APPENDIX 6
Law Report in The Times, Dec 1807, page 3; Issue 7229; Col C
At Court of King's Bench, Friday 11 December 1807
Boyce v. Bayliff(e)
The Plaintiff was a tavern-keeper at Bombay; the Defendant was the Captain of the Huddart East India-man. This action was brought to recover compensation in damages for false imprisonment, during his passage in the said ship, and further, a special damage of £100 being the extra expense he had incurred in leaving the ship at St.Helena, and entering as passenger on board another vessel.
Mr Garrow, for the Plaintiff, said, that his client had passed through various situations in the army, until he had reached from the ranks to the respectable post of Conductor of Ordnance. He had afterwards engaged in lucrative occupation at Bombay. This person and a daughter of the age of eight years, who he was desirous should have the benefit of an European education; and in order to place her out to
advantage, and to afford her his protection in her passage to Europe, he took a place for her and himself on board the Huddart; but the terms on which he engaged did not entitle him to the privileges of the principal cabin. Notwithstanding this circumstance, during the early part of the voyage, he was permitted to occupy the poop, and to take his recreation there with the superior officers and passengers.
The Captain thought fit, without any reason being assigned, on a sudden to debar him of those means of enjoyment. He complained, but his remonstrances were ineffectual; and therefore, without any further interference, he contented himself in his retirement, and amused himself with the exercise of the paternal duties towards his infant child. Notice was indeed given him that she might have the run of
the ship; but he would not avail himself of this permission, that his daughter might not be exposed to the promiscuous society of the crew of an Indiaman; without the protection of his superintendence.
On the 11th of May some strange vessels hove in sight, and it was thought expedient to make preparations, either for the purpose of attack or defence. In this situation of things every person on board had assigned to him his particular station, and the Plaintiff was ordered to the poop, for the purpose of discharging a dangerous duty, from whence he had been driven as a place of recreation. He resisted this order of the Captain, offering at the same time to fulfil his duty anywhere else; but his pride would not permit him to join that company from which, under painful circumstances, he had been excluded.
In a moment of rashness and cruelty, the Defendant ordered that he should be put in irons, that with this disgraceful encumbrance, he should be exposed on the poop; and until eight o'clock the next morning he was continued in fetters.
When he came to St. Helena, being incapable of enduring the society of those before whom he had been thus exposed, he took his passage for England by another vessel; and for false imprisonment, and subsequent expenses, by this new means of conveyance, he brought the present action.
Numerous witnesses were
called, both on the part of the Plaintiff and Defendant. After the Attorney
General had been heard for the latter and Mr Garrow in reply.
Lord Ellenborough said that
there was no pretence for the charge to be made for the trans-shipment of the
Plaintiff and his child, since it did not appear that the ill usage complained
of continued to the time of the arrival of the Huddart at St. Helena, so
that there was no immediate motive for removal. It seemed that the Captain had
given the Plaintiff the privilege of joining the society of the principal
cabin, although the terms on which he entered the ship only entitled him to the
carpenter's cabin.
What the Defendant had
conceded in the way of favour in this way, he had a right at any time to
withdraw; and there could be no cause of action if that right was exercised.
In the sequel, two frigates
were discovered in the distance, and the whole crew was ordered on deck to be
assigned the respective duties the approaching danger seemed to require. While
the corresponding orders were issuing the Plaintiff was directed to go to the
poop. Thus commanded he refused obedience from the false notion of pride. The
Captain had the right to give the order, and with it the Plaintiff ought to
have complied. Just notions of pride, if his Lordship might use the expression,
should have instructed him in that obedience. He should have said to himself;
I have been driven from the sphere of my amusement by the Captain but in
the moment of danger and difficulty he has sent me thither for the general
defence, and honour requires that I should faithfully and manfully discharge
the public duty.
What the Captain ought to
have done in this situation, it was not necessary to enquire; it was sufficient
to say, that he exceeded his authority by ordering that the Plaintiff should be
put in irons; for this act, proved by the evidence, he was charged with
inflicting false imprisonment, and no justification was entered on the record.
This being omitted, in every view of the Plaintiff was entitled to the verdict
of the Jury; but the Gentlemen would recollect, in assigning compensation to
the Plaintiff, that large damages would interfere with that due authority which
should always be exercised by persons sustaining the responsible character of
this Defendant, to whose prudence the lives of some hundred individuals was
committed.
Large damages would make
men in such circumstances reluctant to exert their power, on proper and
necessary occasions, for the common good. From what appeared, the Defendant was
a man of respectable and gentlemanly habits, and was a man not likely, indecently,
much less tyrannically, to demean himself. At the same time serious attention
should be paid to these particulars, the rights of individuals were to be
regarded, and sufficient compensation ought to be made for their infringement.
After the Jury had retired
for about an hour, their Foreman delivered a verdict for the Plaintiff. £80.
NOTE: My thanks are due to Julian Rawes for his input and constructing this web site, and Alan Merryweather for support and proof reading. Bryant G Bayliffe
E N D
_136.jpg)
