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/ssactsengr0441 and id is 1 raw text is: 3 HAGG. 376. THE PRINCE GEORGE 445
[376] PRINcE GEORGE -(Shaw). May 2, 1837.-An agreement for wages, as
purser, having been entered into by a master and sole owner, the purser, prior
to the ship's sailing, signed the usual articles, but in which there was no rate
of wages specified for him. After the completion of the outward voyage he
ceased, by the master's orders, to do duty as purser, but was not regularly
suspended for neglect of duty; the wages pronounced for, and a mortgagee,
who opposed them, condemned in costs. Quwre, whether though the owner
be bankrupt, and the ship has been sold, and the proceeds are insufficient to pay
mortgagees, a principal mortgagee has sufficient interest to oppose a mariner's
claim for wages ?
This was a cause of subtraction of wages, brought by Thomas Vokes. The
summary petition pleaded his hiring on 25th May 1835, for a voyage from London
to Madras and back, at the agreed sum of £200, and that he signed the articles ;
that the ship sailed with a cargo and 250 troops on 6th July, and returned on 22d
May 1836. The agreement was as follows :- This is to certify, that Capt. Francis
Shaw, of the Prince George, bound to Madras, &c., has agreed this day with
Thomas Vokes, that he shall sail with him as purser, and in consideration of the
same, agrees to pay the said T. Vokes or his executors, &c., the sum of £200 sterling,
together with his necessary expenses during the said voyage, one-fourth to be paid
previous to the ship going to Gravesend, the remainder at the expiration of the
voyage.-Francis Shaw.
Witness, T. Francis, George Yard, London, May 25, 1835.
On the 14th of November 1836, the summary petition, to which this agreement
was annexed, was opposed on'the part of Mr. John Campbell, a merchant, as the
principal mortgagee of the ship. The owner was a bankrupt, and did not appear.
King's Advocate for Mr. Campbell. The mariner's contract is conclusive and
binding to all parties, 2 G. II, c. 36, s. 3.(a)' This con-[377]-tract was signed by
the purser, and there are no wages specified in it for him. Isabella, 2 C. Rob. 241,
Elsworth v. Woolmore, 5 Esp. 84. If the agreement for £200 is to stand as wages,
it seems like a fraud on the mortgagee, for there would be a lien for that sum on the
ship.
Addams, contra.-The cases do not apply ; in both there were stipulated wages.
A purser of trust and integrity was necessary from the number of troops, and the
agreement is signed by the master and sole owner ; the voyage out was very pro-
tracted.
Sir John Nicholl: The party who opposes this claim is described as principal
mortgagee ; I doubt whether this describes such an interest as gives him a right to
oppose it ; (a)2 and in suits for wages the Court is anxious that seamen should not
be harassed with litigation. As, however, Mr. Campbell has given bail, and thus
made himself liable to the decree of the Court, and it being very desirable that
questions of wages should be speedily settled, I will give my opinion upon the petition.
It is a claim made on behalf of the purser ; he signed the ship's articles, but there
are no wages annexed to his column, and I observe also that there are none to the
surgeon's, yet both were essential persons in a ship carrying out 250 troops to India.
There is no objection to this claim as made by a purser ; (b) but it is said that by
2 Geo. II, c. 36, s. 2, the articles are final ; but the 8th section [378] reserves the
remedy against the ship, and here no wages are specified in the articles, and therefore
that Act does not apply. An agreement for wages may be made by word of mouth
or in writing : the mariner incurs no forfeiture or penalty by not signing articles,
it is only the master who does so. There might be another question, whether the
Act of Geo. II applied, for it was repealed a few days after the ship sailed, and the
services were mostly performed (and there was no suggestion in the argument that
they were not duly performed) after its repeal. The case of the Isabella (2 C.
Rob. 241) has been relied on ; there, articles were signed and a rate of wages was
specified in the articles: the claim for the wages was admitted, but the Court refused
to admit a claim-in itself not very favourable-set up for the value of a slave under
(a)' 5 & 6 W. IV, c. 19, consolidates all the statutes relating to wages of merchant
seamen ; and as respects the contract, it omits the words binding and conclusive.
(a)2 See (in Appendix) 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65, s. 3, 4, post, p. 437.
(b) See The Lady Campbell, 2 Hagg. p. 14, n.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0441&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)