United States v. Morton
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Indictment under section 1 of the act of March 3, 1855 (10 Stat. 715). The case was, that the defendant [David H. Morton] was duly appointed master of an American vessel, in a port of the West Indies, on the death of the former master, and brought thence to the port of Boston certain passengers in excess of one to every two tons of the vessel.
Read the full summary
Indictment under section 1 of the act of March 3, 1855 (10 Stat. 715). The case was, that the defendant [David H. Morton] was duly appointed master of an American vessel, in a port of the West Indies, on the death of the former master, and brought thence to the port of Boston certain passengers in excess of one to every two tons of the vessel. The evidence tended to show that the former master had made some oral agreement with the passengers, and that they were perhaps on board before the defendant's appointment. The judge ruled, that the defendant was not bound by the illegal agreement of…
1Opinion of the Court
LOWELL, District Judge.
I am satisfied with the rule laid down at the trial. A construction of the statute which should hold the master responsible only for contracts made by him personally would annul it. In many eases, perhaps in most, the contract is made with the consignee or agent of the ship, and the passengers may come on board without the master’s previous knowledge or assent. The statute requires him to see that its provisions are respected; and it must be held, that his permitting such passengers to remain on board is a taking on board. The mere physical fact of coming to the ship is…
2Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. NicholsonDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1882