This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1820 edition. Excerpt: ...belong to different persons, but here they belong to the same persons, and if that were the fact, the absurdity would follow of the same person paying to himself. But the fact is directly the reverse, for the ship saved belongs to the East India Company, but the cargo to other individuals, who let her upon freight to the Company, and under a particular charter, but which charter, of course, leaves her the entire property where it found it, aud iu all respects where the engagements of the charter-party do not apply, as independent a property as that iu auy other vessel whatever. The commander, officers, and crew, are all appointed by the owneri they cannot be transferred to a Company's ship at the pleasure of the Company, as the King's officers and crew are, at the pleasure of the crown, to another of his Majesty's ships; it is merely by the voluntary act or contract of the owner and commander that the voyage is undertaken, for the Company had no other right so to employ her. All argument, therefore, totally fails that is built upon identity of interest. Again, it has been alleeed that the Company is Bot subject Vol, X. 2 S to salvage in the case of ships generally employed in their service j but the argument has tinned out very short of that extent, being confined to ships associated together, and sailing under particular instructions for mutual aid aud protection. How far does usage extend upon this point? Is it universal, or is it restricted to the latter case? Certainly, where au exemption is claimed from a submission to a general right, the exemption ought to be so set forth as to be intelligible in its extent. An indefinite claim of exemption is rank. It is not enough to say that the immediate claim comes within the smallest extent, ...