(Pilotage.) 4. Where an Act of the Dominion Parliament is in part repugnant to an Imperial statute, effect will be given to its enactments in so far as they agree with those of the Imperial statute. ibid. PILOT ACTS. 1. The English cases, by which the owners are exempted from responsibility, where the fault is solely and exclusively that of the pilot, not shared in by the master or crew, are based upon the special provisions of the English Pilotage Acts. The Cumberland, 1 Stuart, 81, n. 2. A construction is given in this case to the Lower Canada Pilot Act (45 Geo. 3, c. 12) and the Liverpool Pilot Act. ibid. 3. As to construction of Pennsylvania Pilot Act, see 1 Stuart, 199; also for provisions of General Pilot Act of England (6 Geo. 4, c. 125), see 1 Stuart, 82. 4. The whole of this Act is repealed by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 120); the limitation of the liability of owners, where pilotage is compulsory, re-enacted by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 388); but it applies only to the United Kingdom Act of 1854, s. 330. PIRATES. 1. As to jurisdiction of Vice-Admiralty Courts, respecting pirates or piratical vessels, see 26 Vict. c. 24, s. 12. ante, p. 357. As to the authority of Admiralty Courts to entertain a suit for the restitution of goods piratically taken on the high seas, see The Hercules, 2 Dods. 369. The Act 26 Vict. c. 24, is now repealed, and the jurisdiction is the same as that exercised by High Court of Admiralty in England. See Habeas Corpus. See The Chesapeake. ante, p. 208. PLEADINGS. 1. The allegations of a party must be such as to apprise his adversary of the nature of the evidence to be adduced in support of them. The Agnes, 1 Stuart, 56. 2. Less strictness required than in other Courts. ibid. 3. All the essential particulars of the defence should be distinctly set forth in the pleadings. ibid. (Pleadings.) 4. The evidence must be confined to the matters put in issue, and the decree must follow the allegations and proofs. ibid. 5. The defendant not pleading a judgment, rendered in another Court, waives such ground of defence. ibid. 6. Where the misconduct of a mariner is relied on as a defence in an action for wages, it should be specifically put in issue. ibid. 7. Demand for watch taken from the seamen's chest by the master may be joined to the demand for wages. The Sarah, 1 Stuart, 87. 8. In a cause of damages, in which the proceedings were by plea and proof, acts appearing on the face of the libel to have been committed at a place which is not within the jurisdiction of the Court, rejected as inadmissible. The Friends, ibid, 112. The procedure by plea and proof is now abolished. 9. Pleadings said to be of little use in Courts of Admiralty. The We're Here, Young, 139. 10. It is a rule of the Admiralty that where there is a material variance between the allegations of the libel and the evidence, the party so alleging is not entitled to recover, although not in fault, and fault is established against the other vessel. The Emma K. Smalley, Stockton, ante, p. 106. See note to this case, ante, p. 114; also ante, p. 154. 11. Under R. 61, every action now shall be heard without pleadings unless the judge shall otherwise order. ante, p. 425. PORT. 1. Probable derivation of this nautical term. The Leonidas, 1 Stuart, 235, n. 2. Ports of Dominion are home ports in relation to each other. The Three Sisters, Young, 149. POSSESSION. 1. Possession of a ship awarded to the master appointed by the owner, to the exclusion of the master named by the shippers of the cargo. The Mary and Dorothy, 1 Stuart, 187. 2. Power given to any Court, having Admiralty jurisdiction in any of Her Majesty's dominions, to remove the master of any ship, being within the jurisdiction of such Court, and to appoint a new master in his stead. See 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 240. (Possession.) 3. Jurisdiction of the Vice-Admiralty Court, in cases of possession, to reinstate owners of ship who have been wrongfully displaced from their possession. The Haidee, 2 Stuart, 25. 4. By 26 Vict. c. 24, s. 10, the jurisdiction of the Vice-Admiralty Courts was extended to claims between owners of any ship registered in the possession in which the Court is established touching the ownership, possession, employment or earnings of such ship. This Act is now repealed, and the jurisdiction is under 24 Vict. c. 24, s. 8. ante, p. 349. See Pritchard's Digest for Lord Stowell's judgments as to the nature of this jurisdiction prior to the latter Act. 5. By the Vice-Admiralty Courts Act, 1863, an Admiralty Court has jurisdiction over claims between owners, where the ship is registered within the possession for which the Court is established. The Edward Barrow, Cook, 212. 6. The Dominion of Canada is not a possession within the meaning of the Act, so as to enable an Admiralty Court for one part of it to entertain jurisdiction over a vessel registered in another part for the enforcement of such claims. ibid. But see now The Admiralty Act, 1891, s. 4. 