p. 499abroad or at home, aiid a consequent violation either of the act of 1794, or of the act of 1807, decreed that the Caroline should be condemned as forfeited to the United States.
« We agree in the above statement of the case.
C. Lee, for the Appellant, contended,
1st. That the libel was not sufficient to support the condemnation — anti
2d. That the offence was not made out in point of fact.
1. The libel does not state ally certain specific of-fence. It is altogether in the alternative. It does not state when, nor where, nor by whom the vessel was seized — nor when, nor where, nor by .whom, 'nor in what manner the vessel was fitted out." It is altogether vague, uncertain and informal.
An information in rent ought to be as precise and formal as an information in personam. The civil law requires that a libel should be certain and positive ip all material circumstances.
. 2.‘The statement of facts is as imperfect as the libel. The vessel is only liable to forfeiture when she shall have been actually fitted, equipped or prepared, not while she is fitting, equipping, or preparing. The degree of equipment ought to have been stated that the Court might judge whether it were such fitting, or equipment as is contemplated by the law. Upon every information for a penalty, the offence should be fully proved — Parker, 22. This case is like that of Moodie v. ship Alfred, 3, Dall. 307, in which this Court decid
p. 500ed that the ship was not illegally-fitted out, although she had taken on board some articles calculated for war.
J. R. Ingersoll, contra.
Contended that the case and the libel were sufficiently. explicit. The intent was clearly shewn. It is not nec ssary, that every thing necessary for the voyage should, be on boaird before the forfeiture accrues. The libel states the offence in the words of the act of Congress.
The Court, after taking time to consider, directed the following sentence to be entered.
“ This cause came oh to be heard on the transcript « of the record and was argued by counsel, on consideration whereof, it is the opinion .of the Court, that the «libel is too imperfectly drawn, p found a sentence of con- *< demnation thereon. The sentence of the said Circuit « Court is therefore reversed, and the. couse remanded « to the said Circuit Court, with directions to admit thp “ libel to be amended.”
The same point was .also decided at this term, in the cases of- the schooner Hoppet — the schooner Enteipricse~r the ship Emily, and the scliooner Ann.