Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

other Greck commercial towns. Money thus lent was sometimes called (vavrikà Xphuara) ship-money. Demosthenes (I. Against Aphobus), in making a statement of the property left him by his father, enumerates seventy mina lent on bottomry. If the ship and cargo were lost, the lender could not recover his principal or interest; which stipulation was often expressly made in the (ovyypaph) bond. (Demosthenes against Phormion, and against Dionysodorus, c. 6, 10.) The nature of the bottomry contract is shown in the Oration of Demosthenes against Dionysodorus:-3000 drachmæ were lent on a ship, on condition of her sailing to Egypt and returning to Athens; the money was lent on the double voyage, and the borrower contracted in writing to return direct to Athens, and not dispose of his cargo of Egyptian grain at any other place. He violated his contract by selling his cargo at Rhodes, having been advised by his partner at Athens that the price of grain had fallen in that city since the departure of the vessel. The plaintiff sought to recover principal and interest, of which the borrower attempted to defraud him: damages also were claimed, conformably to the terms of the bond. As neither principal nor interest could be demanded if the vessel were lost, it was a common plea on the part of the borrower that the ship was wrecked. The rate of interest for money thus lent was of course higher than the usual rate. The speech of Demosthenes Against Lacritus contains a complete Bottomry contract, which clearly shows the nature of these loans at Athens.

Money was also lent, under the name of pecunia trajectitia, on ships and their cargo among the Romans, and regulated by various legal provisions. But it appears that the money was merely lent on condition of being repaid if the ship made her voyage safe within a certain time, and that the creditor had no claim on the ship unless it was specifically pledged. The rate of interest was not limited by law, as in the case of other loans, for the lender ran the risk of losing all if the ship was wrecked; but this extraordinary rate of interest was only due while the vessel was actually at

sea. The interest of money lent on seaadventures was called Usuræ Marítima. (Dig. 22, tit. 2, "De Nautico Fonere;" Molloy, De Jure Maritimo, lib. ii. c. 11; Parke On Insurance, chap. xxi.; Benecke's System des Assecuranz und Bodmereiwesens, bd. 4.)

It has been already stated that Bottomry, in its general sense, is the pledge of a ship as a security for money borrowed for the purpose of a voyage. It has been conjectured that the power of a master to pledge a ship in a foreign country led to the practice of an owner borrowing money at home upon the like security. But Abbott, in his treatise on Shipping, expresses a doubt on this matter, and adds that the Roman law says nothing of contracts of bottomry made by the master of a ship in that character, according to the practice which has since universally prevailed. Yet there are passages in the 'Digest' (20, tit. 4, s. 5, 6) which seem to imply that a master might make such a contract, for, as already observed, the ground for giving the preference to a subsequent over a prior lender is stated to be that the subsequent loan saves the prior lender's security; and we must accordingly suppose that money could be borrowed by the master when he found it necessary for the preservation of the ship or cargo.

The terms bottomry and respondentia are also applied to contracts for the repayment of money lent merely on the hazard of a voyage-for instance, a sum of money lent to a merchant to be employed in trade, and to be repaid with extraordinary interest if the voyage is safely performed. This is in fact the Usuræ Maritimæ of the Romans. But the stat. 7 Geo. I. c. 21, § 2, made null and void all contracts by any of his Majesty's subjects, or any person in trust for them, for or upon the loan of money by way of bottomry on any ships in the service of foreigners, and bound or designed to trade in the East Indies or places beyond the Cape of Good Hope. Another statute, 19 Geo. H c. 37, enacted that all moneys lent on bottomry or respondentia on vessels bound to or from the East Indies shall be expressly lent only on the ship or on the merchandise; that the lender shall have

the benefit of salvage; and that if the borrower has not an interest in the ship, or in the effects on board, to the value of the sum borrowed, he shall be responsible to the lender for so much of the principal as has not been laid out, with legal interest and all other charges, though the ship and merchandise be totally lost. With the exception of the cases provided for by these two statutes, money may still be lent on the hazard of a voyage. Bottomry is sometimes treated as a part of the law of insurance, whereas it is quite a different thing. For further information, see Abbott, On Shipping; Parke, System of the Law of Marine Insurance.

