High Court Of Admiralty, ...
The Times, 1824-01-22T00:00:00

Dr. AIDAS statedn that as this was an unopposed motion, it would have been, in an ordinary case, a motion of course: but it aeemed very necessar' to state the circumstances of this matter. It was an appeal from the sentefice of the Vice-Admiralty Court 'at the Cape of Cood flope. which appeal had not been prosecuted. In the month of August, 1821, the B&iabeth was hired utnder a charter- party entered into between DMr. Pedder, a merchantat the Cape, and owner of this iessel, andthe mereautile house of.lMorse and Co al- so resident at thesame place. The charter-party was for three months, anA stipuated that the Elfableth sbould, during that pe- riod, be employed in a variety of voyages to and from adjacent parts of the eoast of Afrnca; and by a particular covedant,lMessrs. Morse and Cov egreed to insure the owner in the surn of 7,000 rix dollars, "against all suhl risks as underwriters run." This insurance cover- ed the' ship throughout the various riaks'she was to be exposed to pending the term of the charter-par, but did not cover thc freight, which was valued at 400 rix dollars more: upon freight, howvever, no question wh btever had arisen. Very nearthe close of the teen men- tioned, the ?lslabets was unfortunately wreckred ; and a question arose in the Court below, uporn the substituted value of 7,000 rix dol- lars in the engagement between theparties. In compliance with a monitiop issued in April, 1622, under the seal of the Vice-Admi- raty Court of the Cape'of Good Hope, Morse and Co., by their proctor, appeared in court; but under protest. The ground of that protest was. ; thiit courts of common law bave cognizance, to the excclusion of Courts of Admiralty, of all contracts made on land." But to this it was answered, that the Vice-Admiralty Court, by the letters patent which had been granted to it from the Crown, was spe- cially warranted to take cognizance of all aatters whatever re- lating to maritime affairs, bills of lading warrants, charter-pars ties, &c., and entitled to procced' in ail cases occurring with- in the linits of its jurisdiction between merchants and owners of ships. The Judge of. the Court below, after hearing 'the argament on both sides. overruled the protest, and assigued ;Morse to appear absolutelyv and on the 5th of August, 1822, by his interlocutory decree,ie directed the 7,000 rix dollars to be paid into Court. This waas done, but the proctor for Mlorse pro. tested of a grievance and appeal. A protocol of appeal was accord.' ingly put in and admitted, wherein the proctor prayed leave of the Court at the Cape to appeal to the High Court of Admiralty in England; so tlat here the appellant had hisown choice as tojuris- diction; which (Dr. Adams added) his Lordship would not fail to observe as a very material point. Then.the proctor for the owner prayed that the subi oft7,000 rix dollarsmntght be paid out of the rc. gistry, on sutilcicni bhail being given to 0abser the other party's as- serted appeal. Thelearnedcounsel (Dt. Adams) then stated, that this ppccl1sadsretcNeben-lrome1sed>b y Mctrv-3treWt Co.; and his applicition to this Court' was, `hat his Lordship would pronounce thleappeal to he deserted. The effect offbis would be, that the bail ould be released, the lmoney having been 4jready 'brought into Codra. The COURT pronounced the appeal to be deserted, as prayed. rrt(fFl CATIVR (W ADMIRALTY. IVEDNESDAY. TAv. 21. TILE EtiZABETH.