tions were principally seen, and remedied by acts of parliament, after the loss of the American colonies, at the urgent suggestion of Lord Liverpool. (Mr. Jenkinson.)

In Great Britain the laws of registry have always been cautiously observed, and strictly enforced. In the case of Rolleston vs. Hibbard, a party, for the security of a bill of exchange, had taken a bill of a sale upon a ship at sea, not containing a recital of the certificate of registry in the bill of sale; and, on the return of the ship, took possession of her. About the same time the original owner failed, and his assignees under a commission of bankruptcy claimed the ship. And it was determined in their fayour, that the bill of sale was absolutely void. (1) But in a similar case, of a prize-ship, where the legality of the sale was contested on account of a mere misrecital in the manuscript, Lord Kenyon said the ground was insufficient.--(Rolleston and others, vs. Smith.)

Other errours and omissions, however, in the recital of the register, have been held to vitiate the bill of sale, (as in the case of Westerdell vs. Dale.) (1) It is generally, as was said by Justice

(1) Though a bill of sale for transferring the property in a ship by way of mortgage, may be void as such for want of reciting the certificate of registry therein, as required by statute 26 Geo. 3, yet the mortgager may be sued upon his personal covenant, contained in the same instrument, for the repayment of the money lent.-8 East. 231.

(2) In this case of Rolleston and others vs. Smith, the recital of the certificate dated the condemnation on the 28th day of May, 1875, and the certificate of freedom on the 23d of January, 1783, agreeing with an abstract of the register in one of the offices of the customhouse, from which the recital was taken; but differing from the certificate itself, and from the abstract of it in three other offices at the custom-house, in which the sentence of condemnation was truly dated, on the 29th of May, 1782. This mistake being evident from a comparison of dates, was clearly held not to vitiate the bill of sale. But in this case of Westerdell vs. Dale, the word "oath" was used instead of "affirmation," "sworn" instead of "affirm"; the allega

Lawrence, in the case of Moss vs. Charnock, (n) the English principle, not to consider a sale as having any operation or effect, until all the pre-requisites of the act are completely complied with.

One of the great advantages of the registry is, the exact information every person may obtain of the true relations and circumstances of the ship. This design was fully kept in view, The sole owner of the ship Fish

in the following decision. bourne (belonging to New Castle,) that was embargoed in kussia, made a bill sale of one third part to Heath, who immediately thereupon forwarded a copy of the bill of sale to the officers of the customs at New-Castle. The officers caused an entry thereof to be endorsed upon the affidavit, upon which the original register had been obtained; but accidentally neglected to give notice thereof to the commissioners at London. Atter this, and while the ship was yet absent, Ward made a bill of sale of the whole ship to Hubbard in London, for £4000, who, when the ship arrived at that port, obtained a new register, and sold the ship there; but sent no copy of the bill of sale to the officers of the customs at New-Castle. Heath brought an action against Hubbard, and obtained judgment for one third the amount received by the latter on the sale; because Heath on his part, had done all the statutes required of him; and the bill of sale to Hubball was void, by reason of his omission to send a copy to the custom-house at New-Castle. (1)

The mistakes or omissions of officers, naturally cannot effect the parties, so as to invalidate a transfer of the property, when the parties have performed all that the law requires, as in the case of Ratchford vs. Meadows. (2)

(n) Abbott, 85.

(1) Abbott, 86.

(2) Abbott, 90.

tion that another part-owner was not resident within twenty miles, was omitted; and the name of the master changed. Hence the bill of sale was held to be clearly void. Abbott, 82 & SS.