It is observed in the 'Staats-Lexicon' of Rotteck and Welcker, art. "Bodmerei," that Bodmerei "is a loan for a seavoyage, in which the ship becomes pledged. In this simplest form, at least, it is possible that this kind of transaction may have originated among the German nations. And so it is still viewed in the English law, even where the ship is not expressly pledged." This, however, is a misstatement of the English law. The same article, after some general remarks on Bottomry, which it is to be presumed apply to the German states, adds-" that, in fact, Bottomry now generally occurs only in cases when the master of a ship, during the voyage, requires money, and obtains a loan for the purpose of prosecuting it, for which he has no better security to offer than the ship itself. This transaction also differs from the usual contract of pledge in this: that the owner himself does not pledge the ship; but the captain is considered as the agent of the owner, and as doing what is necessary for his interest under the circumstances.'

BOUNTY, a sum of money paid by government to the persons engaged in certain branches of commerce, manufactures, or other branch of industry.

The question of bounties and their impolicy is discussed by Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations,' book iv. chap. 5; and the subject has also been treated in a very complete manner by the late Mr. Ricardo in his Principles of Political Economy and Taxation.' When Postlethwaite published his 'Dictionary of Commerce,' in 1774, bounties were ". very nu

6

66

merous." After the publication of Adam Smith's work bounties began to be regarded with less favour, and have at length sunk into complete discredit. They are now no longer relied upon as a means of furthering the true interests of commerce. The policy of bounties was very materially connected with the opinions of a former day respecting the balance of trade. [BALANCE OF TRADE.] It was thought that they operated in turning the balance in our favour. Adam Smith remarks: - By means of bounties our merchants and manufacturers, it is pretended, will be enabled to sell their goods as cheap or cheaper than their rivals in the foreign markets. . . . We cannot (he adds) force foreigners to buy their goods, as we have done our own countrymen. The next best expedient, it has been thought, therefore, is to pay them for buying." Bounties in truth effect nothing more than this. The propositions maintained by Adam Smith are, that every trade is in a natural state when goods are sold for a price which replaces the whole capital employed in preparing and sending them to the market with something in addition in the shape of profit. Such a trade needs no bounties. Individual interest is sufficient to prompt men to engage in carrying it on. On the other hand, when goods are sold at a price which does not replace the cost of the raw material, the wages of labour and all the incidental expenses which have been incurred in bringing them into a state fit for the market, together with the manufacturer's profits; that is, when they are sold at a loss, the manufacturer will cease to produce an unprofitable article, and this particular branch of industry will soon become extinct. It perhaps happens that the general interests of the country are thought to be peculiarly connected with the species of industry in question, and that it therefore behoves government to take means for preventing its falling into decay. At this point commences the operation of bounties, which are devised for the purpose of producing an equilibrium between the cost of production, the market-price, and a remunerating price, the last of which alone promotes the con

stant activity of every species of industry. Smith observes, "The bounty is given in order to make up this loss, and to encourage a man to continue or perhaps to begin a trade of which the expense is supposed to be greater than the returns; of which every operation eats up a part of the capital employed in it, and which is of such a nature, that if all other trades resembled it, there would soon be no capital left in the country." And he adds:"The trades, it is to be observed, which are carried on by means of bounties are the only ones which can be carried on between two nations for any considerable time together, in such a manner as that one of them shall always and regularly lose, or sell its goods for less than they really cost. The effect of bounties, therefore, can only be to force the trade of a country into a channel much less advantageous than that in which it would naturally run of its own accord."

....

[blocks in formation]

The bounty on the exportation of corn was given up in 1815 [CORN TRADE], and that on the exportation of herrings, linen, and several other articles ceased in 1830. In 1824 the sums paid as bounties for promoting fisheries, linen manufactures, &c. in the United Kingdom was 536,2281.; 273,269. in 1828; 170,9994. in 1831; and in 1832 and 1833 the sums of 76,5721. and 14,7131. respectively.

Bounties are not now allowed on any article of export; but in some cases it is believed that DRAWBACKS Constitute in reality a bounty, being greater than the duty which has been paid on the article. The drawback on refined sugar, for instance, has been fixed at a certain amount proportioned to the quantity of raw sugar supposed to have been used, which is calculated at 34 cwts. of raw to 20 cwts. of

refined; but by improvements in the mode of refining, a less quantity of raw sugar may be required in manufacturing 20 cwts. of refined sugar; and the drawback on the difference is in reality a bounty. BOUNTY, QUEEN ANNE'S. [BENEFICE, pp. 343, 345.]

