Court: Supreme Court of the United States; March 15, 1808; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court
In Dawson's Lessee v. Godfrey, the court addressed whether a British subject, born before American independence, can inherit land in the United States. The case arose from the death of Russel Lee, who owned land in the District of Columbia. Mrs. Dawson, as the lessor of the plaintiff, would normally inherit this land by descent; however, her status as a British subject raised the issue of alienage under Maryland law, which prohibits aliens from inheriting property.
The court confirmed that, generally, an alien cannot inherit land in Maryland. It considered the argument that the rights of British subjects born before American independence (antennati) should be treated similarly to those of Scotsmen born after the union, who could inherit land in England. However, the court distinguished this case from Calvin's case, noting that the allegiance owed by individuals at the time of birth is not applicable here, as the British subjects did not owe allegiance to the American government at their birth.
The court concluded that rights to inherit are dependent on the state of allegiance at the time of descent, not at birth. Therefore, since Mrs. Dawson never owed allegiance to the United States, she could not inherit the land. The court emphasized that while antenati of America may inherit in Great Britain due to past allegiance, the same principle does not apply to antenati of Great Britain in relation to the United States.
An action initiated in England by an American antenatus for land recovery cannot successfully argue a plea of alien born, as this would contradict the facts. Additionally, a plea regarding the severance of the states would not benefit the defendant, since the government’s actions do not strip the plaintiff of civil rights, even if they release the defendant from allegiance obligations. Conversely, if a similar suit is filed in the U.S. by a British antenatus, the plea of alien born would be valid since the plaintiff never owed allegiance to the U.S. government. The plaintiff would need to provide a specific replication acknowledging the plea's truth and detailing circumstances that confirm his lack of involvement in the U.S. social compact. The complexity surrounding inheritance rights arises from misconceptions of inheritance as a natural right; in reality, it is governed by societal laws and territorial jurisdiction. To inherit in Maryland, one must demonstrate entitlement under Maryland law, which generally denies aliens the right to inherit. Therefore, the plaintiff must identify an exception to this rule, but no such common law exception exists that separates the right to inherit from allegiance obligations. The judgment is affirmed, with judges Chase, Johnson, Livingston, and Todd present.