For the most part, the certificate of registry is conclusive proof of property, in relation to insurances and claims for repair. An English ship is required always to have the certificate on board. The English ship Betty Cathcart, Gellepsie, (i) was taken by the French, and carried into an American port. The English consul there interposed, and reclaimed her as captured within the American sea-territory; and the American court declaring it a capture made in violation of their particular neutrality, restored her. Upon an appeal had from this decision, it was agreed to sell the vessel, and to bring the proceeds into court. Penman, of Charleston, purchased her for the former owners, according to his declaration; otherwise for Simpson and Davidson, merchants in London. The French captors, however, refused to give up the register, and the British consul furnished her with a certificate, stating that the ship was and continued a British bottom. The ship, thus deprived of her papers, sailed with a British master and crew, having on board a cargo of lump sugar, for Jamaica; to proceed from thence with convoy to London. The ship was there seized for a breach of the revenue laws, and condemned; but was afterward adjudged free by Sir Wm. Scott, in one of those decisions, so replete with nobleness of soul, and real justice, as to render his name imperishable.

Having drawn this parallel between the English forms, and between the ship's papers of other powers, we are induced to express a wish that the Anglo American documents of property (possibly at the next maritime peace) might be generally adopted and introduced thus:

"That every vessel attached or admitted to a participation in the privileges of a national commerce, whether built at home or abroad, should be provided with a document in which, if practicable, the time and place of building, or of her capture and condemnation, should be set forth; where not, then the time at which she became a national vessel; thereupon an exact descrip

(0) Robinson, I. page 220.

tion, taken upon the oath of surveyors of the homeport, and a certificate of admeasurement annexed; with the name, occupation and residence of the owner; and the name and residence of the master." The act should be upon parchment, or upon the most durable paper, engrossed and granted by the highest authority of the port, who is to take the proofs of property upon the oath of the parties, and attest the same with his seal; afterwards to retain a copy thereof for record, and forward a duplicate to a regularly constituted board in the capital, where (as in England) regular tables of the national fleets should be kept for the observance of the increase and decrease of the national commerce, and the better regulation of insurances, by these accessible proofs of the age, and state of repair of every vessel. The changes of property and of the master, should be officially endorsed; so also the evidences of repair or rebuilding, if it be not found preferable, as in America, to grant a new register.

It is our wish to be useful to commerce, in being able to contribute to the simplification of documents, and in peace and in war earnestly to recommend its protection to every government. What is a nation without commerce? How flourishing, in the annals of history, were the powers that fostered, and how abject, for instance Rhodes, and Sicily, since they have abandoned commerce; and their products, from absurd prohibitions (of exports) have found neither purchasers from abroad, nor cultivation at home!

In many respects Great Britain exhibits a laudable lesson to the continent, of the solicitude with which a nation should foster and protect its commercial regulations and advantages.

As the French (and other) prize regulations, in some cases require the bill of sale to be among the ship's papers, and as in other instances even treaties provide for it; this required change in the ship's papers should be notified to foreign courtsNor can any objection be urged against this regulation, as the largest commercial nations, England, America and France, thus

sanction it.

CHAPTER V.

PAPERS APPERTAINING TO THE VOYAGE.

Books of General Reference.

HUEBNER sur la saisie des batimens neutres.-Paris, 1759.

This work in the § 10th, 3d chap. 2d part of vol. 1st, furnishes a detailed catalogue of the papers required on board of theship, which, however, contains very little, usefully applicable to these times.

MARSHALL'S Treatise on the Law of Insurance-2 vols. London, 1802,

Contains, in the 8th chap. § 5, a review of the ship's papers generally.

IN

N Denmark the owners of any vessel of above five lasts, (a) (or ten tons) intended for commercial purposes during a war, or at least the principal owner, (b) (and only such we know can be considered owners, as are either born in the country, or, before the war, have acquired a citizenship, and fixed domicil in the country,) (c) are required at the home port of the ship, or the place where the majority of the owners reside, (d) to make oath, or written affidavit, that the vessel is not foreign property, and to state the intended voyage and further destination of the vessel; whereupon the magistrate, after an inspection of the original papers, being satisfied of their regularity,

(a) Verordnung, von. 29th December, 1812 (e) § 4.

(b) § 5.

(d) § 5: