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/ssactsengr0404 and id is 1 raw text is: THE NELSON
humanity of the Legislature has fenced round with peculiar regulations, every one
of which is overlooked in this act of these individuals.
It is said that the regulations of the slave trade do not apply to cases of prize.
If a French ship (a)' is captured with a cargo of slaves on board, I admit, they must
be brought to adjudication in the condition in which they were found. But if I
take a French vessel, otherwise loaded, and make her an open vessel for the traffic
of slaves, it becomes then a voluntary commerce, and is, to all intents and purposes,
British commerce, subject to British regulations. It has been urged, that this
cargo was brought in for adjudication, and not for importation or sale, until a sentence
of the Prize Court should be obtained. But the captors had no right to apply
for any such sanction, with respect to a cargo which consisted not of prize goods,
but of goods obtained in commerce. They may have been innocently mistaken,
but I am of opinion, that the Judge of the Court below acted right, and that when
the seizure was made, and the information was laid, it was his duty to abstain from
any further proceedings in the Prize Court, and to condemn the cargo, for a breach
of the navigation law, and in the Revenue Court. The parties have acted without
authority and not under any justifying necessity. They must be taken to have
imported this cargo, in total violation of the [227] regulations which the legislature
has imposed. The sentence of the Court below must therefore be confirmed.
(INSTANCE COURT.)
THE NELSON -(Main, Master). Dec 11, 1805.-Pilotage from the Downs,
Act 3 G. 1, c. 13.-Rates how far applicable to persons not being Trinity pilots.
This was a case of pilotage, on a demand of A.B. for services rendered in piloting
the ship from the Downs to Gravesend, and from thence to Blackwall. The
summary petition stated, that the plaintiff had been engaged by the master to
pilot the vessel from the Downs to Gravesend for the sum of ten guineas and a half,
and that on his arrival at Gravesend the master entered into a new agreement
with him for four guineas and a half for bringing the vessel to Blackwall. In proof
of this agreement, the petition pleaded, a draft drawn at Gravesend by the master
on his owner for sixteen guineas.
On the part of the owner, Laurence objected-That the agreement alleged could
not be supported. That there was a special Act of Parliament 3 Geo. 1, chap. 13,
continued by subsequent Acts, (a)2 which had fixed the rate of pilotage from the
Downs, below the sum exacted in the present agreement, and that it was a point
now depending before the Court in another (b) case, whether that rate did not include
the whole course of the river, from the Downs to the port of London ; the contract
was therefore vitiated in law. Independent of that objection, it was a salutary
principle of the maritime law, in cases of salvage, that agreements made with vessels
in distress [228] shall not be held binding. Cases of salvage, and cases of pilotage
are so closely connected in their nature; and are so much comprehended within the
same policy, that a demand of this nature, exceeding the just rate of such services,
would not be that which the Court of Admiralty will carry into effect.
In support of the petition, Arnold adverted to the terms of the Act of Parliament,
and contended that it applied solely to a particular description of pilots, being
Trinity pilots. The effect of the Act was to grant to these persons particular privi-
leges of monopoly, or priority of service, which made it but reasonable that they
should be limited in their rate of charges. When there are no persons of that
description at the Downs, vessels are at liberty to engage other pilots, who are.not
affected, either by the privileges or the restrictions of the Act, and are at liberty
to contract on terms, that may be agreed on between them and their employers.
This was a case of that nature. The person employed was not a Trinity pilot,
and it was in evidence under the hand of the master in the draft now before the
Court, that the sum demanded was that for which they had mutually agreed.
(a)' Vide infra, La Dame Cecile.
(a)2 By 32 G. 3, c. 37, § 4, to 25th March 1806, &c.
(b) Louisa, Pike, Master, 9th July, 1805.-The question there reserved was,
whether the navigation required of the pilots described in that act, and for which
specific rates are assigned, extends beyond the Hope Point.
6 C. ROB. 227.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0404&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)