Zong!

Gregson v. Gilbert

Gregson v.Gilbert Gregson v. Gilbert. Thursday, 22d May, 1783. Where the captain of a slaveship mistook Hisaniola for Jamaica,whereby the voyage being retarded,and the water falling short,several of the slaves died for want of water, and others were thrown overboard, it was held that these facts did not support a statement in the declaration,that by the perils of the seas, and contrary winds and currents, the ship was retarded in her voyage, and by reason thereof so much of the water on board was spent,that some of the negroes died forwant of sustenance,and others were thrown overboard for the preservation of the rest. This was an action on a policy of insurance, to recover the value of certain slaves thrown overboard for want of water. The declaration stated, that by the perils of the seas, and contrary currents and other misfortunes, the ship was rendered foul and leaky, and was retarded in her voyage; and, by reason thereof, so much of the water on board the said ship, for her said voyage, was spent on board the said ship: that before her arrival at Jamaica, to wit, on, &c. a suIcient quantity of water did not remain on board the said ship for preserving the lives of the master and mariners belonging to the said ship, and of the negro slaves on board, for the residue of the said voyage; by reason whereof, during the said voyage, and before the arrival of the said ship at Jamaica — to wit, on, &c. and on divers days between that day and the arrival of the said ship at Jamaica—sixty negroes died forwant of water for sustenance;and forty others,forwant of water for sustenance, and through thirst and frenzy thereby occasioned, threw themselves into the sea and were drowned;and the master and mariners,for the preservation of their own lives,and the lives of the rest of the negroes,which for want of water they could not otherwise preserve,were obliged to throw overboard 150 other negroes.The facts,at the trial,appeared to be,that the ship on board of which the negroes who were the subject of this policy were, on her voyage from the coast of Guinea to Jamaica, by mistake got to leeward of that island, by mistaking it for Hispaniola, which induced the captain to bear away to leeward of it, and brought the vessel to one day’s water before the mistake was discovered, when they were a month’s voyage from the island,against winds and currents,in consequence of which the negroes were thrown [233] overboard . A verdict having been found for the plaintiJ, a rule for a new trial was obtained on the grounds that a suIcient necessity did not exist for throwing the negroes overboard,and also that the loss was not within the terms of the policy. Davenport, Pigott, and Heywood, in support of the rule. — There appeared in evidence no suIcient necessity to justify the captain and crew in throwing the negroes overboard. The last necessity only could authorize such a measure; and it appears, that at the time when the first slaves were thrown overboard, there were three butts of good water, and two and a half of sour water,on board.At this time, therefore, there was only an apprehended necessity,which was not suIcient. Soon afterwards the rains came on, which furnished water for eleven days, notwithstanding which more of the negroes were thrown overboard. At all events the loss arose not from the perils of the seas, but from the negligence or ignorance of the captain, for which the owners, and not the insurers, are liable.The ship sailed from Africa without suIcient water, for the casks were found to be less than was supposed.She passed Tobago without touching,though she might have made that and other islands.The declaration states,that by perils of the seas,and 210 211 contrary currents and other misfortunes,the ship was rendered foul and leaky,and was retarded in her voyage; but no evidence was given that the perils of the seas reduced them to this necessity . The truth was, that finding they should have a bad market for their slaves, they took these means of transferring the loss from the owners to the underwriters. Many instances have occurred of slaves dying for want of provisions, but no attempt was ever made to bring such a loss within the policy.There is no...