reserving the captain's civil responsibility to the said shipowner.

G. 741, I. 664, P. 667. The Codes of Germany and Italy in words are limited to the case of a previous collision causing a second; that of Portugal is in general terms as here, and in principle agrees with the law of England in such case. M. & P. 624; The Thames, 44 L.J. (Ad.) 23; The Industry, L.R. 3, A. & E. 303; The Sisters, 1 P.D. 117.

832. Ifin consequence of a hurricane or other unavoidable cause, a vessel which is properly moored or anchored fouls. vessels near her and does damage, the damage done will be considered as Particular Average on the vessel that is fouled.

This section appears to be only a special case of the general principle, already covered by the preceding Art. 830 (q.v.).

There is a curious special provision in this case in Russia (R. 1113, 1114), and Holland (H. 560), by which in such case the vessel which drags or drifts bears her own damage and pays half to other vessels, and, what is even more remarkable, in Holland this half is assessed as General Average on ship and cargo.

833. A vessel which, after a collision, founders immediately, and also one, which, being compelled to make for a port to repair the damage received in the collision, is lost on the way or is obliged to run ashore to save herself, is deemed to be lost in consequence of the collision. G. 739, H. 539, P. 670. The Mellona, 3 W. Rob. 7.

834. If ships which come into collision have pilots on board performing their functions at the time of the collision, their presence does not exempt the captains from responsibility, but gives them a right to compensation from the pilots, without prejudice to any criminal liability incurred by the latter.

B. Bk. II., 228, G. 740, I. (M.M.C. 66, 107, 199-201), P. 672, R. 1218, and Appendices.

In case of voluntary pilotage it appears to be universally law that the shipowner is liable, with a remedy over against the pilot if he is at fault. In the case of Trinity House Pilots, however, this remedy over is limited to the amount of their bond, £100; in some countries, as Italy (I.M.M.C. 199), Portugal (P. 672), and Russia (R. 1218), the remedy over goes beyond the pilot himself to the pilotage fund or local authorities.

Compulsory pilotage, i.e., a defence to an action for damage by collision that the vessel at the time was under the control of a pilot by compulsion of law, and that, the relation of master and servant not existing between him and the shipowner, the shipowner cannot be held responsible for his acts of negligence, is a valid defence in England and Germany (G. 740), whilst by the law of Belgium (B. Bk. II., 228) (The Halley, L.R. 2 P.C. 204), and of France (The Augusta, 6 Asp. M.L. 58, 161), and in the Danube (The Agnes Otto, 12 P.D. 56), and Suez Canal (The Guy Mannering, P.D. 132), under local regulations, it is no defence. The point appears to be that in the States where his presence is a defence, he supersedes the captain, and is in command; in those where it is no defence, he is merely an adviser; as to his position in Italy, see note (FOREIGN MARITIME LAWS; II. ITALY, M.M.C. 201), ante. In the United States it sometimes is, and sometimes is not, a defence, the test appearing to be that if the shipowner has a choice of selecting which pilot he likes from the general body, his employment, though compulsory, is no defence, whilst if the first one who appears must be employed, it is. See Smith v. Cowdry, 1 How. 28, The China, 7 Wallace 53, 67, Law Times, May 14th, 1881, Parsons on Shipping, Vol. II., p. 117, n. It is difficult to distinguish the case of a pilot engaged specially to take a ship from Gravesend to sea, and selected from the whole body of pilots who have certificates or licenses, and that of a captain engaged specially to take a ship on her voyage, and who must be selected from those who have masters' certificates.

835. Actions for recovery of damages and losses arising out of collisions will be barred, unless a protest or declaration is presented within twenty-four hours before the proper authority of the port in which the collision occurs, or in the first port the vessel comes into if in Spain, or before the Spanish Consul if the collision happens in a foreign country.

B. Bk. II., 232, 233, F. 436, G. 906 (2), 908 (3), H. 742, I. 665, N. 79, Sw. 284, 286. E. 274, 275.

P. 673,

There is no corresponding provision to this in English Law, and, indeed, the ordinary Statutes of Limitation do not apply. See the Kong Magnus (1891, P. 223), where a claim 16 years old was held not to be barred by laches.

836. A default in making a protest does not prejudice. those interested so far as personal injuries or damage done to cargo are concerned, when they were not on board the ship, or not in a condition to make their wishes known. B. Bk. II., 231, I. 665, P. 673.

Though not expressed in the Code, this appears also to be the case in France (Charles Quint and Ville de Brest, 6 R.I.D.M. 35).

837. The civil liability incurred by shipowners in the cases mentioned in this section is understood to be limited to the value of the ship with all its appurtenances and freights earned on the voyage.

