The Hawaiian gazette., 1870-12-07
Supreme Court-In Admiralty.
uAnrwr11, J. NOV. 90, l87O.-rnr TRIDENT

Panee as Samuel Green-Li5el in persoaaD1.
This was cause for wages civil and maritime
The libel alleges that the libellant shipped on
board the American whaling bark Trident. of
New Bedford, as boatsteerer, about the 9th of
December 1869, at Honolulu, for a whaling
voyage net to exceed twelve months and was to
receive as bis compensation the sixtyffth lay of
the net proceeds OF said whaling voyage, and that
IN pursuance of said terms of shipment the said
vessel proceeded to sea, with libellant on board.
about the Goth of said month of December. He
alleged that be well and truly performed his du-
ties as boatsteerer but that the master of said
vessel, about the Sd day Of September 1870, with
out just cause, degraded him from the position of
boatsteerer and placed him as a seaman before
the mast for the remainder of the voyage that
the alleged cause of his degradation was the
missing of a whale in the Arctic Ocean, which
the hbeant attributed entirely to the mate, who
was steering the boat at the time. and who did
not obey his directions in steering the boat on to
the whale. The libellant averred that be was
ready and willing at all times to act as such boat
steerer but was prevented by the master, and
that be had been obedient to all the lawful com
mands of the officers OF said vessel, and that he
was entitled to his pay at the 65th lay, for the
full voyage as boatsteerer on the basis of the
real value of oil in Honolulu, which he alleged
was 40 cents per gallon. The answer of the mas
ter admitted most of the facts except the per
formauce of his duty as boatsteerer, and alleged
that he had on two several occasions missed strik
ing whales, once of the coast Of California when
the whale was very near. and tha alleged cause
was that said libeant could not strike with a
left-hand dart, and that he so admitted The
master informed him on that occasion that if he
missed again. be would degrade him from bis po-
sition. The second occasion was in the Arctic
Ocean, about the Sd of September last, the oc-
currence referred to in the libel, and the master
alleges that be missed the whale when very close,
and so near that it could have been touched by
;he oars of the boat, and attributed it to the
same eause,-that libeant could not throw left
hand harpoon.-and for that reason he was de-
graded from his position. He further averred
that he had made tender of the amount Justly
,iue the libelant, to wit, the sum of Sl6238.
The master also admitted that libelant had struck
FIVE whales. Upon the above issue the case pro-
ceeded to trial.
The libeant introduced two witnesses, Keoni
and kauweli, who we're oarsmen belonging to
the same boat with the hbellant, who concurred
10 their testimony on the main facts of the case:
That they were seamen on board the bark Tri-
iient; had been engaged in the whale fishery
several years; that libeant had performed his
duty as boatsteerer that his missing the whale
% the coast of California was caused by wave
atrikiug the bow of the boat and knocking him
iown, and that the whale was too far off when
ne did strike for the stroke to be effective; they
stated the distance to be between two and three
fathoms. Relative to the facts Of missing the
whale in the Arctic, their testimony tended to
support the allegations in the libel that the libel
lant told the mate to luf and run the boat nearer
70 the whale, ana be either did not hear him or
lid not obey him, and the chance of near stroke
was lost, and consequently when libeIant did
strike, the whale wasstwo or three fathoms of.