« AnteriorContinuar »
Dames Ammi and Myrsine. 3d. The good provements of Vahl in the tribe of Calaname of Leiophyltum had been given to maria, and he has adopted the genus it previously, by Persoon, as a subgenus Miegea of Persoon in preference to Arunto be sure, but it is a Linnean rule that dinaria, Mx. which is right; but he has when a subgenus must become a genus kept the genus Orizopsis of Mx. equally its name must be retained if good ; it bad, instead of the name of Dilepyrum may be changed only when it is itself er- into which Raf. had changed it, in Med. roneous ; but to change a good name Repos. Obs. on Amer. Botany, since the into a bad one is the most absurd teme- Dilepyrum of Michaux is the Muhlenrity. Yet such absurdity has claimed bergia of Schreber, Pursh, &c. the preference of Mr. Pursh; we would 11. His Milium amphicarpon must advise him therefore, as well as those probably form a new genus Amphicarpon, who
may be inclined to follow his autho- Raf. rity, to go to school, and begin to spell 12. He has followed Wildenow, in botany, as school boys do their letters. uniting the genus Cinna, L. with Agros
As this Flora may unfortunately be- tis, but those genera are totally distinct. come the manual of our botanists, it 13. The Alopecurus carolinianus, of will be needful to point out some of the Walter, appears to be different from the most glaring errors adopted or intro- A. subaristatus of Mich. to which P. duced therein ; we shall therefore at- unites it. tempt to survey them regularly through- 14. Holcus fragrans belongs to a peout the work, following its own arrange- culiar genus Dimesia, Raf. together with ment, and adding occasional observa-' H. monticola of Bigelow. tions.
15. The species of Uniola, with 3 1. Zostera marina, Pursh, is a differ- Stamina, such as U. paniculata, must ent species 2. Stenophylla, Raf. form a peculiar‘genus Trisiola.
2. Caulinia ought to be spelt Cavo- 16. And the Festuca diandra, the tinia, from Cavolini, to whom that genus genus Diarina, Raf. Obs. in Med. Rep. was dedicated, as Befaria ought to be 17. Likewise the Veonica virginica, Bejaria.
together with the species of that genus 3. Only 3 species of Callitriche are enu- having tubular corollas, must form the merated; 10 at least exist in the Atlan- genus Callistachya Raf. Obs. in Med. tick States only, 8 of which were des- Rep. cribed in a Monography of the genus,
18. He has named a new species of sent by C. S. Rafinesque, and read be- Veronica, discovered by Lewis and fore the Linnean Society of London 2 Clarke. V. Reniformis, while Rafinesque or 3 years before 1814.
had given the same name to another 4. Ornus, adopted on the authority of new species, therefore this second spePersoon, contrary to linnean rules, simi- cies must be called V. missurica, lar to Cornus, &c. ought to be Manna. Fl. Miss. phorus.
19. He follows the wrong example of 5. Catalpa, Jussieu, is in a similar Persoon in uniting the genus Stipulicida, predicament, respecting the genus Talpa; Mx. with Polycarpon. it ought to be altered to Catalpium, as 20. He adopts the erroneous generic Talinum containing Linum, should be name of Centaurella, Mx. instead of Bar. Talinium.
tonia, Wild, while Bartonia is an ante6. Veronica Scutellata, Pursh, is differ- rior name, and Centaurella is contrary to ent from the species of Linneus and Eu- the linnean rational rules of momenclarope: V. Uliginosa, Raf.
ture, being derived from Centaurea an 7. His Gratiola aurea had been called anterior genus. We find the greatest G. lutea by Raf. in Med. Rep.
confusion introduced respecting those 8. The Heteranthera was named by two names ; Persoon has adopted both Ruiz and Pavon, in the Flora Peruviana; names as distinct genera! only changing Beauvais's name, Heterandra, is a better · Centaurella into Centaurium, which is
The H. graminea and H. limosa equally bad; while Messrs. Pursh, Nutbelong to a different genus, the Schollera tall and Sims have given the name of of Schreber, anterior to Leptanthus, Bartonia to another new genus. The Mx.
best means of correcting those blunders, 9. His Serpicula occidentalis is a dis- is to leave the name of Bartonia to the tinct genus, the name of Mx. Elodea being genus to which it was first applied, anconsimilar to Elodea of Adanson, must nulling altogether the erroneous name so be changed to Philotria.