BREAD. [ADULTERATION; ASSIZE.] BREVET, in France, denotes any warrant granted by the sovereign to an individual in order to entitle him to perform the duty to which it refers. In the British service, the term is applied to a commission conferring on an officer a degree of rank immediately above that which he holds in his particular regiment; without, however, conveying a power to receive the corresponding pay. Brevet rank does not exist in the royal navy, and in the army it neither descends lower than that of captain, nor ascends above that of lieutenant-colonel. It is given as the reward of some particular service which may not be of so important a nature as to deserve an immediate appointment to the full rank: it however qualifies the officer to succeed to that rank on a vacancy occurring, in preference to one not holding such brevet, and whose regimental rank is the same as his own.

In the fifteenth section of the Articles of War it is stated that an officer having a brevet commission, while serving on courts-martial formed of officers drawn from differrent regiments, or when in garrison, or when joined to a detachinent composed of different corps, takes precedence according to the rank given him in his brevet, or according to the date of any former commission; but while serving on courts-martial or with a detachment composed only of his own regiment, he does duty and takes rank according to the date of his commission in that regiment. Brevet rank, therefore, is to be considered effectual for every military purpose in the army generally, but of no avail in the regiment to which the officer holding it belongs, unless it be wholly or in part united for a temporary purpose with some other corps. (Samuel's Hist Account of the British Army, p. 615.)

Something similar to the brevet rank above described must have existed in the French service under the old monarchy

for, according to Père Daniel (tom. ii. p. 217, 227), the colonel-general of the Swiss troops had the power of nominating subaltern officers to the rank of captains by a certificate, which enabled them to hold that rank without the regular commission. The same author states also that if any captain transferred himself from one regiment to another, whatever might be the date of his commission, he was placed at the bottom of the list in the regiment which he entered, without, however, losing his right of seniority when employed in a detachment composed of troops drawn from several different regiments.

BRIBERY, in English law, has a threefold signification: denoting, first, the offence of a judge, magistrate, or any person concerned judicially in the administration of justice, receiving a reward or consideration from parties interested, for the purpose of procuring a partial and favourable decision; secondly, the receipt or payment of money to a public ministerial officer as an inducement to him to act contrary to his duty; and thirdly, the giving or receiving of money to procure votes at parliamentary elections, or elections to public offices of trust.

I. In England judicial bribery has from early times been considered a very heinous offence. By an ancient statute, 2 Hen. IV. "All judges, officers, and ministers of the king convicted of bribery shall forfeit treble the bribe, be punished at the king's will, and be discharged from the king's service for ever." The person offering the bride is guilty of a misdemeanour. Sir Edward Coke says that

The introduction of brevet rank into the British army, as well as that of the half-pay allowance to officers on retiring from regimental duty, probably took place soon after the Revolution in 1688. But the practice of granting, when officers from different regiments are united for particular purposes, a nominal rank higher than that which is actually held," if the party offereth a bribe to the appears to have been of older date; for in the Soldier's Grammar, which was written in the time of James I., it is stated that the lieutenants of colonels are captains by courtesy, and may sit in a court of war (court-martial) as junior captains of the regiments in which they command. (Grose, Military Antiquities, vol. ii.) It was originally supposed that both officers holding commissions by brevet and those on half-pay were subject to military law; but, in 1748, when the inclusion of half-pay officers within the sphere of its control was objected to as an unnecessary extension of that law, the clause referring to them in the Mutiny Act was omitted, and it has never since been inserted. In 1786 it was decided in parliament that brevet officers were subject to the Mutiny Act or Articles of War, but that half-pay officers were not. (Lord Woodhouselee, Essay on Military Law, p. 112.) Brevet command was frequently conferred on officers during the late war; but the cause no longer existing, the practice has declined, and at present there are very few officers in the service who hold that species of rank.

