American Fur Co. V. United States on:
[Wikipedia]
[Google]
[Amazon]
''American Fur Co. v. United States'', 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 358 (1829), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the
Justice Bushrod Washington delivered the opinion of the Court. Washington noted that Davis was an agent of Wallace, and that his statements could bind the principal. He further stated that all of the goods were subject to seizure, not just the alcohol, but that the instructions as to the location of the seizure to the jury was so confusing that a new trial was required.''American Fur Co.'', 27 U.S. at 365.
American Fur Company
The American Fur Company (AFC) was founded in 1808, by John Jacob Astor, a German immigrant to the United States. During the 18th century, furs had become a major commodity in Europe, and North America became a major supplier. Several British co ...
agent's acts and statements bound the company; that all goods were subject to seizure and forfeiture; but that the instructions on where in Indian territory the seizure could be made was in error to the point that a new trial was required.
Background
On September 24, 1824, a licensed Indian trader, William H. Wallace, was caught with seven kegs of whiskey and one keg of shrub among his goods he had for trade with the Indians. The localDistrict Attorney
In the United States, a district attorney (DA), county attorney, state's attorney, prosecuting attorney, commonwealth's attorney, or state attorney is the chief prosecutor and/or chief law enforcement officer representing a U.S. state in a l ...
moved for the district court to forfeit all of the goods to the government, and following a trial in which John Davis, an employee of Wallace, testified about the alcohol, the jury agreed and forfeited the goods to government.
Supreme Court
Justice Bushrod Washington delivered the opinion of the Court. Washington noted that Davis was an agent of Wallace, and that his statements could bind the principal. He further stated that all of the goods were subject to seizure, not just the alcohol, but that the instructions as to the location of the seizure to the jury was so confusing that a new trial was required.''American Fur Co.'', 27 U.S. at 365.
References
External links
* {{caselaw source , case = {{ussc, name=American Fur Co. v. United States, volume=27, page=358, year=1829, reporter=Pet., reporter-volume=2, el=no , googlescholar = https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15835495638369313391 , justia =https://supreme.justia.com/us/27/358/case.html , loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep027/usrep027358/usrep027358.pdf 1829 in United States case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Marshall Court American Fur Company