The Massachusetts spy, or, Thomas's Boston journal. [volume] (Boston [Mass.]) 1772-1775, 1774-03-10


To the [upcE of the HIcH CouKr of
ADMIRALTY at PHILADELPHIA.
HTSHERE oceaon to make any apology for eonider-
ing you as the writer Of piece, publihed in the
Pennania Packet la week, under the gnztufe of Cvis
in which an attempt was made vndcate your comon.
The ile and matter eetually beay the author to the
public as If his name had been brbed to tilt is but
uce however to y that the deceny and moderation, with
which it is written are worthy both ofpe and imitation
We Eedom fee dpues, Especially where mans nterct is
oinmately concerned, conducted manner g little liable
to exception. No peron can politely repea you more for
iuch behaviour than do.
The controversy Sir fee TO turn wholly the follow
ing quefon namely whether your conmiicn does not
give you power try many eaufes, both civil and criminal
which are and ought be, cognsabe only in courts of
common law In order to prove the Affirmative Of the quef
ton thoughit the be way to afeertain the line OF jui
d6on, between the courts Of Admiralty in England, and
the General courts eabled by the municipal laws Of the
country. This line drawn in England Iende1youfed to
compare with that delneated in your commiion. From
the comparon venturel to infer, that the Lines were BY
no means paaeThs, however, you have thought proper
70 eonts and boldly n that there no difference be-
tween the Admiralty jurdon, execed at this day in
England and that authorized by your commiion. The
authorities however, which cited out Of the fourth rtti-
tute, YOU 70 prudent not to contradict or even attempt
70 explain away-They fucenty prove that the court OF
Admiralty England hath nourfdttOn in any action with
regard to freight charter parties, policies Of inurance bot
eomry bonds, Sc-You only oppole 10 them few paf
fszrs eznfcbed" out Of Beawess mercantile dictionary
With regard % the r ofthen, viz. that the admiralty
hath iurdi in saes Of freight mariners wages, breach
ofchaer parties, though made within the rcal If the
penalty be not demanded, and kewe, in cafe OF build
Ing endne, faying, and veenaing hps, &c. 70 as the
hit be agan the hip and only againf the parties
II only nersay obsre, thar the book there cited,
mean 4. Cake, arc, has authority to fupport any uch
thing. There Is not indeed, r could find, the Leaf
foundation in al Crokes reports, for the aertion. Where
Beswes met with IL, at lois to tell, unlc II was In
Codophins juniddkion of the Admiralty, or in Kideys
view Of the civil law Books, which are high enough IN
their claims, for the power Of courts OF Admiralty and
which have therefore been long nee exploded authorities
on that head But wherever il taken from, il only
be true, IS far as ie regards mariners wages.s The
difneon that the Admiralty hath Juridieon, in cafe of
charter as the penalty be NOT demanded, found
only among the advocates for the extenton Of the civil law
Sir Edward Coke, when he Jays, that the Admiralty cannot
NEEDLE with caufes charterPsrtes perfectly fent as
to il So indeed ali the other books Of the common
law and thefe as lawyer you cannot but know, arc
eAeeed much better authorities in Wefmner-Ha, than
Ridley, Godolphn or Beawes.
Your next authority is lkewife traHfribed" from
the fame author, and BY him taken from Woods intute
Of the civil law. With regard the iubance of it, ha
only fay, that il is expressly contraded by the books cfthe
law in every article, except that of flung in the
Admiralty orfeamens wages, and on the bypothecations
II would be endle TO multiply authorities this head
It has been determined more than that court Of Adj
raty cannot hold plea Of any contract under zeal,
csptin the innee of hpothecaton. Hence is, that
If ison make any ecial agreement under fea with regard
the payment Of their wages, they cannot Afterwards re-
them in court Of Admray.t This too, will ferve
to hew the futty Of the dneon you aim at, with ne
fpe to chater-partes which always under iea 1t
nu be owned, indeed, there oonfu6on, fnot contra
deon, in one of the law books the objees of the
jurifdeon Of court of Admiralty in England. have
the leie Prent, norindeed, would it fuit the linn
tsofa dution, attemptto reconcile them
Upon the whole, however, cannot help thinking that The
genal principle, via. that the Admiralty hath ori-
don where the contract is made land, though il IS
/" to be executed the Tea; or where IL IS
made at Tea, and DC performed at land, will appear to
every peron in America yourfef exeepd to be the eab
ied rule Of deon.f No doubt there may be excep-
ton to IT, as in the cafe Of mariners flung for
es which d to be indulgence of the courts Of COM
Inonlaw, from oomPaiiion TO aior And indulgence
it mott certainly is; for whenever they ncd, itu
be in court Of Admiralty but like other Pefons, they
uR Be ued at common law for the violation of their
tracts. Though you have 70 oblgingy offered your ait-
ance TO our p-wghts, and promed to get their dues
for them in the oompaf ofa few days, yet, tu, even
eps6sp you had right TO decide uch csufes, they have
I Pers william, s67. Ssllr5as' Commentary on
Magra ctaras sos, SVbo s, fbs 1sf cSHrf thar tbr
&c zv Of fbe lard aeTvs pyoced sserce, TVRtozf
4" ary, fte eoHf Of 4dr5aly; and i5af oy abaafs re-
esgy: For fi jEyiSi7os Is 70: aH0zDed, any
fbrg that keepcrs sris RE bGy Of eoEnry excebf ~
4" bayficsar sSaEes, eosfr5s far aisrs zRsgsi, bKr
eyszds sry ;osgs dsns RE tA, msf con-
sSff made ergn oozzfrisf, (tboEsb ftH L ldesiaI
i1 fbs L4uy1i Of days, beszg t5en there be-
fiaft F:" .VSeSer sjs,y asH 'szf Sfs H5ss.B.
" Con-. Io7, 10 f5s fame fEypsis.
SAB. n. 4. Slr6. COS, TcTG.