mr. Griffin

Outcome

judgment for plaintiff on points 1, 3, and last; judgment for defendants on point 2 due to prior payments discharging the debt.

Event Details

The Federal Court unanimously ruled for the plaintiff on recoverability of British debts despite Virginia acts, treaty supremacy under the Constitution, and rejection of debt annulment by independence; divided on loan-office payments as bars, with majority favoring defendants.

Are you sure?