7. J. H., when building a small vessel, was furnished with supplies therefor by D., who put into the vessel, upon the whole, a larger sum than J. H. did. It was afterwards agreed that D. should own half the vessel, and in addition to this he took a mortgage from J. H. previous to the completion of the registry of the vessel. It was filed at the Custom House, but could not be registered, as there was no registry of the vessel. On her completion the vessel was registered in the name of J. H., and no mention was made of D. as part owner. D. subsequently sold her to one C., who registered as owner under his bill of sale, and then J. H. took proceedings against both to regain possession. Held, That the Court could not cancel the registries, nor order a sale, as the parties had applied to the wrong Court; but J. H. and D. were strongly advised that they should have an account taken to ascertain the amounts respectively due them, and should sell the vessel to the best advantage. The W. E. Wier, Young, 145. Since the Act of 1891, the Court has ample jurisdiction to settle all disputes. PRACTICE. 1. The practice to be observed in suits and proceedings in the Courts of Vice-Admiralty abroad is governed by certain rules and regulations established by Order in Council under 2 Will. 4, c. 51. The practice is now governed by the rules of 1893, ante, p. 413, and when they are silent by the Admiralty rules in force in England. 2. The Court will require the libel to be produced at a short day, if the late period of the season, or other cause, renders it necessary. The Newham, 1 Stuart, 70. 3. Demand for a watch, etc., taken by the master from the seaman's chest, may be joined to the demand for wages. The Sarah, 1 Stuart, 87. 4. Where the judge has any doubt in regard to the manner of navigating ship's course, position, and situation, he will call for the assistance of persons conversant with nautical affairs to explain. The Cumberland, ibid, 78. 5. Probatory terms are in general peremptory, but may be restored for sufficient cause. The Adventure, ibid, 99. 6. Upon points submitted for the professional opinion of nautical persons, their opinion should be as definite as possible. The Niag ara, ibid, 320. 7. In certain cases the Court will direct the questions to be reconsidered and more definitely answered. ibid. 8. As to the practice of examining witnesses under a release. The Lord John Russell, ibid, 194. 9. Amendment in the warrant of attachment not allowed for an alleged error not apparent in the acts and proceedings in the suit. The Aid, ibid, 210. 10. Suppletory oath ordered in a suit for subtraction of wages. The Josepha, ibid, 212. 11. Where the Court has clearly no jurisdiction it will prohibit itself. The Mary Jane, ibid, 267. 12. In salvage cases the protest made by the master, containing a narrative of facts when they are fresh in his memory, should be produced. The Electric, ibid, 333. 13. In courts of civil law the parties themselves have strictly no authority over the cause after their regular appearance by an attorney or proctor. The Thetis, ibid, 365. (Practice.) 14. The attorney or proctor is so far regarded as the dominus litis that no proceeding can be taken except by him, or by his written consent, until a final decree or revocation of his authority. ibid. The practice is now governed by the rules of 1893. ante, p. 413. PRESUMPTION. 1. Where a ship at anchor is run down by another vessel under sail, the presumption is that the latter is in fault. The Miramichi, 1 Stuart, 240. 2. If the protest be not produced salvors are entitled to the inference that it is withheld because it would be too favorable to them. The Electric, ibid, 333. 3. It is the duty of the person in charge of each ship to render to the other ship such assistance as may be practicable and necessary; and in case he fail so to do, and no reasonable excuse for such failure be shown, the collision will be deemed to have been caused by his wrongful act, neglect or default (25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 33). The Liberty, 2 Stuart, 102. 4. Where the regulations for preventing collisions under the Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1873, have been infringed, the ship by which such regulation has been infringed shall be deemed to be in fault. See R. S. C. c. 79, s. 5. ante, p. 381. 5. The fact that a steamer in motion collides with a vessel stationary is itself prima facie evidence of negligence on the part of the steamer. The John Owen, 5 Can. L. T. 565. PRIMROSE (HON. FRANCIS WARD). 1. Was appointed deputy judge, surrogate and commissary of the Vice-Admiralty Court for Lower Canada by an instrument under the hand and seal of the Hon. James Kerr, judge thereof, on his being about to proceed to England, dated August 30th, 1833. 2. Discharged the duties of judge from that time until the removal of Mr. Kerr, in October, 1834. 3. Continued afterwards to do so, under the authority of the Imperial Act (56 Geo. 3, c. 86), to render valid the judicial acts of surrogates of Vice-Admiralty Courts abroad during vacancies in office of judges of such Courts, down to the time of the appointment of Mr. Kerr's successor, September 21st, 1836. See The John and Mary, 1 Stuart, 64; The London, ibid, 140. |