BREWER. [ALEHOUSES, p. 99; ADULTERATION, p. 36.]

judge, meaning to corrupt him in the cause depending before him, and the judge taketh it not, yet this is an offence punishable by law in the party that doth offer it." (3 Inst. 147.) In the 24 Edw. III. (1351) Sir William Thorpe, then chief justice of England, was found guilty, upon his own confession, of having received bribes from several great men to stay a writ which ought in due course of law to have issued against them. For this offence he was condemned to be hanged, and all his lands and goods forfeited to the crown. Blackstone says (Comment. vol. iv. p. 140) that he was actually executed; but this is a mistake, as the record of the proceeding shows that he was almost immediately pardoned and restored to all his lands (3 Inst. 146). It appears also from the Year Book (28 Ass. pl. 2) that he was a few years afterwards reinstated in his office of chief justice. The case, therefore, does not speak so strongly in favour of the purity of the administration of justice in early times as many writers, following Blackstone, have supposed. In truth, the corruption of the judges for centuries after Sir Wm. Thorpe's case occurred was notorious and unquestionable. It is noticed by Edward

VI. in a discourse of his published by | navy, marines, or other person employee Burnet, as a complaint then commonly by or under the direction of the commi made against the lawyers of his time. sioners of the customs, shall make any (Burnet's Hist. of the Reformation, vol. ii. collusive seizure, or deliver up, or agree App. p. 72.) Its prevalence at a still to deliver up, or not to seize any vessel, later period, in the reign of James I., may or goods liable to forfeiture, or shall take be inferred from the caution contained in any bribe for the neglect or non-performLord Chancellor Bacon's address to Ser- ance of his duty, every such offender jeant Hutton upon his becoming a judge, incurs a penalty of 500l., and is rendered "that his hands and the hands of those incapable of serving his Majesty in any about him should be clean and uncorrupt office whatever, either civil or military: . from gifts and from serving of turns, be and the person also giving or offering the they great or small ones." (Bacon's bribe, or making such collusive agree Works, vol. ii. p. 632, edit. 1765.) In ment with the officer, incurs the like Lord Bacon's own confession of the penalty. By the 6 Geo. IV. c. 80, § 145, charges of bribery made against him in similar penalties are inflicted upon officers the House of Lords, he alludes, by way of of the excise who take bribes, as well palliation, to the offence of judicial cor- upon those who give or offer the bribe. ruption as being vitium temporis. (How- III. As to bribery for votes at elections ell's State Trials, vol. ii. p. 1104.) Since to public offices. the Revolution, in 1688, judicial bribery has been altogether unknown in England, and no case is reported in any lawbook since that date in which this offence has been imputed to a judge in courts of superior or inferior jurisdiction.

II. Bribery in a public ministerial officer is a misdemeanour at common law in the person who takes and also in him who offers the bribe. A clerk to the agent for French prisoners of war at Porchester Castle, who had taken money for procuring the exchange of certain prisoners out of their turn, was indicted for bribery and severely punished by the Court of King's Bench. (1 East's Reports, 183.) A person offered the first lord of the treasury a sum of money for a public appointment in the colonies, and the Court of King's Bench, in Lord Mansfield's time, granted a criminal information against him. (4 Burrows's Rep. 2500.)

Bribery with reference to particular classes of public officers has become punishable by several acts of parliament. Thus by the stat. 6 Geo. IV. c. 106, $29, if any person shall give, or offer, or promise any bribe to any officer or other person employed in the customs, to induce him in any way to neglect his duty (whether the offer be accepted or not), he neurs a penalty of 500l. So also by 6 0. IV. c. 108, § 35, if any officer of customs, or any officer of the army,

[ocr errors]

1. Bribery at parliamentary elections is said to have been always an offence common law, and it is punishable by indictment or information. There are however no traces of any prosecutions for bribery of this kind, until particular pe nalties were imposed upon the offence by acts of parliament. The act 7 & 8 W III. c. 4, called the Treating Act, declares that no candidate shall, after the teste (date) of the writs, or after the ordering of the writs, or after any vacancy, give any money or entertainment to s electors, or promise to give any in orcer to his being elected, under pain of being incapable to serve for that place in par ment. The 2 Geo. II. c. 24, which is explained and enlarged by 9 Geo. II. c. 28, and 16 Geo. III. c. 11, imposed penalties both on the giver and receiver t a bribe. But the operative statute upve this subject at the present time is 4 Geo. III. c. 118, which provides th if any person shall give or cause to given, directly or indirectly, or shall prmise or agree to give any sum of m gift, or reward, to any person upon a engagement that such person to wr such gift or promise shall be made, sta by himself, or by any other person at ab solicitation, procure or endeavour to pro cure the return of any person to serve a parliament for any place, every saut person so giving or promising :: returned) shall for every such gift or pre

« ElőzőTovább »