Year: 1872

Frank Griffin,


E. A; Niekels, In Admiralty.


Hilton, -..-


Dowling.


Justice Story, that great Jurist, in
speaking of casesimilar in nearly all
of its facts and averments to this says;
' The principle of law upon this SUBJ
ject appear to me to be equally clear
and salutary in poin. of policy. The
master has the supreme authority
on board of his ship; and has, moreover
a sort of parental responsibility and du-
ty devolved upon him, for the due exer-
else of it. It is his duty to prevent as
far as he may, any undue exercise of
authority by his subordinate officers.
and any abuses, injuries and trespasses
by them. If he is present when any of
the subordinate officers infiict chastise-
ment upon the crew, he is bound i'll du-
ty to interfere and restrain it, if is it I'M
proper in its nature aud character, or
under the circumstances.
If he may into rfere and be does not, he
must be deemed to assent to and en-
courage it; for no officer in his presence
has right to inflict punishment with
out his assent OF direction, unless upon
an emergency which admits of no delay
1t is not sufficient to excuse himself
from this interposition upon any notion
of courtesy, or of upholding the author
ity of the officers, or supporting har-
mony and discipline of the ship. The
law has entrusted him with summary
powers, for the good not of the officers
alone, but of the crew also and indeed
for the general good of of the maratime
service. in whice he is engaged. While
he should uphold the just discipline of
of the ship with steady confidence, he
is to take care that the crew are not
m: de the victims of the insolence. the
passions or the caprices of the officers
under him. If he will stand by and see
the seamen cruelty, ,brutally aud unjusti-
fably beaten without interference he
ought not to complain that the law fore
es uron him the conclusion that he ap-
proves what is done and means 20 en-
courage it by his silence and his author
ity. He becomes thereby the abettor
and supporter of the deed, upon the rea-
sonable ground that he who knowing
allows oppression shares the crime
Such, in my opinion, is the dictate OF
the law on this subject, and it is whole
some as an admonition and prosecution
against the undue resentment and OPP
preston of officers which so often ends
in the open rebellion and mutiny of the
injured crew."


2 Sumner. p. II and II.


Thomas v. Lane.


Again, in the case of United States vs.
Taylor, 2 Sumner, 5SS, he says: The
master has the sole authority when on
board to authorize punishment to be in
hicted on any of the crew: and if he is
present when any punishment is intiict-
ed by subordinate officer and can pre-
vent it and does not he is personally re-
sponsible for the act, and by his acqui.
escense adopts it as done by his author
ity"


The doctrine as above stated is not in
conflict with the quotation from his
work on Agency in which Story says
that the master is not responsible unless
an act is done by his authority or done
by his subordinates in the ordinary dis
charge of their duties, which are, Of
course, commanded and required by him.
1 quote from memory; have not the
book before me.


The question is. what are the princi-





pies by which we may determine wheth-
er an act is done by his authority or
not. The principle laid down above is,
that if he is present and might have
it and did not, then it is sdone
by his authority. Again; if he stands
by and sees the seamen cruelty. brutal
ly and unjustifably beaten without in
reference, his non- action and silence is
and authority.


Such is the law governing this case;
now what are the facts from the evi-
dence:


l. We are impressed with the fact
that every man whose duty it was to
to be on deck and who by the acknow-
Judgement of all who were on deck and
near to the spot of the affray swear pos
itively that Capt. Nickols was on the
spot from time prior to the first mate s
froward with an iron bar till the
bleeding and mangled victim was lifted
from the deck and was taken forward to
have his wounds dressed. They were
but two or three yards away during the
whole time. They were there not rs
idle spectators but because their duty
called tLem. They with singular unan-
unity ON all the material points agree. =
1t is true that in some of the minor par.
ticulars they do not agree; but this rath-
er strengthens than weakens their testi-
mony.


If each one Of them told the name
story in all its minute particulars and