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/ssactsengr0215 and id is 1 raw text is: D'ORLIAC V. D'ORLIAC [1844]
missioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, alleged that he should proceed no further
under the attachment decreed against the said Thomas Jennings, and consented to
the same being superseded. Therefore, on this minute, it is clear that the Crown
has consented to the warrant being superseded ;-are we to interfere, and say there
is no power in the Crown to grant a supersedeas? We apprehend that there is no
discretion vested in us to advise the Crown either to supersede the warrant, or to
allow it to remain in full force; that is a matter between Captain Jennings and the
Crown. Even if the Crown had acted improperly towards the Captors, the parties
before us are only Captain Jennings and the Crown, and we cannot interpose to
prevent Captain Jennings having the benefit the Crown intends him to have.
It has been said in argument, that Lieutenant Hill and the Captors have a vested
interest in the proceeds; and so they have, but it is in the net proceeds, after deduct-
ing the charges of the prosecution: and it is not until those charges have been
deducted, that the net proceeds are ascertained.
Their Lordships must not be understood to say, that [373] there is no remedy
against the Crown. Dr. Nicholl referred to a proceeding by petition of right on
behalf of the Captors; but their Lordships, looking to this section of the Act of
Parliament, and finding the words are, after deducting the charges of prosecu-
tion, that the net proceeds are to be the net proceeds after deducting the charges
of prosecution-finding this enactment, their Lordships apprehend that Lieutenant
Hill has no cause of complaint-that the Crown has a discretion to do what is
proper. It is the Crown who issued the Monition, and had Captain Jennings
arrested; and if the Crown thinks proper to consent to Captain Jennings being
discharged, we conceive that it is not exceeding the just power belonging to the
Crown.
Therefore, Captain Jennings ought to be discharged. We think the Captors
have no reason to complain, if they have one half of the net proceeds after these
charges are paid.
[5 Geo. IV. c. 113, s. 40, was repealed by the Slave Trade Consolidation Act, 1873 (36
and 37 Vict. c. 88). See ss. 11-16 of the Act of 1873, and note to Muter v.
Chipchase, 1836, 1 Moo. P.C. 3.]
[374] ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE MAURITIUS.
ALCESTE FLORENTIN ANTOINE D'ORLIAC,-Appellant; LA DAME D'ORLIAC,
-Respondent * [May 9, 1844].
The Charter of Justice of the Mauritius gives no right of Appeal to the Queen
in Council, from a sentence of divorce.
But the Crown can, upon special petition, for that purpose, grant such leave.
Appeal granted by the Cotr D'Appel in the Mauritius, from a sentence of
divorce, d vinculo matrimonii, upon petition of Respondent, discharged as
incompetent. But
On special petition, leave to appeal granted by the Judicial Committee upon
terms of the Appellant's lodging his printed Case within a given time, or
the Appeal to. stand dismissed.
This was a petition by the Respondent, La Dame D'Orliac, for the discharge of
an Appeal, granted by the Cour D'Appel of the Island of the Mauritius, to her
husband, the Appellant, from a sentence of that Court, pronounced on the 16th
of September 1841, affirming a Decree of the Court of First Instance, for divorce
d vineulo matrinonii, by reason of cruelty and outrage.
By the Charter of Justice, granted by His late Majesty, King William the Fourth,
to the Island of the Mauritius, dated the 13th of April 1831, it is, among other things,
* Present: Lord Brougham, the Vice-Chancellor Wigram, the Right Hon. Dr.
Lushington, and the Right Hon. T. Pemberton Leigh.
347
IV MOORE, 373](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0215&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)