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/ssactsengr0207 and id is 1 raw text is: BARTON V. FIELD [1842-44]
the ship and cargo, and the master, officers, and crew, against the Appellants, the
owners of the steam vessel Gazelle.
The cause was heard on the l1th of December 1842, before the Judge of the
Admiralty Court, who pronounced for the damage, and condemned the owners of
the Gazelle and the Bail in costs.
An appeal having been asserted, and the usual proceedings taken in this Court,
the cause was assigned for hearing on the 1st of June 1843.
The Proctor for the Appellants having, however, exhibited a proxy, and declared
his parties, proceeded no further in the appeal.
Dr. Phillimore-Moved their lordships to remit the cause, and condemn the
Appellants in costs,
Which was ordered accordingly.
[Mews' Dig. tit. COLONY; III. APPEALS TO PRIVY COUNCIL; 6. Practice, n. By s. 18
of the Judicature Act, 1873 (36 and 37 Vict. c. 66), and s. 4 (3) of the Judicature
Act, 1891 (54 and 55 Vict. c. 53), the jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee
upon any judgment or order of the High Court of Admiralty was, except as to
Prize, transferred to the Court of Appeal.]
[273] ON APPEAL FROM THE VICE-ADMIRALTY COURT OF GIBRALTAR.
In the matter of the Petition of MILES BARTON, and Others, against BARRON
FIELD.
The Ship WINwIcIc [Feb. 14, 1842,* and Nov. 27 and 28, 1843 t].
This Court will not visit a Judge of an inferior Court with the penal con-
sequences of an attachment for contumacy and contempt, for disregarding an
Inhibition unless such disobedience is wilful, and proceeded from improper
motives [4 Moo. P.C. 283].
An Inhibition to the Judge of the Vice-Admiralty Court at Gibraltar, inhibiing
him from doing anything prejudicial to the parties Appellant pending an
appeal, is not to be disregarded at his discretion, although he may c( nzider
that he is acting for the benefit of all parties.
Decree for a sale of a vessel condemned, after appeal asserted and Inhibition
served personally on the Judge, held not such a contempt, under the circum-
stances of the case, as to entitle the owners to an attachment against the
Judge for costs and damages incurred thereby.
This was an application for an attachment against Barron Field, Esquire, the
late Judge of the Vice-Admiralty Court at Gibraltar, for contumacy and contempt,
in decreeing the sale of the ship Winwick, her tackle, etc., after an Inhibition had
issued under the Seal of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, inhibiting
him, pending the appeal, from doing or attempting anything to the prejudice of
the parties Appellants.t
[274] By an Order in Council bearing date the 13th of July 1840 (ante [Moo.
P.C.], vol. ii. p. 34), reversing the sentence of the Court below, it was, among other
things, ordered that the Appellants (the owners of the ship Winwick) be at liberty
* Present: Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, Mr. Justice Erskine, and the Right
Hon. Dr. Lushington.
t Present: Lord Cottingham, Lord Campbell, the Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce,
and the Right Hon. Dr. Lushington.
t The proceedings which gave rise to this application are reported ante, vol.
ii. [Moo. P.C.] p. 19, on the appeal from the sentence of the Vice-Admiralty Court
of Gibraltar.
IV MOORE, 273 o](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0207&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)