A court being thus permanently established, it was considered expedient to unite the office of Advocate-General, who was the Attorney of the Admiralty Court, with that of the AttorneyGeneral, and accordingly the latter officer was thenceforth also commissioned as the former.

On the 13th of June, 1702, John Bridges was appointed by Governor Cornbury and Council, Judge of Vice-Admiralty of the Province of New York.

In 1703, April 1st, Roger Mompesson was commissioned as Judge of the Admiralty Court of Massachusetts Bay, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, the Jerseys and Pennsylvania.

This extended jurisdiction was subsequently curtailed. On the 5th of October, 1721, Francis Harison was appointed Judge of Admiralty for New York, Connecticut and the Jerseys, in place of Caleb Heathcote, deceased.

In 1738, on the 16th of January, Lewis Morris, Jr., was appointed a judge of the Admiralty Court for New York, Connecticut, and East and West Jerseys, and on the twenty-third, Capt. John Fred was made marshal and sergeant at mace, of the said court.

On the 5th of November, 1760, a commission issued to Lewis Morris, John Chambers, Daniel Horsmanden, David Jones, William Smith, John Cruger, Simon Johnson and Robert R. Livingston, to hold a court for trying and punishing crimes and offenses committed upon the seas.1.

On the 2d of August, 1762, Richard Morris was commissioned by Governor Monckton and Council, Judge of the Court of ViceAdmiralty of New York, to hold his office during pleasure. In 1763 (April 7th) Richard Nicholls was appointed by the High Court of Admiralty, in England, register and scribe of acts, causes and businesses depending in the respective Courts of Vice-Admiralty of New York, Connecticut, and East and West Jerseys.'

Judge Morris and Mr. Nicholls still held their offices in June, 1774, as appears from a report of that date, made by Governor Tryon, relative to the Province of New York. Thomas Ludlow was then marshal. The report also states that the judge, register

1 Record of Commissions, 5, 178-180. 2 Record of Commissions, 4, 149.

and marshal held their offices from the Crown, and were without salary; and that the court proceeded after the course of the civil law in matters within its jurisdiction which, at the time, had been so enlarged by divers statutes as to include almost every breach of the acts of trade.'

In 1763, the fourth year of George III, an act was passed in Parliament relative to the trade of the American Colonies and Plantations; in the forty-first section of which it was directed "that all the forfeitures and penalties inflicted by this or any other act or acts of Parliament relating to the trade and revenues of the said British Colonies or Plantations in America, which shall be incurred there, shall and may be prosecuted, sued for and recovered in any Court of Record, or in any Court of Admiralty in the said Colonies or Plantations where such offense shall be committed, or in any Court of Vice-Admiralty which may or shall be appointed over all America (which Court of Admiralty or Vice-Admiralty is hereby respectively authorized and required to proceed, hear and determine the same) at the election of the informer or prosecutor."""

This section was altered, in 1768, by an act in which it was directed as suits for such penalties and forfeitures "in one court only of Vice-Admiralty over all America" might, from the distance from where the cause of action should arise, be attended with great inconvenience, that, from the first of September of that year, "all forfeitures and penalties inflicted by any act or acts of Parlia ment, relating to the trade or revenues of the British Colonies or Plantations in America, may be prosecuted, sued for and recovered in any Court of Vice-Admiralty appointed or to be appointed, and which shall have jurisdiction within the Colony, plantation or place where the cause of such prosecution or suit shall have arisen.”

This and the preceding section led to the act of February 14, 1787, subsequently alluded to.

Up to 1768, appeals from this court lay to the High Court of Admiralty in England. In that year, however, it was enacted that in all cases of prosecution or suit commenced and determined

in any Court of Admiralty in the Colony or Plantation where the offense was committed, for any penalty or forfeiture inflicted by any parliamentary act relating to the trade and revenues of the British Colonies and Plantations in America, the aggrieved party might appeal to any Court of Vice-Admiralty appointed or to be appointed, and which should have jurisdiction within such Colony, Plantation or Place; which court was directed to hear and determine the appeal.'

Governor Tryon, in the report of 1774, alluded to, says: "From this court (the Court of Admiralty) an appeal lies to a Supreme Court of Admiralty, lately established in North America, by statute; before this establishment, an appeal only lay to the High Court of Admiralty of England."

About 1774, Judge Morris resigned his office, having sided with the Colony against the encroachments of the British Crown. On the 31st of July 1776, the New York Provincial Convention appointed him Judge of the High Court of Admiralty of the State of New York. It also appointed John McKesson Register, and Robert Benson Marshal and Provost Marshal of said court." Mr. Morris declined the office, and on the fifth of August ensuing, Lewis Graham was appointed by the said Convention in his stead,* and commissioned on the 17th February, 1778.

