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/ssactsengr0521 and id is 1 raw text is: BR. & L. 112. THE CARRIER DOVE 321
him whilst he was earning wages on board the ship. But I have already decided
that the master was earning wages on board the ship within the meaning of the
Act, and therefore the objection to the claim for disbursements fails also.
[112] I have no doubt that the master is entitled to the lien he claims both for
wages and disbursements. I regret that an innocent party should. be the loser;
but both parties are innocent, and if I adopted the argument of the defendants I
should be throwing great confusion into proceedings brought by masters. I should
then have to decide when the master's duties commenced on board, in the most
literal and exclusive sense-when they ended, when they began again-for what
period a claim could be made, and for what not; whilst we all know that the practical
duties of a master begin, not when the ship sails, but long before-that those duties
are not confined to duties on board the ship, and that they are most important to
the success of the voyage and the safety of the ship. In the present case I pronounce
for the claim of the master.
Stocken, solicitor to the plaintiff.
Cotterill & Sons, solicitors to the defendants.
A second action had been entered by the master for his wages from the date of
the institution of the first cause to the date of his discharge. The learned Judge
pronounced for this claim also.
.[113] IN THE PRIVY COUNCIL.
Present-Lord Chelmsford.
Lord Kingsdown.
The Lord Justice Knight Bruce.
THE CARRIER DOVE. July 30, 1863.-Collision-Defence of licensed pilot-
Burden and degree of proof-17 & 18 Vict. e. 104, s. 388.-In a cause of collision,
a defendant relying upon the statutory defence (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 388) that
the accident was occasioned by the default of a pilot acting in charge of the ship,
and employed by compulsion of law, is bound to give strict proof that the
collision was occasioned by the pilot's default and by that only. Where, there-
fore, the improper navigation of the defendant's vessel consisted in getting
under way for the purpose of docking, under circumstances which rendered that
proceeding dangerous to other vessels, and the defendant only proved that the
pilot (as well as the captain) was on deck giving general orders, but did not
prove the particular order, nor produce the pilot as a witness. Held (affirming
the judgment of the Court of Admiralty), that the defendant remained liable
for the damage.
[S. C. 2 Moore, P. C. (N. S.) 260; 15 E. R. 899; 8 L. T. 402; 1 Mar. L. C. (Crockford)
341. Considered, The Livia, 1872, 25 L. T. 887. Distinguished, Oakley v.
Speedy, 1879, 40 L. T. 881. For salvage proceedings arising out of the same
collision, see 15 Moore, P. C. (N. S.) 243; 15 E. R. 893.]
[117] Present-Lord Kingsdown.
Dr. Lushington.
Sir Edward Ryan.
THE LACONIA. July 10, 11, 25, 27; August 5, 1863.-Consular Court at Con-
stantinople-Jurisdiction over British and foreign subjects-6 & 7 Viet. c. 94-
Order in Council, 27th August 1860-Admiralty jurisdiction-Rule as to dividing
damages in collision cases.-In almost all transactions, whether political or
mercantile, a wide difference subsists in the dealings between an Oriental and a
Christian state, and the intercourse between two Christian nations. As between
two Christian states, all claims for cession of jurisdiction or exemption from
jurisdiction within the territory of the other require, generally at least, the
sanction of a treaty: but may nevertheless be proved by evidence of con-
sent otherwise ; and such consent may be expressed by usage and conscious
acquiescence ; especially in transactions with Oriental states.-The Ottoman
Government has for a long time acquiesced in allowing to the British consular
authorities in Turkey a jurisdiction between British subjects and the subjects
of other Christian states. Such acquiescence of the Ottoman Government does
not vest a compulsory power in a British Court in Turkey over the subjects of
E. & A. vii.-11](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0521&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)