The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1810-08-02 00:00:00

that nehadant had recei►ed a quantity or &agars
um board, to be carried to Spaim--uird that he had
receit ed 54111. Si. from the 'rreosury, for the freighh
—The order from the Lords of the Admiralty to
Admiral Montagu,. directing him to appoint a ves-
sel for taking out the treasure, and the order from
the Admiral to Captain Jauverin, were alto read,
and admitted.

Sir Boger Curtis, extmined from the Bench, de-
posed, that when n vessel was put under an Adrui-
rarsivinmand, both the Admiral and the Captain
of the vessel received a letter from the Admiralty,
apprizing them of the circumstance ; and that ves-
sel continued under the Admiral's command, until
removed by a similar authority : he bad been forty-
nine yearn in the navy. Being asked, what was
the custom in the navy, as to the apportionment of
money received by Captains of His Majesty's ves-
sels fut freightage ?
Mr. Bast, Counsel for the Defendant, observ-
ed, that the evidence of usage could not be al-
lowed; because, in point of fact, no officer had any
right to demand freightage; it was a mere boon, gra-
tuitously given by the King ; and this he would
• prove, by documents which he held in his hand,
which he would read to the Court. No longer tnan
the .Bth of March 1607, the Lords of the Treasury,
under the direction of the Law Officers of the
Crown, stated, in a rorrelsondence with the Lords
of the Admiralty, that o Naval Officers, generally,
had no right to freightage." This correspondence
took place, in consequence of some of the King's
money being Mopped for the purpose or onsweraq
a deniunl of freightage, to which the officer con-
ceived he was entitled. However, 'l' in consider.i,
tien of the care and trouble which devolved 011 the
Captain+ of men of war who took specie on board,
the Lords of the Treasury proposed to allow them
to per cent." The answer to this letter, from the
Lords of the Admiralty, stated, that their Lord-
ships had taken iuto consideration the allowance
proposed to be given to the Captains of men of
war ; and agreed with the Lords of time Treasury,
that such Commanders cannot have tiny claim on
specie, or say other articles shipped on board their
mewls far the public service. But if His Majesty
should, in consideration of the usage, allow one-

half per cent, to the Commanding Oflccir who har the
care dad custody of such property, the officers of the
navy would receive it with great respe,l and grati-
tude." He begged Vie Court to observe the expres-
sion made use of in this letter ; " the Commanding
olh tr who has the core load custody or such pro-
perty." is specifically mentioned. Surely no person
would contend that Admiral Montagu came uudrr
that doecription. He was not on board : he was safe
enough in Portsmouth when the treasure was on
hoard the Plato. In answer to this letter, the Lords cf
the Treasury stated, " that they would give the one.
half percent." and an order to that effect was sulise-
quently published. It would thus linear, from the
letters both of the I.lrds of the Admiralty and the
Treasury, that there was no right of freightage. It
was, as he had stated before,a been from His Majesty.
The notification of his Royal intentien was parti-
cularly worthy of' observation. It was addressed
simply, " To the Captains and Commanders of
His Majesty's ships." Admirals were ant men-
tioned. Mr. Best then _read the order for the pay-
meta of freightage. signed by the King, and court-
teri.igned by the Lords of the Tieasury. It stated,
" that it should be paid witliont dedatetiqn, or 'lc-
counting for the same." On these documents he
grounded his argument, that evidence of custom
could not 1w received.

Lord Chief-Justice. Maosrtet.o—s4 You need
aot trouble yourself, Brother Best, I will certainly
receive the evidence. The question is, that this
having hero always a twitter of gratuity, and it
hay's; been customary to give • proportion to the
Admiral, whether the new order has altered the si-
tuation of the Captaiu? I will undoubtedly hear
what the usage has beeu."
The examination of Sir R. Curtis was then re-
someil.--Ilesdeposed, that front-his earliest recol-
lection of the subject, he had always understood
that the Flag-Officer should rereive a share of
freightage, as regularly as he did of prize-money,
which was also a gistnity from the King ; he had
received • share hiinself, but did not know whether
the freightage arose from the carriage of the King's
property, or from that of merchant.: lie never
knew of an Admiral's being obliged to make good
any loss which ought occur to the property in the
custody of the Caotain ; he had never known •
doubt expressed on the subject by any Officer, with
the exception of our ; and as the dissimdarity of
opinion between Admiral Montagu and Captain
Janverin was notorious throughout the navy, that
instance might perhaps have arisen from their °pr-
otons being so generally known.
Lord Orin liner, examined from the Bench, stated,
that the usage had been for the Captain, having
the eliirge and recessing freightage, to pay to the
Admiral on the ata:imi t-third of such freightage:
if there were more than one Flag Officer, a propor-
tion was given to the junior Admiral or Admirals,
as it happened. lie recollected, when he com-
manded the Channel Fleet, two instances of re.
eeiving • share. The one, where • vessel ender
his command carried out specie by the order of the
Admiralty ; one-half of the whole shine -was re.
tamed by him, and the other ball went to the
senior Flag-/)fir Cr: the second instance wie.. when be
had received, in like manlier, a share of freightage
front the Commander of the Comet ; she also car-
ried specie by order of the Admiralty. lie recol-
lected • third tranaaction, when lie was on the New-
funoilland station : a ship went to Cadiz, and r--
ceived merchants money on board ; he received a
share of the freightage. The two first he con-
sidered cases in point; it had been an inva-
riable custom to receive a share of freightage;
hr never knew any difference made between public
and private money, with respect to the appropria-
tion of freighlage. Prior to 11409 there was no alter-
ation; the allowance was given in consequence of
some dispute which took place in the aillediter-
noiran; it had been abolished for • time: if a wee-
cheat wished to put private money on board a
King's ship. the Captain might receive it without
writer:dog the Admiral, hut the merchant must
ran she risk of the vessel being perhaps ordered to
a different 'dace from that to which she originally
was destined: he knew it to have kern door, but it
was when there ass a moral certainty of the ship',
distiost,ou nor being chang.d.
Sir IL Curtis adduced a similar instance.
Lord Mood, examined from the Bench, depovd,