The Sun.
London, England, 1822-06-14 00:00:00

MR. MURRAY.

IN THE MATTER OF DE WOLF AND ANOTHER.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL spewed cause against a rule ob.
tained last term by Mr. Rotch, calling on Mr. Charles Mur-
ray to shew cause why he should not deliver a bill of costs and
disbursements, and pay into Court such balance of money in
his hands as should be found due to persons named De Wolf,
for whom, and other American citiiens, he had bi‘en retained
some years since, as agent in conducting an appeal suit in the
Admiralty Court here, against a condemnation in the 'Rite-
Admiralty Court, at liarbadoes, touching a cargo of slaves, in
which the parties before mentioned were interested.
At the suggestion of the .Court, it was agreed to refcj
matters in difference to Mr. Alderson, it being thought ,that
that was the better -mode 'of adjusiing all the rights OtAie
parties, and the case was referred accordingly. - •

HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY, .JUNE 11:

THE JULIANA:

We have already reported the fonnerproceediigs in thqease.
A question was reserved, as to whether the seamen were 'en-
titled to wAges for such part_ of the -Juliana', voyage as, by
reason of her loss, was not performed. It -was argued that no
freight having been earned, no wages were payable, freight be-
ing the mother of wages.
Dr. JEN/7ER and Dr. LtiSurNwroar this rriorrtirig declared
that they hdd not been able to. find any. cases that bore on, the
present question. , . , .
Lord STovvrt.t. thought-this- a verv.clear case. The patty
was entitled to his wages for the whjle of the thne.up to`the
voyagn from Calcutta. If the ship was lost in the course of this
latter voyage, it was clear that the owners gained nothing.—
Whether they had secured themselves by insurance or other-
wise, did not appear : but here the owners and nuisiners..Were
joint suffered—it was a common calamity. The Court.had ho
doubt that the mariners themselves contributed nothing tO that ca-
lamity ; but as the contract entered into between the seamen and
owners ran thus, " so much per month," that must be the rule
by which this question was to be decided. It seemed that,
though the Jrdiana did not carry a cargo aboard, to. Batavia,
yet she went to Batavia, and took a cargo from thence. This
was in the course of her long voyage. The seamen found em-
ployment in the voyage to Calcutta, and fteight was earned at
every place but at Batavia. It would be putting the matter
on tne most inconvenient footing if any stipulations of the
kind which had been pleaded r t this case, were .to be in-
corporated into the mariner's contract. This would na-
turally give rise to -many misrepresentations. The parties
(the sailors) might know nothing about" them; the contract
might assume quite a different form from any thing which' they
had an idea of; or it might be matter of previous agreement
between the freighter and freightce. The- sailor in this ease
had earned his wages fairly enough ; but under such a contract
he would have- no means- of defending- himself. The- Court,
therefore, having already admitted that the owner was entitled
to freight roll the last voyage, had no hesitation in saying;
.that
the sailor was entitled UP to that dine. . •
The COURT afterwards observed, That it was at'a loss to ac-
count for the misapprehension which seemed to have got into
the 'books of reports, to the effect that a different rule prevailed
in these cases in the Admiralty Court from whit obtained at
common law. The three cases mentioned by East (tile one de-
cided by Lord Holt, another which went up to the, Lords, and
a third which was heard in Chancery) were all decided en pin-
eiplesperfectly in unison with each other.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT:

IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO PERSONS TIMER:FE TO

INSOLVENTS IN CUSTODY.

The CHIEF Commrssio-srn expressed himsclf, as follows:
---" When an Insolvent files his schedule in this Court, gte
creditors inspect it, and finding some good debts due to Ole
estate, go away satisfied, and do not oppose his discharge. rp
the interim between such inspection and the day of hearing, the
debts are collected without any appliCation to the Cqutt to, i)o
so, and innocent parties are induced to pay mor:ey in their
own wrong. Let it be made as publicly known as posible,
both for the information of the public, to whom it is in im-
'portant matter, as well as for the sake of • the dignity of the
Court, that on the next recurrence of a sirni/a: case, the order
for hearing will be dismissed, and the offender remanded to
custody.'