University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
  
expand section 
  
expand section 
  

expand section1. 
expand section2. 
expand section3. 
expand section4. 
expand section5. 
expand section6. 
expand section7. 
collapse section8. 
 8.1. 
expand section8.2. 
 8.3. 
expand section8.4. 
expand section8.5. 
expand section8.6. 
expand section8.7. 
 8.8. 
 8.9. 
 8.10. 
expand section8.11. 
 7.12. 
expand section8.13. 
expand section8.14. 
 8.15. 
expand section8.16. 
 8.17. 
expand section8.18. 
 8.19. 
 8.20. 
expand section8.21. 
expand section9. 
expand section10. 
expand section11. 
expand section12. 
expand section13. 
expand section14. 
expand section15. 
expand section16. 
expand section17. 
expand section18. 
expand section19. 
expand section20. 
expand section21. 
expand section22. 
expand section23. 
expand section24. 
expand section25. 
expand section26. 
expand section27. 
expand section28. 
expand section29. 
expand section30. 
expand section31. 

26.25. 25. That we should not follow the general Disposition of the civil
Law, in things which ought to be subject to particular Rules drawn from
their own Nature.

Is it a good law that all civil obligations passed between sailors in a ship in the course of a voyage should be null? Francis Pirard tells us [54] that, in his time, it was not observed by the Portuguese, though it was by the French. Men who are together only for a short time, who have no wants, since they are provided for by the prince; who have only one object in view, that of their voyage; who are no longer in society, but are only the inhabitants of a ship, ought not to contract obligations that were never introduced but to support the burden of civil society.

In the same spirit was the law of the Rhodians, made at a time when they always followed the coasts; it ordained that those who during a tempest stayed in a vessel should have ship and cargo, and those who quitted it should have nothing.

Footnotes

[54]

Chapter 14, part XII.