Page:Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, Volume 1.djvu/324

 310 //. FROM THE llOO'S TO THE 1800'S the court of Admiralty. A statute of 1540 ^ gave to the Admiral a jurisdiction in matters of freight and damage to cargo. The patents of Henry VIII.'s admirals not only omit the proviso to be found in earlier patents, confining their jurisdiction within the limits marked out by the statutes of Richard II. 's reign, they also insert a non obstante clause dispensing with those statutes. ^ We begin to be able to clas- sify the jurisdiction of the court under the following heads : —— (1) Ordinary or "Instance" Jurisdiction. This com- prises — (a) Criminal Jurisdiction. (6) Civil Jurisdiction, (c) Admiralty Droits. (2) Prize Jurisdiction. (1) Ordinary or Instance Jurisdiction. (a) Criminal Jurisdiction. We have seen that after 1363 the Admiral's criminal juris- diction was recognised as exclusive on the high sea.^ This exclusive jurisdiction could be exercised over British subjects, over the crew of a British ship whether subjects or not, over any one in cases of piracy at common law.* It could be exer- cised over no other persons.^ The act of Richard II. recog- nised also a jurisdiction in cases of homicide and mayhem committed in ships below the bridges.® This jurisdiction was, » 32 Henry VIII. c. 14. • The patent of Henry Duke of Richmond (1525) gives him power " audiendi et terminandi querelas omnium contractuum inter dominos proprietaries navium ac mercatores seu alios quoscunque cum eisdem dominis ac navium ceterorumque vasorum proprietariis pro aliquo per mare vel ultra mare expediendo contractuum omnium et singulorum con- tractuum ultra mare proficiendorum vel ultra mare contractuum et in Anglia et ceterorum omnium quae ad officium Admiralli tangunt. . . . Aliquibus statutis, actubus, ordinationibus, sive restrictionibus in con- trarium actis editis ordinatis sive provisis, non obstantibus," Select Pleas of the Admiralty i Iviii. The later cu)mmissions are very similar; but they omit the non obstante clause. » 13 Rich. II. St. 1 c. 5; 15 Rich. II. c. 3. • Stephen, H. C. L. ii 27-29. In cases of piracy by statute, jurisdic- tion only exists over British subjects. • R. v. Keyn (1877) 2 Ex Div. 63. The effect of the decision was over- ruled by the Territorial Waters Act (41, 42 Vict. c. 73). The Act de- clares that offences committed by anyone within the territorial waters of the crown, i. e. on the sea to such a distance as is necessary for the defence of the dominions of the crown, are within the jurisdiction of the Admiral. • 15 Rich. II. c 3.