Star.
London, England, 1822-11-27 00:00:00

CAYENNE.

Dr. JENNER said, that this was a case of a capture
of booty by a conjunct force, naval and military, by
his Britannic Majesty's ship the Confiance, com-
manded by Sir James Lucas Yeo, deceased, and by
a Portuguese army of 1,400 or 1,500 men, in Janu-
ary, 1809. Cayenne surrendered by capitulation to
this united force, the settlement (Guiana) being ccded
to the Portuguese. The shares to be taken as of the
proceeds, by the Portuguese troops, and the Captain,
Officers, and crew of the British ship, were, by con-
sent, to be subject to arbitration in Europe ; an
eventually 32,7001., was remitted from Portugal to.
England, as the share which had been allotted to the
naval part of the armament in question. Owing to,
the embarrassments of the Messrs. Broughton, into
whose bands-this money had been paid, a sum not
exceeding 11,5001. had been finally paid into the re-
gistry of this Court. Upon this sum the Agent had,
as it was conceived, by mistake, paid over the five
per tentage, which, under various Acts of Parlia-
ment, is directed to be paid into the treasury of
Greenwich Hospital on ail proceeds of prize, con-'I
demned as naval prize. It was now to be contended
before the Court, that this was. a case not of such.a '
description ; that it wts not, therefore, within the'
meaning of those Statutes ; and consequently that
the Court would decree Greenwich Hospital to re-
fund the same. For this purpose a monition had been
taken out on behalf of Sir James Lucas Yeo (repre-
tented by his son, the present Sir Jas. Yeo), and..the
Officers and crew of his Majesty's ship Confiance.
On the part of Greenwich Hospital, a protest was at
first asserted, but subsequently waived. The present
case must depend on the enactments and provisions I
of the 46 Geo. 111. c. 101, 102 ; and the 51 Geo. 111.
c. 127. The Court was perfectly aware that the 16
Geo. 111. and some preceding Acts had directed the
payment of 11. 1.35. 4d. per cent. on the proceeds.of
srll naval prize, and that the 51st of the same reign
directed_a further payment in all similar cases of
Si: Bd. per cent. making altogether 51. per Cent.
and this was confirmed by the language of the 55th
Geo. HI. c. —, sec. 2. The whole of the question
here was this—Was the capture of the booty taken at'
Cayenne effected by a naval 'fojte, or by a conjunct'
expedition of sea and land fortes? That this Was' a
case of the latter descriptiOn; the'circumstances which
had been detailed could surely leaven° doubt: the
military or Portuguese force was very considerable;
the naval force consisted of the Of and crew of
a single British ship. Thereforethis was not a purely
naval capture. Now the Court hid already decided,.
in the well-known case of Genoa, and again iwthat
of Java (both of which had beettlaken 'by the cot-
j uncv operations of sea and land forces); that the &ants
or proceeds were not liable to the paynient of the Ave-
per tentage. He submitted, therefore, that in' this
instance the per tentage had been erroneously
and ought to be refunded. ' • '
Dr. LUSH INGTOW, an the same side. wavrathet
posed to rest this case or the 57th Gen. 111. c. IV;
I which had a clear reference to ptirely
The Court had already decided This case in the jutii
ment which it gave- in the case of Genok' wheji it
observed that the 57th of Geo. HI. did hot apply to
' conjunct 'expeditions. SO in the case of the grant td
Lord Keith, and the.natalforcelindeetis toturnant,'
' for prize captured owthellprtfrtofist of Spain -the
..Court said' that theenwich Hospital was entitled to

the gimlet, eentag.whkiltrit dote claimed, . because
it was naval prize captured softly by the navy. In
the present case ix was grant of a completely dif.
ferent description.
The Ktsto!s Aneocarr, with whom was Dr. An.
NOLO, retied on the terms of the present grant, which
was, for prize or booty (for here the distinction was
quite immaterial) captured by the navy, by that part
of it which assisted the Portuguese troops. As to
conjunct expeditions, there was this very material
distinction, on the other hand, to be taken, namely,
that the Act, and this Court in the case of Genoa,
contemplated conjunct expeditions of his Britannic
Majesty's sea and land forces.
.Now the capture of
Cayenne could hardly be considkred in that light ;
.for the military were entireTyPortugnese; and it was
not enough to say that they, were our allies at the
time, or that they were hostile to the French. The
Learned Counsel contendkd that Greenwich Hospital
was justly entitled to. the per tentage.
Lord STOWELL said, he could raise no doubt in his
own mind as to what _the Court was bound to do on
the present occasion • and that was, to abstain from
calling on Greenwich Hospital to refund the money
which had been paid. in, the shape of leer tentage, by
the naval agent, in consequence of this gran,;. TLi;
was driginally a conjunct expedition, inasmuch.as hi;
Majesty's ship Confiance participated in the darvJers
and difficulties which. attended Ole capture of
enne ; and in the granting part of the original grant
it was considered and described as a conjunct expe-
dition. But under what circiirmtances did it stand
now ? A variety of proceedings had been had, in
non: of which, neither in the ter ms of the grant is eif,
was any mention made of any other share. 'Ili:,
therefore, was solely to the navy, so far as I t:ariied
the proceeds actually before the Court. Under :lier:e
circumstances, the per tentage had not been paid in
L error; and the Court would, therefore, dismi'.s een-
, wick. Hospital from all further observance of this
suit (with Costs).