ENPages
(seq. 16)
At the Council Chamber Whitehalls the 25. of January 1759
By the Right Honorable the Lord of the Committee of Council for hearing Appeales from the Plantations.
Upon a Motion this day made to their Lordships praying, that a Day may be appointed to hear the Appleal of Robert Ritchie, late Master of the ship or I now called the Elizabeth, from a sentence given in the Vice Admiralty Court of the Island of Antigua, on the 2nd of November 1756, upon a Libell exhibited in the said Vice Admiralty Court, by John Dearmon Nanton, as traiter of His Majestys Customs, for the Port of Old Road in the saide Island, for condemnation of the said I now and her cargo, for having imported into that Island sundry commoditys contrary to Law; And also further praying, in regard no appearance hath been entered for the said John Dearmon Nanton, to the said Appeal, although upwards of two years are expired since the said sentence was given, that therefore the usual Summons may be affixed on the Royal Exchange, and in Lloyds Coffee House - Their Lordships are thereupon pleased to order that the said appeal be heard at this Committee on Thursday the 22d. of February next, at six of the clock in the evening; And that a Summons be affixed on the Royal Exchange and elsewhere in the usual Manner, to require the said John Dearmon Nanton, to enter his Appearance forthwith, and to come prepared to be heard thereupon by his Counsel learned in the Law, on the said 22d. of February next. -
W:Blair
(seq. 19)
Copy Opinion However the witnesses of [?] in preparatorio may differ in their evidence yet they all agree that the Castor and Pollux were engaged with and fought the two French Ships & whether they struck to the Argyl or to them the privateers will be Intitled to a share of the prizes Nor does it seems to me to be very material to which of them they were Condemned since the rights of the others is reserved by the [?] It will not therefore I [?] be advisable for the Argyl and [?] to prosecute their Appeal but rather to proceed to Judgment on the merits to of the Claims and if they shall be aggreived by the final [?] they may Appeal therefrom. Besides I am Inclined to think that their position for a [?] will be looked upon as a prosecution of their Appeal & that they will not be permitted to proceed upon it for as by the Appeal they had declined the Jurisdiction of the Judge of the Vice Admiralty Court by that petition they submitted themselves to it again & did an Act Inconsistent with their Appeal which is a prosecution of it. As to the share which the privateers are Intitled to and in what manner the Division is to be made is a point of more doubt. The Act of Parliament & his Matys Proclamation have not provided for it nor has it come Judicially before the Court of Admiralty. The same Rule cannot comprehend both because the Proportion is settled in regard to Ships in his Matys pay but in regard to Privateers it is left to the Agreement made between the Owners of Ships Company. There seems therefore to me to be a Discretionary power in the Court according to the Circumstances of the Case and that in the present 1/4th to each of the privateers appears to be the most Equitable Division.
J Andrew
Dis Commons 14 Janry 1744
(seq. 20)
His Ma[t]ys Ship A[r]gyle Sloop [T]ame against Her [chivalrous] [His Castor] & [No flux] Rotating to 2 mi[n]s [faher] in the West Dr Andrews Opinion How the [prizes] ought to Distributed. [Faker] upon the consommation of the prizes and before [the Knips] Ship [a] Sloop had [outward] into a [gail] as the [Privateers] for sailing them [Regal] to [?] prizes.