New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-02-13

pumped into the brosdside Of q steamer under full
headway while that steamers lights were, a. Ii Al
legged in this case, ranged fore and at above her
decks in full view, except in enc contingency ana
tina! contingency is fog or thick weather. In sucn
case the thing might be done, and no lights on
either eide could avert such an accident, since or
binary lights are Of no avail in such fogs az often
prevail at sea. If the weather was thick, the loss
of the Lyonnais can probably be more truly i'm
puted to the non.use of her own steam whistle
than to any want Of lights board the other ves-
eel The Gaze, however, eeems to have turned, as we
have stated upon the want Of these lights on board
the Adriatic; and for that want Capt Durham
had his ship and freight conhscsted, and
himself and his owners were mulcted IN
Overwhelming damages. II would seem that
subsequently Captain Durham, under sudden
impulse or consciousness of injustice done to him.
seized his ship under cover Of night and ran to sea-
He wss, however, soon oyertaken and captured,
aud our latest sdvices are that he was carried to
France in irons. Now, the merits of this case In.
volve question of commanding importance to
great maritime nation like this. We have our
merchantmen in every quarter Of the globe. The
sails of our seamen wbiten every sea, and their dag
floats under every sky. 1t is of vital consequence to
interests of such magnitude, lying worldwide on the
waters of the globe, that our mariners and ship
owners should know the full extent of their llabll
ties.
The peIilous character of the nsvigatOr's voca-
ton necessitstes seepless watchfulness, and his
own personal safety demands q constant vigilance
over all his acts. For this reason mariners have
been left neasurably to their own vita to devise
such general directions for the safety of their
several ships upon the ocean ss their own expert
ence has demonstrated to be necessary. In this
way certain practical usages have grown up which
may be termed the common law Of the ocean.
For example, ships meeting one another are COM
PEELED to obey certain well-establshed customs, and
keep to the right, or to the left, or change their
course az may be, and no mariner violates the rule,
except at his peril These rules are all well known to
every SEAMAN and every boy on shipboard is taught
them as soon as be is taught anything. There is,
then, q common law of the ocean to which all are
amenable, and to which every ship and shipmaster
must yield strict obedience. In addition, it is
their duty to observe all the statutes established to
regulate their conduct by the law making power Of
the country to which they respectively belongs and,
of course to obey the law of the jurisdiction into
which they, at any time, may enter. But on the
high sea We contend that the statute law of the
nation to which the ship belongs, and the simple
common law of the sea, constitute the only law to
which any shipmaster, or ship owner, owes obedi-
ence.
Now We think that these plain and simple
authorities in the case of the Adriatc. That ship
has been cOnfiscated, and her owners mulcted in
heavy damages, because her captain failed to show
u Light number Of lights at the time of her
collision with the LyOnnais. The French Court has
assumed to declare that it was the duty of that ship
to have had hoi ,ted such lights, and that because
she did not, an accident occurring, the vessel
was responsible therefor. But where among
these usages which constitute the common law of
the ocean is one which eIacts the carrying of lights
and where is the American statute that exscts it
There is no such general practice which prevails
with seagciDg vessels; and there is no such Amcri-
can ststute and we are thus compelled to conclude
that the decision Of the French Court is in total
violation Of the equity of tbb case. The Court
has set up an arbitrary standard unknown to
navigatOrs, and has punished the Adriatic for it's
violation.
If a French Court is at liberty to say that Amer
lean ships shall carry lights on the high seas, it may
also declare that these lights shall be blue, red, or
yellow. Or it may legislate for cur ships upon
other points as WELL We center our protest against
this doctrine. No such authority as the French
Court seems to have exercised in this case can be
tolerated. But this is not all. There is another
and still weightier exception to the jurisdiction of
this Court We do not believe in French authority,
or English authority, or any other foreign author.
ity, over our ships and our shipmasters except for
violations of law which occur within their own
jurisdiction. To be sure, the ease ON the face
assumes to be but a claim for damages, which, it
may also be assumed is like a note of
band which may be enforced whenever the
delinquent appears within the jurisdiction where
the claim is set up or the debt 10 due. But the
claim in the present case is based upon a transac-
ton involving the rights Of Americans upon the
high seas. The question of these rights is not to
be left to the settlement of any foreign Judicial
bedy but must be considered and settled by national
authority. In order to mulct the offending party in
the case, the French Court has first to assert its
authority over the acts of an American shipmaster
on board bis own ship, while wholly beyond French
jurisdiction. We are not aware Of the ground
upon which any such claim can be maintained; and
unless some such ground can be found, it seems 10
ia that the condemnation of the Adriatic for the
reasons get forth, is high-handed act, for which