Centaurella and Centaurium, and giving 10. He has adopted the generic im- to the new Bartonia the name of Nut
tallæ, from one of its discoverers: this 33. He has very wrongly united the has been done by Rafinesque in his genus Ampelopsis of Michaux, to CisFlorula missurica yet in manuscript, and sus, L. we invite all the American botanists 34. He has united the Viola rotundito accede thereto, instead of adopting folia of Michaux, to his Viola Clandesand propagating blunders.
tina, while they are totally different. 21. He unites the genus Isnardia with 35. His Viola bicolor is the V. tenella of Ludwigia, while he ought rather to have Raf. Obs. in Med. Rep. where it is only united all species of Ludwigia with- mentioned, but not described, owing to out petals, to the genus Isnardia.
Dr. Muhlenberg's insisting at the time on 22. His Viscum flavesceus is not such a considering it as a variety of V. arvensis, species, but probably the V. leucarpum but in 1814, he has adopted the species of Raf.in Flora Ludoviciana.
and name of Mr. Rafinesque in his gene23. Eleagnus is changed in Eleagrus, ral Catalogue! which is right.
36. In adopting the good name Hamil24. Hippophae argentea does not be- . tonia, Wild. instead of Pyrularia, Mr. long to that genus, having the flowers as he might have quoted as a synonyme in Eleagrus, and the fruit as in Hippo- Calinur, Raf. Obs. in M. R. phae ; it has been made a new genus, 37. Asclepias viridiflora was discoverand called Lepargyrea by Rafinesque in ed, named, and described by Rafinesque, Florula Missurica.
and Muhlenberg, before Pursh. 25. The ller canadensis of Michaux 38. Asclepias pedicellata and A. viridis, and Pursh, is certainly not an lier, it belong to a peculiar genus named Anthadoes not even belong to the same natural noiis, by Raf. and Acerates, by Elliot; family; but has more affinity with Rham- the first name is rather more expressive mus. It must form a new genus, which and less objectionable. Rafinesque has called Nemopanthus, in - $9. Mr. Pursh writes Gelsemiun of his Report to the Lyceum, and in his Jussieu, Gelseminum, probably from Decades of New American genera of Catesby; but Jussieu's alteration is very Plants.
proper to distinguish it in sound from 26. The Ilex myrsinites of Pursh is Jasminum : why has he not quoted as likewise a peculiar genus, but of the fa- synonymous, Jeffersonia, of Brickell? mily Ileridia ; Rafinesque has called it in Med. Rep. Pachistime.
40. He has united the Gentiana cates27. Potamogeton natans of Pursh is bei, of Walter, to the G. saponaria, not the Linnean nor European species; while they are very different species, as the same is the case with many other was proved by Dr. Macbride, in a comspecies of that genus ; see an account of munication to the Lyceum of Nat. His. the American species by Rafinesque in tory of New-York: they both belong to Med. Repos. 1811.
the genus Cutlera, Rał. as well as G. 28. He has adopted the incorrect name oclerolenca. of Onosmodium, Mx. which is derived 41. Hydrocotyle reniformis, of Walter, from Onosma, a previous genus, and was is also wrongly united with H. repanda. altered into Osmodium by Raf. in Obs. 42. He unites the genus Myrrhis, Ms. Med. Rep.
with Cherophyllum ; the Ch. claytoni of 29. He has followed Salisbury in unit- Persoon is however made a Scandir ing the G. Pyridanthera, Mx. to Diapen- by Muhlenberg! which proves that it besia ; but they are evidently two distinct longs to neither genera, but Myrrhis hapgenera of the same natural family. pens to be erroneous also, by being simi
30. The Solanum heterandrum of Nut- lar to Amyris, a previous genus, whence tall and Pursh must form a conspicuous several names have been proposed for it, and peculiar genus, to which Rafinesque Washingtonia, Osmorhiza, Gonatherus ; gives the name of C'eranthera, Decades of but these are not yet published ; the seN. G.
cond is perhaps the best. 31. Samolus valerandi of Pursh, or the 43. His Atriplex halimus, A. laciniata, American species, is different from the A. hastata, are different from the EuroEuropean, Raf. calls it S. parviflorus. peaň species, and have been called A. hali
29. Ceanothus perennis is C. herbaceus moides, A. mucronata, and A. dioica by Raf. Med. Rep.
C. S. R.
ART. 3. Report of Cases argued and determined in the circuit court of the United
States for the first Circuit. By JOHN GALLIBON, Counsellor at Law, Vol. 2, pp. 596.
