The Portland daily press., 1881-01-04
Important Decision.
CIRCUIT COURT, MAINE DISTRICT SEPTEMBER
TERM, 1880.
LOWELL & Fox, JJ.
The United States by Indictment
.1lerQnder BAN.


LOWELL g. Fox, JJ.
The United States By Indictment
alerander BAN.
Fox, j. The defendant, one Of the crew of
the schooner j. S. & S. G. Adams was indicted
for desertion at this port.
The articles, which were signed by him at
Philadelphia July 19th described the VOYAGE
as from that port to Portland Maine-thence
to some one or more ports east, if required by
the master, and back to a western port of dis
charge. Term not to exceed two months y
The vessel arrived at this port, discharged her
cargo, and was about to proceed to the Kenne-
bee river for ice on the ;51st of July, when the
defendant deserted. The defense was placed
on two grounds-frst. that the description, in
the articles, of the voyage was not sufficiently
def lite and specific, SO as to bind the crew to
its performance, and secondly, thai the articles
We're null and void, not having been signed by
Balm Ill the presence of the shipping commits
sloner. master, consignee or owner These
objections were Overruled by the District
Judge, and a verdict of guilty having been rem
dered, the defendant now moves for a new
trial
The Revised Statutes Sect. 1920. declare
that every master of q vessel of over tiftv
tons burthen, bound from port in one State
to port in any other than an adjoining State,
shall before he proceeds on his voyage make
an agreement in writing or in print with every
seaman y declaring the voyage or term
of time for which such seaman shall be
shipped,n This provision is taken from the
Act of 1870, and has frequently been passed
upon by Courts of Admiralty. These articles
describe the voyage as from Philadelphia to
Portland, thence to one or more ports east if
required, and back to a western port of dis
charge-the term not to exceed two months.
i Inns description bears strong similarity to
that found i'll Thompson q The Oakland 4 Law
Reporter 30l, in which Judge Sprague held
that articles describing q voyage as 'sfrom Bos-
ton to one or more ports SOUTH thence to one
or more ports in Europe and back to port of
discharge in the United States'' were sniff
GENTLY precise and definite to be obligatory
upon the parties, and such we hold were the
present articles
At the trial the counsel in defense relied
with great confidence ON the opinion in the
U. 5; Smith, o Otto 536, insisting that it was
conclusive against the validity of defendants s
shipment, and upon the present motion for a
new trial, remarks of Mr.. Justice Clifford in
that case are urged upon us as decisive and
should control our conclusions upon this point
His language is as follows: ''Seamen, how
ever, for such voyage (coastwise) must be
regularly shipped, and the master before he
proceeds upon the voyage must make with
each seaman he carries to sea, as one his crew.
an agreement in writing or in print, in the
manner and form required by the act
Voyages of this kind, not being within
(Act of lime 1917 .ho acuooa.,. nuoo. -,
is not reonired to he signed in tho nrosonoo ns
shipping commissioner instead of that, the
owner, consignee or the master of q ship so
sucb n case nerform tho Jnt;os ofy - ao.,, @ ~
missioner. bnt third narSoms ossoss So 20, " oo o.,ni
authority in any case.'
Smiths case was before the Supreme Court
sion of on;nion fron, 10 C;ro,,;t T"r. q Wy i
Massachnsetts D;striot mnor ~ ois ,n.; ior .le
sswhether the Act Of 1879 dnrios sn 70
ming of seaman on yaseels anIaro5 - iH
for VOYAGES coastwise between St,nt;cy pnrts % ;.
This Guestion was answereJ in tha ,'onot;1,o 10
The decision therefore of tbe Con-. u..o
lv is not in accord VIII .tn fonon app'1ieI'-
tions from, The oninion of Nv TSt;, fsIi;te1
If the Act does not anniu 70 s,,o
the regnatiops tcucb;na KY sT nuun
crew as found in tha At ora r.. I;nI \: oIIti
any more than anv of tho otho NV
tained in the Act ii0' i''o'' oo'i-
~,
Inc ruilhs AZ inc tTal was IN conformity
Win tne eeclsloh 1tsell--waS based thereon
and was IN accordance with what is under
stood to be the uniform practice in this Cir
CUT ~ mas never peen held that, the provis-
IONS as TO shipments OF crew ON foreign voyages
were appllcaole TO coastlng VOYAGES, As stated
DylIoWeii, J:' IN the L. w. Haven, ), Fedrel
Reporter ooO, decided III July last.
Ihe shipping act required shipments and
dlscharges OF seamen Tor long foreign voyages
10 De conducted under the supervision OF
shipping commissioners; as to the contract oi
coastlng and west Indian voyages, it left the
| ACT OF 100 TO deal with them.'
Inc failng was made upon the provisions
OF the ACT OF loi2 as found incorporated into
tne heylsed statutes, the attention of the
| Court at the trial, not having been called, to
| the ACT OF June y 1874: this Act, however was
| then IN 1orce, and we are OF tae opinion. that
IL Is unnecessary iof us TO determine, the true
| construction OF SO much nt LII as Is found in
| the Revised Statutes relating to coasting voy-
| ages, ana wnlch were included i'll the Act OF
IofZ, as Dy the Act OF 1914, vessels upon such
| voyages, are entirely excluded from the opera
| uon Oh an provision OF this title, heretofore
contained IN the shipping act.
| by act OF Congress, approved June % 1874 the
| ReYised Statutes, took effect as of Doc. 1873
put by sect. oool IL was declared, that Act;
passed SINCE tna1 date, are 10 nave full effect
| as IL passed alter the enactment OF the reyis-
sion, and SO far as such acts vary from, oI
| connlct wltn, any provision, contained
| IN SAID revision they are to have effect
as subsequent Statutes and as repeating
| any portion OF the revision inconsistent there
with; Inc Act OF June 1874, chap. 260 en-
| acted, that none OF the provisions OF the Ac
OF June I ioI lohlpping commissioners Act
| shonld Apply 10 sail or steam vessels engaged
on the coastwise trade except the coastwist
trade between the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts
| &c.
Inns language Is SO broad and comprehensive
that IN our opinion Its effect must be to strike
from the heyiseo statutes every provision
therein; Whlch was taken from the Act O
| lo':' relatiVe 10 such coastwlse vessels. Ane
their operation must be restricted to vessels
sailing on long lorelgn voyages, or from the
Atlantic 10 the racine coasts. All the regula
tlons lo4nd IN me ACT OF 49, and transferred
10 'he neVlSeu otatutes, relative to the ship
ment OIL crews, Which might otherwise, per
laps, pe applcaoie 70 coaStWlse voyages are NJ
| longer IN 1ofce, ana the jury were correctly