
    HEADMAN’S CASE. Henry D. Headman v. The United States.
    
      On the Proofs.
    
    
      This suit is brought to recover the proceeds of cotton captured at Savannah. The cotton, however, appears to have been purchased jointly by the claimant and one Casey, and no evidence is produced showing the amount of the claimant’s interest.
    
    
      Where cotton is bought by two jointly, before capture, one of the parties cannot maintain a separate action for half the proceeds, without proof to show the extent of his interest.
    
      Messrs. Suglies, Denver & Peek for tbe claimants:
    This claim is for tbe proceeds of three bales of sea-island cotton, seized by tbe United States at tbe time of tbe occupation of Savannah by General Sherman, and shipped to Mr. Simeon Draper at New Tort and sold.
    The ownership and loyalty of tbe claimant and tbe seizure of the cotton by the United States, being proved, a judgment is respectfully requested from tbe honorable court for the amount of the proceeds of the same.
    
      Mr. B. S. Sale, special counsel of the Treasury, for the defendants :
    The question to which the attention of the court is more particularly directed in this caséis as to the fact of the claimant having voted at the presidential election, held under the rebel government, on the 6th day of November, 1861. It appears from the poll-books of an election held in the city of Savannah on that day that tbe claimant appeared and vot§d for the rebel candidates for president and vice-president.
    It is submitted therefore—
    1. That the fact that the claimant participated in an election held under the rebel government, and cast bis vote for the candidates of that government, was, of itself, such countenance, assistance, or encouragement to the rebellion as brings, the claimant within the rule laid down in the case of Margaret Bond.
    2. That the casting of this vote at that election was, practically, a renunciation of his allegiance to the government of the United States; and if the court shall so hold, then it has no power, under the act to which we have referred, to render any'judgment in favor of the claimant.
   Milligan, J.,

delivered the order of the court:

This is a claim for three bales of cotton alleged to have been captured in the city of Savannah, by the United States military forces, in 1864.

The court is satisfied that the claimant consistently adhered to the United States throughout the rebellion, and did give no aid or comfort to persons engaged therein.

The seizure, shipment, and sale of three bales of sea-island cotton is fully established, and also that the proceeds of the sale were paid into the Treasury.

It appears, however, that the cotton under consideration was purchased jointly by the claimant and one Casey; and rejecting the claimant’s own testimony, which we are bound under the statute to do, there is ho evidence whatever to show the amount of the plan tiff’s interest in the cotton claimed.

Under this state of facts, we feel it to be the safer rule to suspend final judgment in the case, and give the claimant au opportunity to show by legal testimony the amount of his interest in the cotton claimed, or make good the proof of the entire amount he claims.

The cause remanded to the general docket.  