WE E are happy to announce the con- of the property on bail or stipulation to
tinuation of this useful collection of abide the event of the cause ; questions of reports, containing the decisions of the proprietary interest and for citure of neuHon. Joseph Story, in the circuit court trality on account of malâ fide conduct ; for the first circuit, including the States liability of prize goods to duties, and of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and mode of collecting them; the mode of Rhode Island, for the years 1814 and compelling captors to proceed to adjudi. 1815. This learned judge is distinguish- cation, and their responsibility in case the ed for his genius, industry, and attain- property is lost or spoliated; the nature ments, and for the ardent zeal and enthu- of contraband, and the penalty for carrysjasm with which he cultivates the field ing it; the doctrine of domicil; of ranof jurisprudence; and a faithful record soms; and the extent and nature of the of his labours on the circuit, where a jurisdiction of the prize court. The degreat variety of important causes are final- cisions in these cases have either been so ly disposed of, must be proportionably satisfactory to the bar that no appeal has interesting to the profession. Mr. Galli- been entered, or they have been confirmson, the reporter, has confined himself to ed upon appeal, by the supreme court, the task of giving the arguments of coun- with the exception of a single case involvcil, and the judgments of the court; it ing a question of fact arising out of conwould have been a work of supereroga- flicting testimony. Among the judgments tion to have added notes to decisions, appealed from, and confirmed by the apwhere all the resources that could be pelate tribunal are, that of the Invincible, drawn from authorities are already ex- (p. 29.) in which it was determined that hausted, and every illustration that could the trial of prizes belongs exclusively to be derived from elementary learning has the courts of the captor's country, and been bestowed on the cases determined. that no neutral nation can at all interfere Indeed we are quite sure that there is not therein, either by a proceeding against in any English book of reports, before or the captured property, or the commissince Lord Mansfield's time, so rich a sioned cruizer, on the complaint of its own collection of decisions in every branch of citizens, or of foreigners: a case of great law, and one from which the student or importance in principle, and of daily apthe practitioner may gather so much use- plication, (affirmed in the Sup. Co. Feb. ful information. The multiplication of T. 1816, 1 Wheat. R.) that of the George, reports would cease to be lamented as an (p. 249,) a question of collusive capture, evil to the science of the law, if they where it was difficult to unravel the closewere all of the character of the work be. ly woven web of fraud by which a trade fore us.
with the enemy was to be covered under In the law of prize it settles the most the guise of hostile capture; (affirmed in important principles and rules of prize the Sup. Co.Feb.T. 1817.2 Wheat. R.282.) practice; a subject of very great interest, that of the Commercen, (p. 261.) in which and which, had it not been for the expe- the long contested question between bellirience acquired in the late war, would gerants and neutrals, whether in any, and have remained in that darkness and ob- in what cases, provisions, become contrascurity in which it seems to have been band, by the law of nations (independent the sedulous study of the practitioners at of treaties) was settled; and the penalty Doctors Commons to involve it. of confiscation was applied to provisions
Among the principles settled in the destined to the allied army in Spain dur present volume are the whole doctrine ing the late war, although Spain was respecting joint captures, and the pro- neutral as between the United States and portions in which the capturing crew are Great Britain ; (affirmed in the Sup. Co. to share; the responsibility and duties of Feb. T. 1816, 1 Wheat. 382.) The principrize agents; the presumptions and tes- ple of this last case does not, as seems to timony applicable to cases of collusive be intimated in the review of the first capture; the custody and care of the volume of Wheaton's Reports, (North prize papers, and the mode of conducting American Review, vol. 5, No. 1, p. 114.) îhe preliminary examinations; the gene- involve a recognition of the British docral rules of evidence, and in what cases trine which interdicts in war all neutral further proof is admissable ; the delivery trade not open in time of peace. In the VOL. 11.No. 111.
