309 



AxNNUAL RKCilSTER, 1S14. 



been under weigh earlier, the de- 

 fendant would not be liable ; and 

 if it had been practicable in the 

 ordinary course of seamanship, the 

 Captain should have sailed direct; 

 but if a prudent m:in would have 

 slopped, the plaintiffs would be 

 entitled to recover. — Verdict for 

 Plaintiffs. 



Court of Exchequer. — Nov. 28, 

 1814. — Property Tax on the Pro- 

 Jits of Shipping. — The Court this 

 da\' delivered judgment on the 

 following case, which applies to 

 tlie general assessment of an im- 

 portant branch of the revenue : 



The Attorney-General v. Bor- 

 radaile. — The defendant was pro- 

 secuted by information of the At- 

 torney-General, for the penalty of 

 50/. incurred by his neglect to 

 make a return, under the Property 

 Act, of the joint profits, as ma- 

 naging owner, and precedent act- 

 ing partner, in the ship Elphin- 

 stone, of which the defendant, and 

 other persons whose names ap- 

 peared on the register, were part 

 owners, and which ship was char- 

 tered to the East India Company. 



A verdict was taken for the 

 Crown last Michaelmas Term, in 

 the penalty subject to the opinion 

 of the Court, on a special verdict 

 on the point, — 1st, Whether each 

 ship of this description was a se- 

 parate adventure or concern in the 

 nature of trade : and 2nd, If so, 

 whether the defendant, as manag- 

 ing owner, and ship's husband, 

 receiving and dihtributing the 

 whole of the earnings, was the 

 precedentacting partner, and liable 

 to make the return of the whole 

 of such profits, in order to a joint 

 assessment and payment of the 



Property Tax in the first instance, 

 and before a dividend or distribu- 

 tion, as in other partnership con- 

 cerns. 



The case having been twice ar- 

 gued before their Lordships, the 

 Lord Chief Baron delivered the 

 opinion of the Court in terms, 

 that each ship was clearly a sepa- 

 rate adventure in the nature of 

 trade, and was a partnership con- 

 cern, of which the defendant was 

 liable to make the return of the 

 whole profits, as managing owner 

 or husband, and precedent acting 

 partner, in order to a joint assess- 

 ment, in respect of each ship, dis- 

 tinct from any other concern. — 

 Judgment for the Crown in one 

 penalty of 50/, 



This decision of the Court esta- 

 blishes the liability of the manag- 

 ing owner, or husband, of every 

 trading ships, to return the whole 

 profits, as precedent acting partner, 

 under a penalty for default; and 

 confirms the general construction 

 and practice, under the Property 

 Act, in regard to a joint and dis- 

 tinct assessment of the profits of 

 each ship as a separate partner- 

 ship adventure. 



Courtof King's Bench. — Thurs- 

 day, Dec. 22. — Carstairs, v. Stein, 

 — The Court was occupied from 



9 o'clock in the morning till after , 



10 o'clock at night in trying a 

 most important action upon the 

 case directed by the Lord Chan- 

 cellor between the assignees of 

 Messrs. Kensington and Co. the 

 bankers, and the assignees of 

 Rlessrs. Stein, Smith, and Co. who 

 were made defendants by the 

 Chancellor's order, with power to 

 examine them ; a power of which 

 the defendants' counsel availed 



