The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1874-05-27
Supreme Court of the Hawaiian Is
lands.

! L1aL
Libel in admiralty on appeal from Jus
tice Hartwell.
Appeal to Supreme Court in admiralty,
ALLEN, CD, HARRIS and JUDD, j. Mr..
Justice Judd delivered the opinion of the
Cont.
The japanese crew of the Hawaiian
schooner South Sea filed libel against J.
C. Davis, master and owner of said vessel,
claiming, in addition to their wages, pas.
sage money from Honolulu to Yokohama,
Japan; and introduced evidence to show
that the voyage of said vessel was from
Japan to the South Sea Islands and return
to Japan.
The respondent introduces the shipping
articles of which there are two. The first
one, dated January 23d, 1878, signed by
all the libellants except Manjero, describes
the voyage as from =" Kanagawa, Japan,
to Honolulu via Marianas Islands," and
bears the certificate of L. NJ. Van Reed,
II. IL Ms Consul General for Japan, to
the effect that the said articles were made
out and signed in this Consulate, that
they were read and explained by him to
the parties whose names are subscribed
thereto, comprising the crew ofthe said YES
sci, and that each of them personally ac-
knowledged that he fully understood the
same and had signed his name, of his own
free will and accord, and the certificate is
impressed with the seal of the consulate.
The lbellant Manjero is shipped on sepa-
rate articles dated February LIST, 1873, for
q voyage from Kanagawa, Japan, to
South Sea Islands and return unless soon
er discharged not to exceed six calendar
months"
These second articles bear a certificate
to the same purport as the first except
that 1t is signed by c. ~ Sheppard, Uni
ted States Consul and acting His Hawaii
an Maiesty's Consul General for Japan,
and impressed, very properly, with the
seal of the United States Consulate. The
respondent in his answer expresses his
willingness to pay the crew their wages,
and to provide for Manjero passage
back to Japan.
E Preston and r. II. Stanley, proctors
for libellants The decree of $45 passage
money back to Japan for each ibellant
must be affirmed, because it appears from
the evidence that the Hbellants were In
duced to sign under the representation
that they were to be returned to Japan.
The two shipping articles are inconsistent
with each other. The entries in the log
book show that the voyage was intended
to be rs claimed by libelants. Shipping
articles as to destination may be rebuff
ted by parol.
w. c. Jones, proctor for respondent -
Shipping articles are conclusive as to
destination and wages. Manjero's con.
tract to be returned to Japan does not
control the contract of the other seamen.
The log shows the destination was to
Honolulu after the intermediate trading
voyage in the South Seas was concluded
Per CdTidm: Although in admiralty
seamen are allowed to Join in libel for
wages, yet theirs is not joint contract,
though all may have signed the same
shipping articles; each contract may be
considered separately though in the same
proceedings; for the shipping articles con-
stitute a several contract with each sea-
man. Oliver Ct dL vs. Alexander Ct al,
Peters, l43.
Viewing, therefore, the contract be-
tween the master and Manjero made on
the LIST of February, which was for voy-
age from Japan to the South Sea Islands
and return, as a separate and distinct en-
gagement TO return him to Japan, it is not
with the masters contract
with the seven japanese engaged on the
23d of January for their voyage was to /
Honolulu via the Marianas Islands, which |
from Japan might properly be called /
South Sea Islands. The contract with /
them contained no engagement to return
to Japan-and their voyage was conss- I
tent with Manjero's voyage-being the /
same so far as it went, but Manjero'S was /
TO continue further, that is, back to Japan. |
Having thus far considered the two /
shipping articles as they appear on their I
ace, and which we regard as grima tdcie /
evidence of the voyage intended, let us
zee if the libellants have rebutted their
apparent intent.
The log books are introduced, which
)egn the voyage with an entry Voyage
rom Yokohama TO the South Sea Islands"
I does not say "to Honolulu" which an
navigator may have consider
d as one of the South Sea Islands.-but
.lSo, it does not say, ''and back to Japan"
IN examining both log books we find it
he custom of both the captain and the
nate to write at the top of each page the
intermediate passage which the
essel was then pursuing, as Tor example,
Guam TO Tinnyan," " Tinnyan to BONN
slaRds,n and "Bonin Islands TO Honolu-
L." On the 20th OF July, 1873, the yes
el left the BONN Islands, and on the 2Ist
he mate Payne resumed his charge of the
og and heads the page for that day "Bo-
in Islands to Honolulu and this heading
) continued every day until the vessel
caches this port. The men came aft on
he 23d of July and demanded to know
Why the vessel was heading so much to
he eastward and not to Japan, and the
aptain answers that he was going to
honolulu. The courses in the log do not
how that he ever steered westward or
owards Japan after leaving the BONN
Stands.
There is some evidence from Daniel
'all, the cook, that at the time the crew
anne aft July 2SdJ the captain told them
hat when be got to Honolulu he would
ee that they had their passage back to
apan. But Ball shipped on the articles
rst mentioned, that is to Honolulu via