The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-04-24
Dntneettr.
From a PHILADELPHIA PAPER.
LAW CASE

An important principle was efabli!hed nv
Judge Peters, at the Iait difriet court. in the CAT
OF the mariners who left the fhip woodrow
Sims Tome days after fhe bad been branded in
the bay of Delaware.
"A number OF them having come I'D TO IL, 2
city, were apPrehended on a charge of deferti.
on made by the owner (Mr. JOS. Sims) aud
COMMITTED 10 priion under the feyenth fiction
OF the act of congrefs, I" for the government
and regulation of feamen in the MERCHANTS fer
vice., which enaets, "that if it fhall appear by
que proof that the mariner has fgRed a contract.
within the intent and meaning of the act. and
that the voyage agreed for is not fnifbed. al
tered, or the CONTRACT otherwife diiolved. and
that fuch feamen has deferted the i,ip ar veGcI.
or abiented himfelf without leave. II NAV he
lawful for any juiice of the peace to commit
DIM to the houie of correction or common saol.
there to remain until the fhip or ve0el mall he
ready TO proceed on her voyage, or till the maj
ter fhall require his difcharge, and then IA he
delivered to the laid matter"
On being brought, before the court bv Habe-
as Corpus, 1T was alledged by fome of them
that the captain had given his content to their
leaving the vefTel-on this point the tefimony
was detective, bnt II appeared fully in evidence
that the mutation of the ihip was fuch, that IL
was not probable fhe would ever be got off.
1t was commended by MIR. Franklin in behalf
or the Mariners, that the voyage was defeated
6y the diiafer which had happened to the vef-
lei, and that, therefore,, co%uformably to every
rational contribution of the law, the contract
oetween them and the owners was comDieteIv
AZ an end F; that they were not under any obi
gation 10 remain VITA the %veiel, longer than
while there was a reaGonabIe profpeGt of her be-
ing a0Icto proceed TO fea, and as zach profpect
mad vaniihed, the owner was not legally inf,6-
able IN the courie he purified, and had no right
TO Keep them in confnement-and that a DIFF
ferent contribution of the act would lead to in
itances of perpetual imprisonment, as the fbip
might neUer " tie able TO proceed on her vow
age,' and the matter might neyer 4" require their
Gifcharge."
1t was urged by Mr.. Rawle of council for the
owner, that the expref1ion in the law were de.
citive and could admit of but one contraction,
that IT the Mariner dcfert, or abfent himlell
without leave OF the mater or other command
ing officer, he fhail be committed until the vef-
Eel be ready TO proceed to iea, or his difcharge
be required by the malter, that the warrant of
the magiItrate was in the nature of an execution.
conclufge in its effect, aad therefore could not
be fuperleded even by taking hair for the ap-
Pearance OIL he party at any ipecified time that
the commercial interets of the country de-
manded an enforcement of the power given by
the act OF coDgreis, as importan; voyages, might
often be defeated by the deCer,ion Of the Tea
men, if the matter or owner bad no right to
c%onfne them, aud that in the inRance before
the court, there was reafon TO believe that the
~htudiion of the ve1el had been rendered wSrfe
by the abfence Of the mariners, at a time when
their ~fervices were mon wanted.
The judge decreed, that the conduit Of the
mariners did not amount to a defertion, within
the meaning Of the ad of c~ongrefs that the
veilel being ftranded put aR end to the