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/ssactsengr0488 and id is 1 raw text is: 208 THE SHANNON 2 HAGO. 174.
the slave consolidation Act, encourages information to be given by petty officers
and mariners of any act of slave trading committed by the master ; and on the
assurance that they shall be exempted from the penalties so incurred under that
statute. It would not be consistent with the policy of that statute, nor with the
general principles of law, to hold that the forfeiture of any legal interest should be
incurred by the mariners, acting in the enforcement of the penalties of the law,
although the owners might be affected thereby : on this view of the case, I do not
feel myself warranted to pronounce that any act of misconduct has been alleged and
proved on the part of the owners, that will absolve them from the demand of wages
which is the subject of this suit, and I pronounce accordingly for the payment.
SHANNON -(Pennefather). April 29, 1828.-In a cause of collision against a
steam vessel, the Court, assisted by Trinity masters, pronounced for damages
and costs ; holding, that the steam vessel, being more under command, and
manifestly having seen the other vessel, was to blame.
An action was entered in £400 against a steam vessel, the Shannon, for
,damage to the British Union off Beachy Head. From the affidavits it appeared
that the British Union was going up, and the Shannon down the channel
that the Shannon had seen the Union five miles off, but that the Union
did not see the steam vessel till just before the collision.
The King's Advocate and Haggard for the Shannon.-The Shannon was
on the starboard [174] tack; and the rule of navigation is, that when ships are
crossing each other in opposite directions, and there is the least doubt of their going
clear, the ship on the starboard tack is to persevere in her course; while that on the
larboard is to bear up, or keep more away from the wind ; that in this latter situation
was the .British Union, and if she had followed the rule of navigation the accident
would not have happened. The affidavits showed that the crew of the Shannon
believed that the British Union would bear up.
Lushington and Nicholl, contra.
The advantages which belong to steam boats distinguish this from an ordinary
case of collision ; that even admitting the general rule of navigation to be correctly
stated, it would not justify a vessel, having the power to avoid a collision, in standing
upon any such privilege, if she foresaw the disastrous consequences of persisting in
such a course. Here it was proved that the Shannon perceived the British
Union at a distance of several miles ; but independent of this circumstance, steam
boats, it was well known, always went to the larboard.
Court.-If the state of facts were clear and undisputed, the Court would be
disposed to concur in the argument, that the rule of navigation should be applied
according to the characters of the two vessels ; but here the testimony is conflicting,
and the defence of the Shannon partly is, that she actually supposed the British
Union intended to bear up.
The Trinity Masters observed ;-whether the wind was N.W. as represented by
the Shannon, or N.N.E. is of no very great importance, as the [175] Shannon,
not receiving her impetus from sails but from steam, should have been under com-
mand. Steamboats from their greater power ought always to give way ; upon this
consideration, and also being satisfied that the Shannon had seen the Union,
they were of opinion the Shannon was to blame.
The Court accordingly pronounced for damages and costs.
CONCEPTION -(Eruzuma). May 6. 1828.-A sale of a derelict having been
previously allowed, and the proceeds brought in, the Court signed the primum
decretum, and at the same time permitted the proceeds, which were far less than
the disbursements, to be paid by the salvors.
Haggard moved for a primum decretum. This was a derelict brought into the
River Mersey by the brig, Magdelaine, on the 1st of August 1827. On an affidavit
of the owner of the brig, founded upon a report of surveyors at Liverpool, as to the
state of the derelict, a decree of appraisement and sale had been suffered to issue
before the usual defaults had taken place, and consequently before the primumn
decretum was signed.
The proceeds, £132, 4s., had been-brought into the registry; but the disbursements
exceeded £66.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0488&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)