"Bellona"-(Voltz)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 March 1809 |
| Date | 01 March 1809 |
| Court | High Court of Admiralty |
English Reports Citation: 165 E.R. 1033
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY
S C 2 Eng. Pr. Cas 21
[63] "bellona"-(Voltz). March 1, 1809.-Joint capture-Revenue cutter not entitled to share merely on the ground of being in sight. [S C 2 Eng. Pr. Cas 21 ] In this case a claim of joint capture was set up by a Revenue Cutter, on the ground of being in sight-There was no act of assistance, and therefore the only question was, whether the Revenue Cutter, upon the mere fact of sight, must necessarily be presumed to have the animus capiendi so as to entitle her to share For the captor the King's Advocate and Swabey contended-That a Revenue E. & A. V.-33* 1034 the "belle" edw. 64 Cutter was to be considered as a private ship of war, and that the fact of sight, without co-operation, would not entitle her to share with the actual captor, which wag in this case a king's ship. On the other side Adams and Jenner.-It is true that the mere fact of sight will not entitle a privateer to share with a king's ship , because a privateer may choose whether she will pursue or not, and consequently the animus capiendi is not necessarily to be presumed But Revenue Cutters stand upon a different footing, and cannot be classed in all respects with private ships of war In the case of The " Active " (Adm May 10, 1798), which had been recaptured by an armed Revenue Cutter, a question arose, whether the recapturing vessel was to take a salvage of one-sixth as a private ship of war, or whether she was to be considered as a king's ship. The Court in that case gave only a salvage of one-eighth, and therefore if vessels of this description are to be considered as king's ships where it operates to their disadvantage, they are clearly entitled to the same character where it may have a beneficial effect These [64] vessels are in the public service, they are a description of force relied on for the public security, and it cannot be said, because the protection of the revenue is superadded to their other duties, that the capture of the enemy is not their immediate duty The King's Advocate -The case which has been cited, has been long over-ruled in this Court, which gives one-sixth to revenue cutters, the same as to privateers in cases of salvage Judgment-Sir W Scott . This is a question arising on the admission of an allegation, stating an interest, as joint captor, on the part of the " Falcon " revenue cutter, armed with a commission of war I observe that there is no averment of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
An analysis of the 2004 Nader ballot access federal court cases.
...in 2004, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate was not known until July 6, when John Kerry announced that his choice would be John Edwards. (63) Also, the Democratic Party's position on the Iraq war was unclear until its national convention, held July 26-29. Therefore, the logic employ......