Year: 1859

Z
Jonas St. Johns Island on the first of May The
Master of the bark having articles Of trade on
board which he wished to dispose Of made an effort to
push through the ice so that he could arrive at the
City of Okotsk before the vessel Of the Russian Amer
lean Company. Instead Of this course to the North
East he should have given direction to the ship so
TO have kept her in clear water thereby taking the
chances for whales. In this effort get to the City
Of Okotsk he failed account of the Ice, and he then
sailed for the Horse Shoe Bay, where trading
red on, but nothing incompatible with the business of
the ship From Horse Shoe Bay he sailed for 0udsko
and here he bargained Tor some SKINS with under
standing TO return for them which he did do in the
fall Thence to Kouran, and between the two places
spent II or IA days. number Of Of prints and
| liquors were landed He was cruising between the
different ports trading and visiting and whaling till
he puts away for s. West Bay in Shanter Island, where
he arrives the 18th Of July, during all this time he
took only % bbs of oil, where he continued whaling
until Aug % and took about $50 bbls. Of OIL And
here when he reasonably successful In taking oil.
and the prospect hatterng for good success still
he deemed it proper leave this locality where he had
had success to make passage to Ayan, for the object
of seeing the Governor who expecting to leave


1t is in evidence that he landed goods at this place to
considerable amount, which is not very definitely fixed
by either party, but altogether beyond what
quired for the supplies From Ayan he sailed to Ouds
ko and back again and thence to Centre Bay. where
he went for spars, thence to Petropauask where he
arrived on the 4th of November and remained there
till the 25h of November. At the latter place he took
on board some materials of ship belonging to the
same owners Here some trading was done. and the
birthday of the Captain celebrated. Thence he
sailed for Honolulu where he arrived the 18th Of
December.


From the evidence, which do not deem il necessary
more fully to detail am satisfied that the Captain
did devote his attention to other objects than those
which his contract enjOined.


| The general principles of law respecting devia-
tons very clearly understood, and IN most COM
mercial countries they give the legal right Of
discharge, and payment of wages at the port of de-
parture. So if the voyage be interrupted and lost
| by the act of the master owner the seamen have
| a valid claim for an adequate compensation. And
when different construction has prevailed 1t has
| always been required that any alterations OF the
original voyage that the owners masters may
make, shall be accompanied with notice and COM
pensation to the mariner BY the Danish Code,
| mariners not allowed TO leave their master on
account of enlargement of the different destina-
ton, but entitled to an increase OF wages sub
stantially the principle is incorporated in the
| laws of Holland.


| I English Ad. Rep, " Elize 1872


Ibid Countess of Harcourt,'' 24S.
| Ibid Minerva" 347.


| Ibid George Home" $40.


See 243 the Cambridge Ad.


Parsons, a very accomplished writer on merean-
| tile law says can extraordinary and unnecessary
proraction of the voyage would be deviation.
But that the mere length of the voyage, without
other evidence would not prove this" And this doc
4 trine is sustained by authorities.


| II Wheaton, p. 3S3.


| Esp, 25.


| John. Rep, 1873, l43.


In insurance cases the law is rigid in requiring
the performance of the precise voyage insured, and
no doubt that the rule is founded on sound
policy, otherwise it would subject the insurers to
hazard not contemplated by the contract.
| Delay or change of course to save shipwrecked
men is justified by the law, and not regarded as a
| deviation. A Master has no right to deviate from
the accustomed route without legal cause, such
stress of weather. to procure necessary repairs
to gain convoy, or to avoid capture or detention.


8 Kent, S9l.


| Nor to substitute another voyage for the
| agreed upon between the owners and freghters of
| the ship. Every thing beyond the voyage agreed
upon, is out of the scope of his authority master,
as such he has power to change that voyage for
another. This doctrine is thus clearly laid down by
Flanders on shipping, and sustained by numerous
| authorities.


do not consider this decision as establishing any
new principle in the maritime law, it has been
intmated by the counsel that such decision would,
but the application of principles already settled to
| the combination of circumstances as presented in
this case, and which, far any cases have been
| reported may be regarded new.


The voyage described in the shipping articles was
| JChaling Uoydge. 1t was neither trading voyage
nor freighting voyage, and if the original pur-
pose neglected to accomplish other purposes, it
was a violation of the contract and here let say
that do not regard the exchange of articles of
trade for provisions for the ship, any additional
| trade which the master may make, in the regular
course OF the voyage which does not interfere with
the original purpose of the voyage as a foundation
for damages the part OF the persons employed.
| The question arises then the evidence in this
case, whether Captain Enberg devoted more time
than was necessary for the legitimate purpose Of sup
plying his ship to other purposes which may have
| been interesting and valuable to himself, and in
which the seamen were coparticipants. The obi
| cations of contracts are mutual. The master by
his contract for whaling promises compensation for
I rlTrvF 70 Tho rnr ut fqk
hence if he lessons the opportunity for whaling, he
| lessons the chances for voyage He violates the
spirit of the contract when he ceases to prosecute
his voyage with vigor, and with single purpose.
Everything which conflicts with this tends to lessen
the aggregate of the voyage, and of course the COM
/ pensation.


From the evidence do not perceive that the
master resisted the claim for additional compensa-
zion from improper motives but rather from partial
estimate or appreciation of the rights of par
ties 1t has been contended on the part of the
ter that the intention of going to Petropaulski
known TO the seamen, and they did not express any
objection. do not regard 1t necessary for them to
protect their legal rights, have demonstrated with
the master, although in this case it does not ap-
pear that the master made any direct communica-
tion and all that known about it was by gen.
eral report the ship 1t IS said they might have
taken passage in the ship " Montezuma" bound to
this port. but there is evidence that passage
proffered to them. and if there had been, it
not incumbent on them TO leave their own ship
with their interest of the voyage on board. 1t was
clearly such deviation in treghting voyage
would have entitled the to a discharge, and
consequent payment of the wages and expenses to
the port of their departure.


The question of damages in this case is more
difficult than in most Others. 1t is contended on
the part of the libellant that he should have pay
the largest catch of the season, the opPortun
ity, which was legally enjoined, required, oy the
contract of devoting the entire season to the wha
ing business mad not been afforded him. 1t is true
that the entire season has not been SO devoted but
portion of the season has. and IN this, the ship
had not verv great success. Prom the 18th Of July
to the 25th of August, she was in South w. Bay,


L ~. l.