PRINCETON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 22101 010762498 ADVERTISEMENT. THIS imperfect attempt to illustrate the jurisdiction and practice of the Admiralty is divided into three parts. In the first, the reader will find a brief historical examination of the jurisdiction which the Admiralty at different times, has claimed and supported; and the inroads that have been made upon it by the courts of common law, are so far indicated as to enable the curious to pursue the subject. The second part contains a translation of the Praxis Suprema Curiæ Admiralitatis, by Francis Clerke, who was registrar of the Court of Arches during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. In matters of Admiralty, Lord Hardwicke considered this work as of " unquestionable credit*," and I do not know that the correctness of his opinion has ever been disputed. "I writ nothing" says Clerke, in another book, "but what I have known and seen practised." The first edition was printed in 1679. A translation of the third edition, which is the earliest that I have seen, was published in the year 1722,"for the benefit and use of all such as are concerned in the admiralties of England, all masters of ships, mariners and other seafaring persons." That edition was from a surreptitious copy of Mr. Clerke's MS. and is both incorrect and incomplete. It was not until the year 1791 that justice was done to the author by the publication of a new edition faithfully collated with * 1. Atk. 296. 7663 427 (RECAP) JUN -3 1907 210162 two MS. copies in the hand writing of Dr. Wyseman and Dr. Lloyd. To this edition, which has been used in the present translation, large additions have been made in the volume now offered to the Bar, and the translator has endeavoured to incorporate the ju risdiction and practice of the District Courts of the United States. In the third part, the practitioner will find a collection of precedents which may be useful to those whose experience is not extensive. The practice of our admiralty is yet in a crude state, and all that can be done, at present, is to select such precedents as have been approved. The admiralty jurisdiction of the United States, in the first instance, is committed to a variety of persons, and though appeals are allowed in certain cases, yet in many the poverty of the parties or the small value of the sum in dispute prevents a resort to the superiour tribunal. Hence the difficulty of obtaining uniformity of decision. To exhibit and reconcile the decisions of the different districts is a task which is not attempted in this work. The author does not attempt the discussion of the principles of maritime law, but he has confined himself to the manner in which those principles are applied. His attempt is about to be arraigned at the bar of publick opinion, and the trial cannot be anticipated without a degree of solicitude which he neither wishes nor affects to conceal. From the liberality of his profession he may confidently expect every indulgence that is due to a desire of being useful to himself and to others. Baltimore, 20th Sept. 1809. HISTORICAL ESSAY ON THE CIVIL JURISDICTION OF THE ADMIRALTY. THE origin and antiquity of the title, Admiral, have exercised the research and divided the opinions of many profound writers upon this subject. Such an officer is to be found in most kingdoms that border upon the sea; and it is said that Philip of France was the first who conferred that title in civilized Europe. This was in 1284 or 1286, but the same writer finds the name of this officer occurring once in the history of France, so early as the year 558. 1 And. Com. 29.By Du-Cange we are informed that the Sicilians were the first, and the Genoese the next, who gave the denomination of admiral to the commanders of their naval armaments; and that it was derived from the Saracen or Arabic word amir or emir, a general name for any commanding officer. According to some writers the first admiral who is recorded in English history, was in the reign of Edward I. in 1297, and the first title of Admiral of England which was expressly conferred upon a subject, was given by patent from Richard II. in 1387, to the Earl of Arundel and Surry. But Spelman is of opinion that the title was first used in the reign of Henry III. because it does not occur in the laws of Oleron enacted in 1266, nor is mentioned by Bracton, who wrote about that time: and in a charter, 8 Henry, which granted the office to Richard de |