B. Bk. II., 7, F. 216, G. 452, 736, H. 321, I. 491, N. 65, 79, Sw. 49, 172, 175, E. 30, M.S.A., 1862, § 54.

The general rule of Continental States is that the liability of owners for the acts of their captains is limited to the value of ship and freight, and can be cleared by abandoning them; this is also the law in the United States. In England, however, the liability is limited to a sum of £8 per ton in case of damage to property, and an additional £7 per ton where there is loss of life or personal injury. By the new Code of Portugal (P. 492) the liability of shipowners in case of collision appears to be unlimited.

838. When the value of the vessel and its appurtenances does not suffice to cover the liabilities, compensation due for loss of life or personal injury will be entitled to priority.

I. 661.-See note (a) to that Article, which, however, requires a slight emendation, as the new Portuguese Code (P. 673 (1)), like the Belgian Code, recognises claims for loss of life and personal injuries, and by the Article here considered, Spain, like Italy, gives priority to such claims, and it has been decided in England that where there is loss of life or personal injury, as well as damage to property, the life and personal injury claims have the exclusive benefit of the £7 per ton, the difference between £15 and £8, and then for the balance of the claim have an equal right to share in the remaining £8 per ton. The Victoria, 13 P.D. 125. The latter part of the note relating to case of the Sailing Ship Garston Co. is now inaccurate, owing to the decision of the House of Lords in the case of The Xantho, 12 App. Cas. 503. See Note to Art. 830, ante.

839. If there is a collision between Spanish ships in foreign waters, or if, after a collision on the high seas, the vessels arrive at a foreign port, the Spanish Consul in such port will institute a summary enquiry into the matter, and send the papers to the Captain - General of the nearest department for further prosecution and determination.

This provision is new. Protests and claims had to be made in the first port reached. See note to Italy (I. 665).

SECTION IV.

Shipwrecks.

840. The losses and depreciations that a ship and its cargo sustain in consequence of wreck or stranding will be at the separate account of the several owners, who will share in the same way in whatever is salved.

G. 703, I. 646 (1), P. 635 (2), 637.

841. If the wreck or stranding be caused by the default or want of care and skill of the captain, or if the vessel went to sea insufficiently repaired and equipped (i.e., in an unseaworthy condition), the shipowner or shippers may demand compensation from the captain for injury done to the ship or cargo by the casualty, in conformity with what is laid down in Articles 610, 612, 614, and 621.

This is probably the law of all civilised States, even though not expressly stated, in the case of a master of a ship, that a person injured should obtain satisfaction, if he can get it, from the person injuring him; the more important question is how far the shipowner and the ship itself are liable for the acts of the master. See Arts. 587, 588, and 837 ante.

842. There is a special lien on property salved from a wreck for the payment of salvage, and its claim must be satisfied by the owners of the goods before they are delivered to them, and in priority to any other charge on them if they are sold.

B. Bk. II., 3 (6), H. 313 (1), 566, G. 753, I.M.M.C. 133, P. 689.

843. If several vessels are sailing on a joint undertaking (en conserva), and one of them is wrecked, the cargo that is salved will be divided amongst the rest in proportion to what each can take.

If any of the captains refuse without just cause to receive his share, the captain who has been wrecked will enter a protest against him before two sea officials for all losses or injuries which may ensue, and extend the protest within 24 hours of his arrival at his first port, and include it in the

proceedings which he must institute in accordance with the rules laid down in Art. 612.

If it is not possible to transship all the wrecked cargo on to the other vessels, things of greatest value and least bulk, as pointed out by the captain in agreement with the officers of his vessel, will have priority in salvage.

844. The captain who has collected goods salved from a wreck will prosecute his voyage to his port of destination, and on his arrival will place them, under Judicial control, at the disposal of their lawful owners.

If the goods can be discharged in the port to which they are consigned by a deviation from the voyage, the captain may put in to that port, if the shippers and super-cargoes who are present, and the officers and passengers on board the ship consent; but he cannot justify so doing, even with such consent, in war time, or when the port is difficult or dangerous to approach.

All expenses of such putting into port will be on account of the owners of the cargo (so carried) as well as the payment of such freight as, having regard to the circumstances of the case, is fixed upon by agreement or Judicial decision.

This legalises, under certain restrictions, a deviation, not merely to save property, but to benefit salved property, contrary, in both cases, to English Law. See Scaramanga v. Stamp, 5 C.P.D. 295.

845. If there is no one in the ship having an interest in the cargo who can satisfy the expenses and freights resulting from the salvage, the Judge or Competent Court may order the sale of the portion necessary to satisfy them by its proceeds. Resort may be had to the same process where the preservation of the cargo is attended with danger, or when a year has elapsed without its lawful owners being ascertained.

In both cases the proceedings will be conducted with the publication and formalities ordered in Art. 579, and the