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/ssactsengr0402 and id is 1 raw text is: TBE FREDERICK AND MARY ANN
Then if this is a contract in violation of the Act of Parliament, what will be the
consequence ? That the contracting parties are in pari delicto; that one is not
at liberty to set it up against the other, and to allege that he was induced by the
other to enter into such an illegal contract. It is as much the duty of the one not
to yield to temptation, as it is of the other not to propose an illegal temptation.
In such a case, the law refuses to interpose between them, and leaves them to avail
themselves of their dishonest engagements as they can. As to the reason advanced,
that the real master was notoriously of so cruel a disposition, that he could not
obtain men -Is not that a fraud upon every man that entered on board the ship ?
If the master was a person under whom no one would voluntarily ship himself, was
it not a gross act of fraud to entrap men into a situation of connection with, and sub-
ordination to, such a person. [213] When I recollect that the whole purpose of the
act was to guard against cruelty, and against habits of ferocious disposition, to be
exercised upon the persons subjected to his command, and when I see that the effect
of this contrivance has been to entrust a person with the management of this kind of
commerce, whom the policy of the law would have excluded, I cannot but consider
it as a very gross case. Both the parties are equally guilty of fraud, upon every
person who entered on board the ship, as well as upon the general policy of the law.
It is said that to reject this demand cannot affect the continuance of such a practice
-I am of a different opinion. The practice will not be carried on unless instruments
can be procured ; and I trust it will be some discouragement, that parties should
know, that they will not be permitted to resort to the assistance of the law to enforce
their demands under such agreements. On every ground, I am of opinion, that the
petition is inadmissible, and that the explanation offered, instead of affording any
excuse, is an aggravation of the offence.
It being represented that the mate had not only lost all his wages, but that he had
been obliged to find his way home from the coast of Africa, and the owner having
been equally guilty, the Court gave no costs.
THE FREDERICK AND MARY ANN -(Andriesen, Master). Nov. 26, 1805.-
Interests of mariners, separated from their ships, as prize masters, on board
captured vessels, to share with the ship's crew, and vice versa of the ship's
crew to share in prize interests acquired by them.
[S. C. 1 Eng. Pr. Cas. 548.]
This was a case, on the claim of the ship's company of the Ceres privateer
to share in salvage decreed to be paid on the recapture of some British property
on board this vessel, effected by Barnaby Vick, and eight others of the crew of the
Ceres, from on board a prize belonging to the privateer, which the said Vick
was conducting into port in the capacity of prize master.
[214] On the part of the privateer, the King's Advocate stated-That the Frederick
and Mary Ann was a Dutch vessel which had been captured by an English privateer,
and was afterwards retaken by the French, and was finally recaptured by the prize
master of the Prince, who was conducting the Prince, a prize belonging to the
Ceres privateer, into port. Some part of the prize had been condemned as
droits, as Dutch property taken by a non-commissioned captor, and other parts had
been restored to the British proprietors on salvage. The present claim is instituted
on the part of the ship's company of the privateer, to share in the interests of salvage
accruing on the recapture, and that not only on general principles of equity, but also
under the express agreement of the ship's articles, in which it is provided, that
any of the crew who should be put on board a prize, and taken prisoners, should
share in prizes made by the privateer during their absence. This article necessarily
implies a reciprocal right, on the part of the crew, to share in any prize interests
that may be acquired by such persons in the course of their separate employment.
On the other side, Laurence.-The circumstances of this case present as gallant
an action, as perhaps ever came to the view of the Court. This person was put on
board the Prince to conduct her into port. In the course of his voyage he fell
in with a vessel which appeared to be an English vessel in the hands of the French.
The prize master went out in his jolly boat to reconnoitre, and having approached
under the disguise of a French uniform, and in the character of a French officer,
he boarded the vessel, and overpowered the French crew, and succeeded in [215]
effecting the recapture of a very valuable property. It was an act of mere personal
6 0. ROB. 213.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0402&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)