Commercen, the provisions were exported court in an action of trover! For if the by the special permission of the British prize court has no jurisdiction the erceptio government for the supply of their army rei judicatæ would not apply. Besides in Spain, and the principle on which the prize practice of all Europe authorizes freight was refused, is very distinguisha, such a condemnation. ble from that of the rule of 1756, and is The principles of prize law are by no rather to be referred to that by which a means, as some suppose, applicable only licensed trade is rendered illegal, or to in time of war, and to the concerns of nathat by which the confiscation of the ve- tions actually engaged in the conflict. hicle of enemy's despatches, &c. is jus- They are directly useful for a long time tified. The voyage was illegal both on ac- after peace is restored in settling various count of the contraband, and the adop- questions of maritime and commercial tion of the enemy's character, and iden- law which arise during the war, and they tification, with his interests by transport- at all times reflect light on the investigaing supplies to his army under his spe- tions of those who delight in tracing the cial permission. It was perfectly imma- analogies of law. But the value of the terial to the decision of the cause whether present volume does by no means depend the exportation of grain from Ireland to solely on the prize cases it contains. It Spain was or was not permitted in time embraces a variety of interesting deciof peace. In the case of the San Jose In- sions in commercial, chancery, and comdiano (p. 268.) it is determined that if a mon law, illustrated by elementary leartihouse of trade, established in the enemy's ing and sound juridicial logic. country, ship goods, on their own account, Among these is a most elaborate opi. to one of the partners who is domiciled nion upon the prize, instance, and crimi. in a neutral country, the whole is con- nal jurisdiction of the admiralty ; an opidemnable as prize; but if the shipment nion, which is a monuincnt of the leartbe made by order of a partner, for his ing, industry, and talents of the judge, separate account and risk, it is not liable which may fairly challenge comparison to condemnation. (This rule affirmed in with any thing that the annals of Eurothe Sup. Co. Feb. T. 1816, in the case of pean jurisprudence can boast. In this the Antonia Johanna, 1 Wheat. R.) In able and admirable opinion, it is maläthe Arabella and the Madeira, (p. 368.) tained by a most conclusive train of reathe doctrine that the prize court may soning that the original, rightsul jurisdiccondemn property lying in a neutral port, tion of the instance court of admiralty which had been before laid down by the extends over all torts committed on the Supreme Court of the United States, in high seas, and to every species of mariHudson vs. Guestier, 4 Cranch, 293, 6 time contract, including policies of insuCranch, 281, (though previously denied rance; and that all the exceptions to this by the Supreme Court of this State, in ample jurisdiction, which the courts of Depuyster vs. Wheelright, 1 Johns. R. common law in England have enforced 471,) was reviewed, and sanctioned upon with the terrors of prohibition, have been the footing of authority, upon the legis- mere usurpations of power over weaklative will as expressed in the prize act, This doctrine has been incidentaland upon the principles of public law. ly confirmed by the Supreme Court of A case was argued at the last term of the U. S. in Martin vs. Hunter, 1 Wheat. the Supreme Court of New-York, in and is followed in practice by all the Diswhich the validity of such a condemna- trict Courts from Maine to New-York, intion came again in question ; and that clusive; in which courts, suits by matelearned tribunal will doubtless see the rial men for supplies for vessels in the propriety and wisdom of conforming its port where they belong, and hypothecadecision to the prize law as laid down by tions at home, and suits by the master for the highest court of the country, for the wages, are daily entertained by proceedvery same reason that this court regard ing in rem orin personam to the great con as authoritative the decisions of the State venience of commerce, courts on questions of local law; because The position that such is the rightful they form a rule of property, which extent of the jurisdiction of the admiralty ought not to be disturbed, and which can- is supported; 1st. by historical analogies
, not be shaken without great inconve- showing that such has been its jurisdiction nience and mischief. A different course in every maritime country in Europe, might be attended with this awkward re- from time immemorial, and still remains, sult, that a condemnation in the District
, except in England only. Even in Scotland Circuit, and Supreme Courts of the
Uni- the admiralty takes cognizance of all ted States, might be reversed in a State maritime contracts and torts whatsoever;
