The provisions of the 20th section of chapter 291 of the Laws of 1846 are broad enough to protect the gunpowder, which is the subject of this action, from forfeiture, under the provisions of the 18th section of the act. The latter section declares that all gunpowder found within the limits specified in the first section of the act, shall be forfeited to the use of the fire department. The limits specified in the first section are that part of the city of New York lying south of a line running through the center of Sixty-second street (Laws
The 20th section of the act declares that the penalties and provisions of the act shall not extend to any vessel receiving gunpowder on freight, provided such vessel do not remain at any wharf of the said city, or within 300 yards thereof, after sunset (of the day on which the gunpowder is put on board) or on any other day while having gunpowder, on board. The vessel was ready, and had orders to proceed to sea on the day the gunpowder was received on board, and was only prevented from so doing by the illegal interference of the fire wardens. The powder was seized before 12 o’clock at noon of the day it was put on board the vessel, and we have no right to presume that the vessel would have remained within the prohibited distance of the wharf after sunset of that day.
It is claimed by the defendants that the 20th section only applies to vessels receiving gunpowder on board, within the prohibited district, from licensed dealers in gunpowder, under the provisions of the 3d section of the act. As before remarked, the language of the 20th section is broad enough to include all vessels receiving gunpowder on freight, whether-from licensed dealers or other persons. If it was the intention of the framers of the act to restrict the exemption to vessels receiving gunpowder on freight from licensed dealers, they doubtless would have used language to express that intention, and none other. The act is highly penal, and should be strictly construed.
It may also be observed that to protect from forfeiture under section 13 of the act, gunpowder put on board of vessels within the prohibited district, by licensed dealers, no such-provision was necessary as is contained in the 20th section. The 3d section makes it lawful for licensed dealers in gunpowder to • send it in the day-time, in quantities not more than five quarter casks at one time, through the streets of the city, if covered
The right to receive gunpowder on freight upon a vessel within the prohibited district, under the conditions specified, being granted, the ordinary reasonable means of enjoying such right should also be held to be granted.
The language of the 20th section would authorize vessels' coming into the harbor of New York from other ports, with gunpowder on board, to tranship such gunpowder to another vessel, subject to the conditions of that section, as to hauling into the stream. The 4th section of the act, however, provides that the commander or owner of every ship or vessel arriving in the harbor of New York, with more than 28 pounds of gunpowder on board, shall, within 48 hours after its arrival, and before such ship or vessel shall approach within 300 yards of any wharf, pier or slip within the prohibited district, cause such gunpowder to be landed by means of a boat or boats, or other small craft, at any place without such district most contiguous to any magazine for storing gunpowder, and cause it to be stored in such magazine. The 5th section authorizes such ship or vessel to proceed to sea within 48 hours after her arrival,or to tranship such gunpowder from one ship to another, for the purpose of immediate exportation, without landing such gunpowder as required by the 4th section, but in case such vessel proceeds to sea, or such transhipment is made, it is declared unlawful to keep said gunpowder longer than 48 hours within the harbor of New York, or to approach with such gunpowder within 300 yards of any wharf, pier or slip within the prohibited district. It may be conceded that these provisions in relation to vessels arriving in the harbor of New York, with
We can only say that the act contains such provisions. Under the 3d section of the act, one hundred licensed dealers in gunpowder might have as many carts, each carrying through the streets of the city and delivering to a vessel lying at a wharf within the prohibited district, at the same time, five quarter casks of gunpowder, or in all five hundred quarter casks, and under the 4th and 5th sections of the act, 29 pounds of gunpowder on board of a vessel arriving in the harbor of New York, cannot approach within 300. yards of such wharf, or be permitted to remain within the harbor of New York more than 48 hours. We can only say that the legislature is omnipotent, except where its powers are restricted by the Constitution.
The 4th and 5 th sections of the act do not, however, by their terms, extend to any other vessels than such as arrive within the harbor of New York with gunpowder on board; they do. not apply to a vessel taking gunpowder on board, outside of the limits of the city of New York, and yet within the harbor of New York. That was the case of the. powder company’s schooner which brought the powder in question within the district mentioned in the first section of the act. The powder was put on board of the schooner within the harbor of New York. It is not necessary, in this case, to decide whether, after
The right to put the powder on the plaintiff’s vessel, on freight, is given by the 20th section of -the act, and all means of enjoying that right, not prohibited, are lawful, and the 4th and 5th sections of the act do not apply to the powder company’s schooner or the powder on board of it. The case is omitted in the act, and it is better that it should be provided for by the legislature than that the courts should viólate the unambiguous language of the statute, and usurp a power. belonging to another branch of the Government. The province of the Court is/ms dicere non dare.
We entertain no doubt that the action was properly brought under the 10th section of the act against the fire department of the city of New York for the acts of the fire wardens.
The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.
Davies, Wright, Selden and Emott, Js., concurred.