3

On the 25th of November, 1775, the Continental Congress recommended the several Legislatures of the United Colonies to erect, as soon as possible, Admiralty Courts to determine concerning captures taken in the war existing between said Colonies and Great Britain, and to provide that all trials in such cases be had by a jury, under qualifications which the said legislatures should deem expedient. Congress, likewise, declared that in all cases an appeal should be allowed to them, or to such person or persons as they should appoint for the trial of appeals.

In 1777, Congress, after appointing and discharging two other committees, appointed on the thirteenth of October a standing com

1 British Statutes at Large, vol. 13, p. 15.

2 Journal Provincial Convention, New York, 1, 550. * Journal Provincial Convention, New York, 1, 554. 'Journal Provincial Convention, New York, 1, 556. 5 Journal of Congress, 1, 260.

mittee of five of its members, they or any three to hear and finally determine upon appeals brought to said Congress from the Admiralty Courts of the respective States.' Three more members were added on the twenty-seventh of July in the next year, any three of the whole committee to hear and determine appeals."

The Articles of Confederation (entered into by the States, July 9th, 1778), by their ninth article, declared that the United States, in Congress assembled, should have the sole and exclusive right of establishing rules for deciding in all cases what captures on land or water should be legal, and in what manner prizes taken by land or naval forces in the service of the United States should be divided or appropriated; also, the same right of appointing courts for the trial of piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and of establishing courts for receiving and determining, finally, appeals in all cases of captures. They also provided that no member of Congress should be appointed a judge of any of said courts.

On the 6th of March, 1779, Congress declared that they or those appointed to determine appeals (viz., a committee of their own members) from the Admiralty Courts, had necessarily the power to examine as well into decisions on facts as decisions on the law, and decree finally thereon; and that no finding of a jury in any Admiralty Court, or court for determining the legality of captures on the high seas, could or ought to destroy the right of appeal and reëxamination of facts reserved to Congress; and that no act of any one State could or ought to destroy the right of appeals to Congress in the sense above declared.'

In 1780, however, on the fifteenth of January, there was established a court for the trial of appeals from the Courts of Admiralty in the United States, in cases of capture, denominated, by a resolution of Congress, May twenty-four of that year, "the Court of Appeals in Cases of Capture," to consist of three judges appointed and commissioned by Congress, either two of whom, in absence of the other, to hold the said court for dispatch of business. The court appointed its own register. Congress further declared, that the trials in the said court should be according to the usage of nations and not by jury.*

3 Journal of Congress, 5, 87.

1 Journal of Congress, 3, 430.

2 Journal of Congress, 4, 429.

* Journal of Congress, 6, 14.

The salaries of the judges were fixed at $2,250 each.'

On the 28th of October, 1779, Congress ordered that a Board of Admiralty should be established to superintend the naval and marine affairs of the United States, to consist of three commissioners, not Members of Congress, and two Members of Congress, any three of whom to form a board for the dispatch of business, to be subject in all cases to the control of Congress; no more than one member of the board, at any time, should belong to the same State; that there should be a secretary to the board, appointed by Congress, and a clerk, appointed by the board, and that the said board should sit in the place where Congress should be held, and all its proceedings should be inspected by Congress, or a committee appointed for that purpose, as often as might be thought proper or convenient; that the salary of each of the three commissioners who should conduct the business of the Admiralty Board should be $14,000 per annum, and that of the secretary of the board be $10,000 per annum; said salaries to be annually or oftener, if Congress should judge it expedient, revised and altered agreeably to the appreciation of the Continental currency.

On the 5th of April, 1781, Congress, by an ordinance pursuant to the Articles of Confederation, established courts for the trial of piracies and felonies committed on the high seas.'

In 1786, the salaries of the Judges of the Court of Appeals were abolished by Congress, "as the war was at an end, and the business of the court, in a great measure, done away." In lieu thereof, ten dollars a day were allowed them for attendance on and travel to and from said court.*

On the 14th of February, 1787, the New York Legislature passed an act to prevent encroachments of the Court of Admiralty of the State, in which it was directed that the said court should not meddle or hold plea of anything done within this State, but only of things done upon the sea "as it had been formerly used." That of all manner of contracts, pleas and quarrels, and of all other things done, arising within the body of any county in this State, as well by land as by water, and also of wreck of the sea,

1 Journal of Congress, 6, 182.

2 Journal of Congress, 5, 395–397.

3 Journal of Congress, 7, 76.

✦ Journal of Congress, 11, 33-123.