Boston Towboat Co. v. Winslow, 76 F. R. 595; The Robert Graham Dun, 70 Id. 270, 63 Id. 167; The Kenilworth, 64 Id. 890.

United States v. Smith, 95 U. S. 536, 24 L. ed. 517; The Grace Lothrop 95 U. S. 527, 24 L. ed. 514, 1 Holmes, 342; Burton v. Frye, 139 Mass. 131; United States v. Rose, 14 F. R. 681, 12 Id.

576; United States v. French, 14 Phila. 497, 9 F. R. 369; The Bark Brothers, 10 Ben. 400; United States v. The City of Mexico, 11 Blatch. 489, 7 Ben. 31; United States v. Idell, 16 Int. Rev. Rec. 147.

United States v. The Thomas W. Haven, 3 F. R. 347; The Grace Lothrop, 95 U. S. 527, 24 L. ed. 514, 1 Holmes, 342.

Master engaging seamen in foreign port
without complying with provisions of
law

Master failing to post copy of shipping

agreement.

Master shipping seamen without articles

R. S., s. 4518.

R. S., s. 4519.
R. S., s. 4521.

Seamen who go on board and go to work as mariners voluntarily, without a valid contract, may be required to perform such services as are necessary for navigation, but they may leave at any port without forfeiting the wages earned, although they cannot require the owner to return them to the port of shipment. The Occidental, 101 F. R. 997. Whenever a clause in the articles is ambiguous, the meaning most favorable to the seamen shall prevail, the want of clearness not being their fault. Wope v. Hemenway, 1 Sprague, 300, 2 Curtis, 301. Shipping articles providing for a "voyage from Boston to Valparaiso or other ports of the Pacific Ocean, at and from thence home direct, or via ports in East Indies or Europe," are not sufficiently definite, and the seamen would not be bound by the articles to any service after reaching Valparaiso. Id.; The Samuel Ober, 15 F. R. 621. See Magee v. The Moss, Gilpin, 219, 226; Johnson v. Dalton, 1 Cow. 543; Bartlett v. Wyman, 14 Johns. 260. The Act of 20 July, 1790, does not make the written agreement conclusive upon the seamen. They have often been permitted to prove that the shipping articles did not set forth correctly the

agreement; and the courts, without impeaching proofs, will hold to be void such agreements in the articles as are injurious to the seamen. The Juliana, 2 Dod. 504; The Minerva, 1 Hagg. 347; Harden v. Gordon, 2 Mason, 541; Abbott on Shipp., ed. 1830, 435; The Cypress, Blatch. & H. 83, 87. Seamen's contracts to ship for the voyage are terminable at the will of the parties on arriving at port by the dismasting of the vessel in a collision. Thorson v. Peterson, 9 F. R. 517. Where the shipping articles are silent as to wages, the seaman may prove by parol what wages were stipulated for, or he may claim the highest rate payable at the port of shipment within the three months next preceding the date of the articles. The Warrington, Blatch. & H. 335. See Rollins . E. O. Stanard, 4 F. R. 750.

Stipulations operating to the disadvantage of seamen will not be enforced against them by courts of admiralty, unless it appears from extrinsic evidence that the seamen fully understood the stipulations, and received an adequate consideration therefor; as, for example, a stipulation that they will prosecute their suits for wages only in courts of common law, amounting to a waiver of their lien upon the vessel. The Sarah Jane, Blatch. & H. 401. A stipulation provided that all differences should be referred to arbitration. It was held that when the wages due were agreed upon and demanded, but payment was refused, there was no difference, within the meaning of the stipulation. Id. When the seamen after the vessel has put to sea compel the master by threats to enter into new shipping articles at a higher rate of wages, they are void. Bartlett v. Wyman, 14 Johns. 260. Originally in the Act of 1790 this and § 4521 were found together. Old cases on this section before the revision are The Australia, 3 Ware, 240; The Atlantic, Abb. Adm. 451, 470; Page v. Sheffield, 2 Curt. 377, 1 Sprague, 285; Jameson v. Ship Regulus, 1 Pet. Adm. 212; Walton v. Ship Neptune, Id. 142; Wolverton v. Lacey, 8 Law Rep. N. s. 672.

Shipping commissioner, etc., taking un

lawful fees

R. S., s. 4595.

Chapter Two. - wages and effects.
Paying seamen advance wages.

21 Dec., 1898, s. 24;
30 Stat. 763.
26 April, 1904, 33
Stat. 308.

Patterson v. Bark Eudora, 190 U. S. 169, 47 L. ed. 1002, 110 F. R. 430; The Alnwick, 132 F. R. 117; Kenney v. Blake, 125 Id. 672; The Kestor, 110 Id. 432; The Alexander M. Lawrence, 101 Id. 135; United States v. Nelson, 100 Id. 125; The Staghound, 97 Id. 973; The J. D. Peters, 78 Id. 368; The Eclipse, 53 Id. 276; The Samuel E. Spring, 27 Id. 764; United States v. King, 23 Id. 138; The State of Maine, 22 Id. 734.

other than that provided by law. . R. S, s. 4549.

Patterson v. Empire Transportation Co., 111 F. R. 931; The Alexander M. Lawrence, 101 Id. 135; The Pennsylvania, 98 Id. 744; United States v. French, 9 Id. 369; Walsh v. The Louisiana, 4 Id. 751; The Bark Brothers, 10 Ben. 400.

The T. F. Whiton, 10 Ben. 369; The Mentor, 4 Mason, 102. See The Lilian M. Vigus, 10 Ben. 385; Ardrey v. Karthaus, Taney, 379. In cases of the misconduct or negligence of the seamen, reasonable

deductions have been allowed. Bates v. Seabury, 1 Sprague, 433; Brown v. The Neptune, Gilp. 89; The Hudson, 6 F. R. 830; The Coldstream, 4 Sawyer, 172. In many cases deductions have been disallowed. Macpherson v. Blytheswood, 1 Phila. 546; Chatfield v. The Wolga, 3 L. Repr. 387; Wilson v. The Mary, Gilp. 31; Magee v. The Moss, Id. 219; Johnson v. The Coriolanus, Crabbe, 239; The Saratoga, 2 Gall. 164; Pitman v. Hooper, 3 Sumner, 50; The Lethe, Bee, 423. See Brice v. The Nancy, Id. 429; Hart v. The Littlejohn, 1 Pet. Adm. 115; Howland v. The Lavinia, Id. 213; Pedro v. Allen, 1 Lowell, 435; The Hudson, Olc. 396. As to a minor, see The Lucy Anne, 3 Ware, 253. The provisions of this section do not apply to cases within the provisions of § 4604. Stevenson v. Hare, 2 Sawyer, 583. See cases under § 4549.

The C. F. Sargent, 95 F. R. 179; United States v. Givings, 1 Sprague, 75; The Hibernia, Id. 78; United States v. Ashton, 2 Sumner, 13; The William Harris, 1 Ware, 367.