HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0119 and id is 1 raw text is: SHIP CARPENTER (THE) [1810]
[10] JUDGMENT.-Sir W. Grant-By the judgment in the case of the Amedie, we
pronounced the slave trade can have no legitimate existence, except under the
particular municipal law of that country, to which the claimant belongs. It was
then considered, and very explicitly declared, that the trade was altogether unlaw-
ful, except so far as it was in the power of the neutral to shew this trade was protected
by the law of the neutral state. This protection was required to be satisfactorily
shewn in that case, which not having been complied with, we pronounced sentence
of condemnation. Here also the claimant must necessarily do the same, and produce
the proofs of his protection before he can obtain restitution.
SENTENCE.-Pronounced for the appeal of the captor, reversed the sentence of
the Court below, decreeing restitution of the ship and cargo upon payment of the
captor's expenses, and condemned the ship and cargo.
An application was made for the claimant's expenses, which was also refused.
[See notes to The Arnedie, 1810, 1 Acton, at p. 251 ; and The Africa, 1810,
2 Acton, at p. 3.]
[11] THE SHIP CARPENTER, MEYER, Master [Jan. 24, 1810].
Brimstone under a false destination from Sicily to Copenhagen but actually
to Marseilles, not contraband under the particular circumstances of this case.
Ship restored. Not to be inferred that it cannot be so in any case.
This vessel, with a cargo consisting of Brimstone, under American colours, bound
from Palma in. Sicily to Marseilles (but ostensibly to Copenhagen) was captured
and condemned at Malta as lawful prize. An appeal was prosecuted by the master
as to the ship and cargo; but after appearance entered, notice was given by the
appellant's proctor, that they had not considered their appeal as applying to the
cargo, although by error it had been inserted in the inhibition.
The King's Advocate [Sir Christopher Robinson] for the Captor.-The decision in
the Court below proceeded upon the principle that the present cargo must be con-
sidered under the circumstances of its destination as completely within the meaning
of the term contraband. The question as to this species of cargo has never here been
formally decided, perhaps never even discussed. The conduct of the parties engaged
in the transaction, and the mode of carrying on this speculation, are matter of
sufficient curiosity and interest to arrest the attention of the Court. The master
states he sailed in ballast to several ports of Sicily previous to his arrival at Palma,
where this cargo of raw brimstone was shipped for account of Abraham Gibbs of
Palermo, Consul of the United States, and actually destined to Marseilles; but
finding it impossible to clear out from thence for a French port, an ostensible
destination for Copenhagen was adopted. The cargo was consigned to order, and
had the ship arrived at Marseilles some person would [12] have applied for the
cargo. At the time of the capture there was on board a bill of lading describing
the whole cargo as for the sole account and risk of the master, paying no freight,
being owners property, in which a blank was left for the consignee's name. Also
a certificate to the following effect. I, Charles Rowley, Esq., commanding his
Majesty's ships in the island of Sicily, certify that I do not consider raw brimstone
an article of contraband; and were I to visit a neutral vessel laden with it, I should
not detain her.' Palermo, 27th April 1807. Signed C. Rowley. To, which was
annexed another certificate under the consular seal of the United States, stating
that the above was a faithful copy of Captain Rowley's opinion, certified under his
own hand, the original being in the possession of the subscriber Abraham Gibbs,
Consul. Under these circumstances, and prepared with these specious' instruments,
the parties considered the fraud possible, if not practicable, and the ship sailed for
Marseilles, which port she was actually taken in endeavouring to enter. Facts such
as these make it impossible to consider this particular case as a, question to. be de-
cided merely upon the strict principle, whether the cargo was contraband or not.
The fallacy and deceit practised in this transaction, and to which the agent for the
II ACTON, 10](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0119&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)