200 Chests of Tea.

1824. detection. It would have been more natural to have disguised congo teas in bohea boxes. But the difficulty that lies in the argument derived from this source, is, that upon opening the chests, the contents are proved to be exactly what the New-York witnesses call bohea, and the Boston witnesses congo. So that the question of fraudulent disguise depends upon the fact, whether the tea be or be not bohea; and if it be settled to be the latter, then the suspicion from this circumstance vanishes. The same answer may be given to all the other circumstances relied on as badges of fraud. They become utterly unimportant, if there was not a real misrepresentation of the quality of the tea.

There is one cogent fact, which presses with peculiar weight in the consideration of this part of the case. It is, that after the present seizure was made, and the whole train of suspicions disclosed, the remaining teas, of the same denomination and importation, which were yet in the public stores at New-York, underwent a strict examination there under the authority of the officers of the customs. The result of that examination was an unequivocal opinion, that they were the common bohea of commerce; and this result being communicated to the government, no farther proceedings were thought necessary to vindicate its rights.

But another fact, which is decisive against the supposition of a fraudulent intention, is, that the teas were purchased in China as bohea, at the usual bohea price, and upon their importation into

New-York, were there sold at the usual bohea price. They were sold at prices from thirty-one to thirty-six and a half cents per pound, when, at the same time, and in the same place, congo sold at forty-eight cents per pound. This is not a matter of doubtful or equivocal evidence; it is admitted and proved in the most positive manner. What then could have been the inducement to fraud? Men do not perpetrate frauds upon the revenue from the mere love of mischief, or the wanton disregard of duty. There must be some leading interest, some enticing object in view, to lead them to such a violation of social law and moral sentiment. In the present case, no such motive could exist, for the whole conduct of the party is at war with the supposition. Nay, more, the perpetration of the fraud would have been against his interest. We do not here allude to his private reputation as an opulent merchant, engaged in an extensive commerce in teas, nor to the powerful influence that, under such circumstances, public opinion must have upon him, in its stern and severe, though silent rebukes. But his immediate interest in the same trade and in the same voyage, would be sacrificed by such unworthy proceedings. He would hazard large interests upon a paltry saving in duties, from which he could in the end derive not the slightest benefit.

It has been said, that unless the present libel can be maintained, a wide door will be opened for the admission of frauds in the importation of teas. If this be true, it forms no reason for a different judicial construction of the acts of Con

1824.

200 Chests of Tea.

1824.

200 Chests of

Tea.

gress, much less for the enforcing a forfeiture where the facts will not warrant it. Congress can provide an easy remedy, by.changing the specific duty to a duty ad valorem, a policy which has already obtained the sanction of other nations.

into the discusThe judgment

It is unnecessary to go farther sion of the merits of this case. of the Court is, that the decree of the Circuit Court of Massachusetts, given pro forma, ought to be reversed, the libel of the United States be dismissed, and the 200 chests of tea be restored to the claimant. But the Court are also of opinion that there was probable cause of seizure, and direct it to be certified upon the record.

Decree reversed.

[LOCAL LAW.]

JOHN MASON, Appellant,

V.

JOHN MUNCASTER, survivor of George Deneale and John Muncaster, CHURCH-WARDENS OF . CHRIST CHURCH, FAIRFAX PARISH, ALEXANDRIA, and the said JOHN MUNCASTER and EDMUND J. LEE, PRESENT CHURCH-WARDENS OF THE SAID CHURCH, and others, Respondents.

A bill in equity, brought to rescind a purchase made under the decrce
of this Court, in Terrett v. Taylor, (9 Cranch, 43.) upon, the
ground that the title to the property was defective, and could not
be made good by the Vestry and other persons, who were parties to
the former suit. Bill dismissed.

The Vestry of the Episcopal Church of Alexandria, now known by
the name of Christ's Church, is the regular Vestry, in succession,
of the parish of Fairfax, and, in connexion with the Minister, has
the care and management of all the temporalities of the parish
within the scope of their authority. A sale by them of the Church
lands, with the assent of the Minister, under the former decree of
this Court, conveys a good title to the purchaser.
Although the Church-Wardens of a parish are not capable of holding
lands, and a deed to them and their successors in office, for ever,
cannot operate by way of grant; yet, where it contains a covenant
of general warranty, binding the grantors and their heirs for ever,
it may operate by way of estoppel, to confirm to the church and its
privies the perpetual and beneficial estate in the land.
The parishioners have, individually, no right or title to the glebe
lands; they are the property of the parish in its aggregate or cor-
porate capacity, to be disposed of, for parochial purposes, by the
Vestry, who are the legal agents and representatives of the parish.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia.

1824.

Mason

V.

Muncaster.

1824.

Mason

Muncaster.

This was a bill brought by the appellant, Mason, to rescind a purchase made by him, jointly with W. Jones, of a part of the glebe land which was sold under the decree of this Court, in the case of Terrett v. Taylor, reported in the 9th vol. of Mr. Cranch's Reports, p. 43. After a confirmation by the Court below, of the report of the sale made by the commissioners for this purpose, and after various intermediate negotiations, the appellant gave his promissory notes to John Muncaster, one of the respondents, and George Deneale, since deceased, who were at the time Church-Wardens of the Episcopal Church of Alexandria, in payment of part of the purchase money; and judgment having been obtained against the appellant, upon these notes, in the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, the appellant also sought by his bill a perpetual injunction of this judgment. The grounds of the prayer of the bill were, that the title of the property was substantially defective, and could not be made good by the Vestry, and other persons, who were parties to the bill in the former suit; that the same bill contained a material misrepresentation of the facts respecting the title, of which the appellant was, at the time of the purchase, wholly ignorant, and of which he had but recently acquired full knowledge."

Upon the final hearing in the Court below, the bill was dismissed, and the cause was brought by appeal to this Court.

a The essential parts of the pleadings and evidence will be found fully stated in the opinion of the Court.