Star.
London, England, 1820-04-20 00:00:00

Tilt SUM ELIZA.

Thts was an ordinary caie of salvage, promoted
by the masters of the Robert and 'Mary, and the
Nader and Owners of the four other smacks follow-
ing. viz. the lugger Foz, the Ocean, the Union, and
the Endeavour. The vessel was found on the 4th

of August, IEIB, derelict, at sea ; her cargo, which
was of timber, nearly all floated out of her, and she

was in so complete a state of wreck, that her hull was
• obliged to be bound over with curds and rope-ends,
before she could be carried into Margate. A great
deal of her Will was picked up by some other
boats, and the wnole being sold with all possible
speed, yielded the sum of £1576 net proccecb, " ez-
elusive of duties," as expressly stated in the account.
'lle business of the salvage, having occurred in the
immediate vicinity of the Cinque-ports, was referred
to to Admiralty Court of the Lord Warden, %;hen
the Commissioners awarded a moiety of the value
salved, viz. (deduction being made of the expenses of
the salvors) £775.45. net. The Owners being dis-
satisfied with this decision, pioccedings w.re had
against them, and a monition prayed by the salvors
but die period during which that monition could by.
law be granted having lapsed, the Masters and
Owners of the several smacks had no other remedy
but to appeal the matter to this Court, t 6 which no
opposition was offered by the other parties, they
making the cffer of EVX) for salvage. The argument
on the case brought out the curious fact, that the-
Owners of the Eliza were still liable to the payment
of duties (many of which were actually paid) that
would reduce 'their moiety to 1.:13 only; and al-
though (as it was contended by the Learned Counsel
for these Gentlemen), there could be little doubt that
the Commissioners of the Customs would refund a
large portion of them, especially those to be paid on
the property salved, yet they submitted that it would
be most hard upon them if they; instead of retaining
one moiety, were to be allotted, in fact, only one-
fourth of the proceeds, while the other moiety se-
mined to the salvors entire. The salvors owe'

statement had made it appear that the balance of the
net proceeds, due to the Owners, after the deduction
of all expenses, would •be no snore than £320. The
Learned Counsel having proceeded to shew that this
amount, after the discharge of the remaining duties
•ictually due, Would be reduced to abOut 1.13, con-
tended that the fair principle would be, either that the
moiety of the salvors shoultbe divided as upon the,
net proceeds, after the duties had been paid upon the,,
'whole of them, or.that a reference should be made'
to the Commissioners of theCu.stoms, in• order to as-
certain what proportion-of dutiei they might be dis-
posed to remit, and then that the award of the Court
.should issue, subject to the result of that reference.
The Learner/ Counsel for the salvors, on the other
hand, maintained that there could hardly be any
doubt as to the construction of the Att of the sth
George I. cap. 2. sec. 13. from which-it very clearly
appeared that goods salved or sold, for the purpose
of raising a fund for payment of salvage, were not
subject to payment of duties; that this was evident
from the very title of that Act, which was to the ef-
fect, that from and after the 28th of March, 1719,
foreign liquors and tobaccos foUnd as wreck of ves-
sels stranded or driven on shore, or-whether as jetti-
zons, totsams, lagons, or wreck, should be liable to
the usual duties. Now this was a recognition of the
former exemption which had been made in favour
of all goods salved; and out of these two articles
alone were to be excepted. Ihrt, supposing the
hardship to lie upon the owners, to the full extent
mentioned by the Learned Counsel, as respected the
deficiency in the moiety of the owners, );et it was
well known that cases had come before that Ceuit
where the. Court had awarded salvage, even where
there were no proceeds.
Sir WILLIAM Score, after the arguments of the
Learned Counsel were concluded, minutely reviewed
the circumstances of this case. He was dearly dis-
posed to confirm the decree made by the Commis-
sioners of the Lord Warden of the Cinque-ports,
which allotted a salvage of £775 4s. To this amount
he should certainly direct salvage to be paid, if it
should appear that the practice was, as he conceived
it to be, that duties were not levied upon property
sold to defray the expenses of salvage. cut, if it
should appear otherwise, he would consider the case
at large Le.eafter. in the meanwhile, the Registrar
was directed to make the necessary reference to the
honourable Commissioners of the Customs.
CCURT OF COM NION PLEAS, ARRIL IS.

BURNETT V. MINNETT. •
This was a' case in which the plaintiff sued for the
moiety of the payment t- a freight, which be and the
defendant had conjointly promised to procure for a
person of the name of Faith, who had chartered to
them a ship to the West Indies, upon the condition of
their having obtained a freight back, but which con-
dition, their agents, in that part of the world, failed
to fulfil. The matter was left to arbitration, as be-
tween Faith and Burnett, and the. arbitrators agreeing
that Faith was entitled to p:tyment for the homeward
freight, Burnett paid the whole sum of 111051.-
and now demanded the moiety of that sum from
Minnett, with whom he was combined in the charter
of the ship.
The defendant pleaded that he had not been acces-
sary to the reference to arbitration, and that, there-
fore, he was not bound by their award.

The Learned Judge, however, was of a contrary
opinion, and, by his direction, the Jury found a ver-
dict for the plaintiff, in the amount of the moiety of
what he paid for the homeward freight to Faith.