
    Plumb against M‘Crea and others.
    a replication n$ de injuria, &c. is gep in the pica cuse,^ and ^ not gal^™t.as
    
      bolS,tTa%mtatis, ¿Sn*! &=• to thaSlethe5tgoocis forfeited”11 the and were con-district court, is
    THIS was' an action of trespass de bonis asportaiis, to recover ■ . ,, damages for taking away a number of horned cattle, on the 11th of September, 1814. , . .
    The defendant .pleaded, 1st. The general issue.. 2d. That the cattle were’attempted to be exported,, by the plaintiff and others, being citizens of. the United States, into Cánada,, and that MR rea, as agent of the collector of Champlain, and the Other defendants, as his.assistants, seized them as forfeited to the United Stales, and. delivered them to the collector. The third plea stated the seizure, and the proceedings in the district court of the district of Jfeti-York, whereby the cattle were condemned as to the United States.
    
    The plaintiff replied, 1st, To the second plea, denying that the cattle were attempted to be exported ; and, 2d, To the third plea, that the defendants took the1cattle de injuria sua proprio.
    
    The defendants demurred specially to the replication to the third plea, and the plaintiff joined in^demufrer, .
   Per Curiam.

The replication of de injuria suapropña,, &<?., is bad, according to the rule laid down in Crogateh ease, and recognized by the court, in Lytle v. Lee & Ruggles, (5 Johns. Rep. 113. This is a pléa good only where the matter alleged is by way of excuse, and not where it is insisted upon as giving 'a right. (1 Chitty’s Pl. 562, 3, 4.) The pleas are good and sufficient, if true, to bar the plaintiff’s right of recovery. If the cattle were forfeited by the act of, congress, the property was devested by the ac-t of flip plaintiff.. ■ .

Judgment for the defendants, :  