White v. Whitman, 1853, 1 Curt. 495 White v. Willis, 2 Wil. 87 Whitney et al. v. Emmett et al., 1831, 1 Baldw. 316 Whitton v. Brig Commerce, 1798, 1 Pet. Adm. 160 252, 286, 289, 290 148 250, 266 250, 265, 319, 348 252 452 41, 44 403 409 409 332 74 215, 217 Willard & ux. Admr. v. Dorr, 1823, 3 Mason, 161 250 326 80 130 181, 188, 250 552 107, 123 125 252 326 413, 421 522 107 172 250, 318 251 125 251 123 326 ADMIRALTY JURISPRUDENCE. CHAPTER I. THE Sources from which an accurate knowledge of Admiralty Law may be derived, are many and various. In theory, the United States may seem to have borrowed it directly from England; yet, in practice, reference to other countries and codes is indispensable to consummate that knowledge. No jurist can satisfy his own mind as to the nature of Admiralty Jurisprudence, or extent of Admiralty Jurisdiction, by a simple recurrence to the legislation or adjudged cases of England alone; and no treatise. upon this subject would be either complete or comprehensive which did not also largely draw from what are, in Europe, denominated the Foreign or Marine Ordinances. By this expression are meant certain maritime codes, which, at different periods in the growth and history of commerce, have become incorporated into the Marine Jurisprudence of Europe. The Maritime Ordinances or Codes originated in the Middle Ages, and not with the so-called great powers of modern Europe; nor is their origin, to any great extent, to be traced back to ancient Greece or Rome, save only such portions thereof as may have survived the wreck of time, and come down to modern times, |