and in the late volumes of Dow's Reports England. In both countries these courts in Parliament, there are several insur- are branches which have sprung from ance causes appealed to the house of that ancient and venerable stock, the ofJords, from the court of session in Scot- fice of Admiral, which occupies so great a land, originally brought in the admiralty portion of the military and political hiscourt of that country ; 2d. by the anti- tory of the two countries. The etymoquities of the admiralty, all proving that logy of the word serves to indicate the such was its original and rightful juris- origin of the office, and the epoch when it diction; 3d. the authorities cited by was introduced into the maritime counLord Coke in the 4th inst. 134, to nar- tries of Europe. The word Admiral, or row down the admiralty jurisdiction, Ammiral, is unquestionably derived from are reviewed and analyzed in a mas- the Arabic word emir or amira, signifyterly manner; and it is most satisfactorily ing a general officer or commander in shown that they do not support the chief, dominum vel præfectum*. In the ground taken by that disingenous and time of the crusades, by means of which illiberal enemy
every, jurisdiction but so many oriental institutions and usages his own; 4th. it is considered what effect were brought into the west of Europe, it the statutes of Richard II. and Henry IV. was introduced into France as the title were intended to have in restraining the of a commander in chief of land or sea ancient jurisdiction of the admiralty, and forces; for it was indifferently applied to it is proved that the construction of these either. Accordingly, we find that the statutes, by the courts of common law, is office, with that title, was unknown until erroneous, absurd, and inconsistent with the third dynasty of French kings, under the fragments of jurisdiction which they Charles IV. about the end of the thirstill permit the admiralty to exercise, teenth century, and made its appearance (e. g. suits for mariners wages,) and that in England about the same period, in the it is wholly irreconcileable with their ex- reign of Edward I.t After the term position of the statutes; 5th. the extent thus came to be exclusively applied to of the admiralty jurisdiction is inferred the commander in chief of marine forces, from the concession of the common law the station was filled in France with judges themselves, in the solemn agree- several illustrious characters, and in the ments of 1575 and 1632, most amply ad- scale of civil and military dignities, rankmitting and confirming the jurisdiction ed immediately after the office of conclaimed by the admiralty ; 6th. the grant stable. Among these, history distinin our constitution to the judiciary of the guishes Gaspard de Coligny, the virtuous United States, of jurisdiction over“ all chief of the Protestant party, in the civil cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdic- wars which desolated France under the tion," is expounded to refer, not to the successors of Francis I.; and Henri de admiralty jurisdiction, as acknowledged Montmorency, a leader of the Catholic by the courts of common law in Eng- faction, who resigned this office into the land at the commencement of the Ame- hands of Louis XIII. in 1626, by whom rican revolution, or at the time of the it was suppressed, and that of Grand emigration of our ancestors ; but either Master, Chief, and Superintendent Geas acknowledged and exercised in the neral of the navigation and commerce United States, at the declaration of inde- of France, created in favour of his mipendence, or, to the ancient and primi- nister, Cardinal Richelieu. The civil tive jurisdiction of the admiralty of Eng- and military functions of this office were land, by virtue of its original organiza- thus separated until 1669, when Louis tion. It is shown in the opinion that the XIV.revived it under the ancient title of admiralty courts, in these then colonies, Admiral, though with a considerable di-, exercised jurisdiction over all maritime minution of its former power and splentorts and contracts; and the supposition dour. But whatever might have been its that the terms “ admiralty and maritime political and military authority, at various jurisdiction," intended by the framers of periods of French history, from the time the constitution to refer to the rightful of its first establishment, it is certain, jurisdiction of the English admiralty, re- that, both before its suppression by the ceives strong countenance from the his- artful policy of Richelieu, in order to torical analogy between the original or- strengthen the power of the crown, and ganization of that court in England and in France, and indeed in all the maritime countries of Europe.
In France the courts of admiralty have Al signifies, in Arabic, the ; tbus Al Emir, by a jurisdiction of all maritime contracts slight change, became Ammiral. and torts, as they formerly had in
| Valin, sur l'Ord. Liv. 1. tit. 1, de l'Amiral-2 Bro. Cit. and Adm. Low. 22.
Milton writes the word thas-