Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-03-16

u
riners for wages. The case is an interesting as
setting aside doubtful point of law The Nep-
tune had been lost on her voyage from RIO Janciru
TO Hamburg, being stranded the coast of Britain
ny, and no part of her cargo could be saved but
the seamcn continued on board for several DAYS to
save as much rs possible of the ship and her tackle,
and succeeded in Saving such part OF the rigging
spars, Nc as would suffice to pay the wages OF the
marines who remained on board. 1t was contend
ed that they were not entitled wages, OH the au-
thority oil the maxim that freight is the mother of
wages. Lord Stowcll considered the case at lar.c,
citing the various authorities. He then remarked
that the modern practice of all maritime states de-
parted from the application of this rule, where
ehoush of the vessel was saved TO be applicable to
the wages TO which effect he cited certain maritime
ordinances of france, Spain aud Holland and the
naval code of Denmark. He added, Z" the Court
had been informed on good authority that similar
Improvement OF the rule obtained in America,
country which had of late years very successfully
turned its attention to the understanding of mari
time law, although there, no more than in our own
books and DECISIONS were there any recorded cases
IN which the doctrine had bean specifically rccog-
nizcd.' The London Courier adds to its report of
this case, "a gentleman sat on his Lordshp's right
hand during the delivery of this sentence. We
understood him to be the Hon. MIR. Jackson ono of
the Judges of the u. States of America" Judge
jackson of this town, late Of the Justices of the
Supreme Judicial Court of this State.
In the debate in the House of Commons, Feb. II,
on the motion of Lord Nugcnt for copies of the in
structions TO Sir w. A'Court Mr.. Canning said, he
did not mean, at present, into the general
question, but the Noble Lord had referred to him
upon particular point he should
conhnc himself exclusively to that part of the noble
Lords speech. The noble Lord had asked whether
Sir W. ACourt,i in not removing from Seville to Ca
diz, had acted upon his own discretion, or in PURSE
ancc of directions from the English government
TO this Inc had to answer, that in great degree his
conduct had been regulated by both The govern
ment had endcavored orsec all ossible cases that
could arise, and had provided instructions for those
imaginary cases but Sir w. A'Court was fully a
ware that, in all cases that might not have been for
seen, the most ample confidence would have been
reposcd i'll his discretion 1t SD happened that, of
the cases which had been foreseen none had occur
red but case did occur into which, as he was not
going to reply TO the general argument, he should
not now enter which the greatest wisdom could not
nave toreseen-he meant the deposition of the King
for time limited. To have required the foreknow-
ledge of such an event, would have been high de-
mand on the faculty of imagination; and upon this
point Sir w a Court was not prepared with any
specific instructions 1t perfectly true, that his
continuance at Seville had been msconstrued by a
factiouS party in that town, who had endeavourcd
to make him an instrument for their own purposes
But Sir VIM. Court Showed them lie was not TO be
made their instrument, and changing his resolution,
pctook hiSeH 10 ot. lIucar, WIN view to depart
for Gibraltar. On quitting the seat of government,
Sir w. A'Court's determine ton was well known tn
the government at nome, for dispatch was received
from him, III which he stated that in two cases, in
Structions did not arrive in time. he should exercise
his own discretionhrst, if his presence at Cadiz
should conduce to the personal safety of the King
and Royal Family, he should remain there and Sc
condy if he received perfect assurance of the 60
vermont, that the Kings person should be safe, he
should remain there However, he actually did re-
eeive instructions not put himself in blockaded
place; so that if any blame could attach to such
course of conduct, he (Mr. Canning) was ready 10
undertake its defence. and he though it fit to make
this explanation to exonerate Sir w. A'Court-
Hear! l--Boston Daily .4drertiser.