It is also used as a general term to denote the whole naval power of a state or country.1 1. Bouv. L. Dict. Marine Corps.-A body of officers and soldiers under an organization separate and distinct from that of the army, and intended for service in detached portions, on board ships of war. Marine Causes. An action for wages as master of a canal boat is not a marine cause, within the meaning of Code Civil Proc., § 317 (New York), declaring an action in favor of a person belonging to a vessel in the merchant service for services during a voyage to be a marine cause, and is not triable forthwith at chambers. Warn v. Easton & McMahon Transit Co., 2 N. Y. Supp. 620. Marines Included in "Persons Enlisted for the Navy."-The act of congress passed on the 2nd of March, 1837 (5 Stat. at Large 153), authorized a reenlistment of marines to serve during the cruise then about to take place, they being included in the denomination of "persons enlisted for the navy." Prior laws recognize marines as a part of the navy. Under the same act the commander of the squadron had power to detain a marine after the term of his enlistment expired, if, in the opinion of the commander, public interest required it. Wilker v. Dinsman, 7 How. (U. S.) 89. Marine League.-A measure equal to the twentieth part of a degree of latitude. Bouv. Inst. N. 1845 Three geographical miles. U. S. Laws, act June 5th, 1794; April 20th, 1818; 1 Story's Laws 352; 3 ib. 1694. It is generally conceded that a nation has exclusive territorial jurisdiction upon the high seas for a marine league from its own shores. I Kent 29; The Franconia, 2 Ex. Div. 63. Marine Contract.-Is one which re lates to business done or transacted upon the sea and in seaports, and over which the courts of admiralty have jurisdiction concurrent with the courts of common law. De Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gall. (U. S.) 398; Ins. Co. v. Dunham, II Wall. (U. S.) 1. A contract for the transportation of passengers by a steamship on the ocean is a maritime contract, and there is no distinction in principle between it and a contract for the like transportation of merchandise. The same liability attaches upon its execution both to the owner and the steamship. The Moses Taylor, 4 Wali. (U. S.) 411. See also The Schooner Titian, 5 Mason (U. S.) 465; Plummer v. Webb, 4 Mason (U. S.) 380; Drinkwater v. The Brig Spartan, Ware (U. S.) 91; The Sloop Mary, 1 Paine (U. S.) 673; New Jersey Steam Nav. Co. v. Merchants' Bank, 6 How. (U. S.) 344; Bazin v. Liverpool Steamship Co., 5 Am. Law Reg. 465; The Eddy, 5 Wall. (U. S.) 481. What Is Not a Marine Contract.-Contracts for building ships or vessels, or for labor done, or materials furnished in their construction, are not maritime contracts. The scow M. Tuttle v. Buck, 23 Ohio St. 565. See also Peyroux et al. v. Howard et al., 7 Pet. (U. S.) 343; Roach et al. v. Chapman et al., 22 How. (U. S.) 129. See generally ADMIRALTY, vol. 1, p. 197-8. 318 Marine Court in the City of New York.-A local court originally erected for the determination of controversies between seamen, but now a court of record, possessing general jurisdiction of controversies involving not more than $2,000, and special jurisdiction of civil actions for injuries to person or character without regard to the amount of damages claimed. Rap. & Law. L. Dict. Marine Interest. A compensation paid for the use of money loaned on bottomry or respondentia. Provided the money be loaned and put at risk, there is no fixed limit to the rate which may be lawfully charged by the lender; but courts of admiralty, in enforcing the contract, will mitigate the rate when it is extortionate and unconscionable. Bouv. L. Dict. See also Sm. Merc. Law (8th ed.) 410; BOTTOмMRY BOND, 2 Am. & Eng. Encyc. of Law 483; ReSPONDENTIA, infra. MARINE INSURANCE.-See GENERAL AVERAGE; JETTISON; INSURANCE; SHIPPING. I. Definition.—Marine Definition. Marine insurance is "a contract whereby one party, for a stipulated sum, undertakes to indemnify the other against loss arising from certain perils or sea risks to which his ship, merchandise or other interest may be exposed during a certain voyage or a certain period of time."1 II. What May be Insured.-Insurance may be effected upon the vessel, goods on board the vessel, the freight, a profit expected, a commission, passage money, bottomry and respondentia, salvage, on general average, a lien for disbursements, advances, the master's wages, an insurance premium, the solvency of an insurance company.2 I 1. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 16. This is the ordinary definition. Phillips Ins. 1; I Duer Ins. 1; Marshall Ins. 1;3 Kent Com. *253. Perhaps the most accurate definition is that of Laundes Mar. Ins. (1st ed.) 1: "A contract whereby one who has an expectation of pecuniary gain depending on the safety of property exposed to hazard at sea, may secure himself by paying beforehand a fixed sum as the price of the risk." 2. The Vessel.-I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 18. The words of the policy, "and also the body, tackle, apparel, ordnance, munition, artillery, boats, and other furniture of and in the good ship or vessel called the," etc., include― Provisions.-Brough v. Whitmore, 4 T. R. 206. Boats.-Hoskins v. Pickersgill, 3 Doug. 222; Hall v. Ocean Ins. Co., 21 Pick. (Mass.) 472. i Whatever Is Appurtenant to the Ship-3 Kent Com. (13th ed.) 258; Plantamour v. Staples, 1 T. R. 611, n. In some places they include imstruments for navigation belonging to the ship owners. I Parsons Mar. Ins. 525; 1 Phillips Ins. (5th ed.), § 468. Outfit.-Hill v. Patten, 8 East 375; Forbes v. Aspinall, 13 East 323. But in whaling voyages where the implements for trying out blubber, harpoons, etc., are technically spoken of as "outfit," an insurance merely on the ship does not cover such "outfit." Hoskins . Pickersgill, 3 Doug. 222; Gale v. Laurie, 5 B. & C. 156; Taber v. China Ins. Co., 131 Mass. 239 at 251; Lewis 7. Manufacturers' Fire etc. Ins. Co., 131 Mass. 364. The words include the interest of captors. Routh v. Thompson, 11 East 433; 13 East 274. But do not cover loss by collision for which the body of the vessel is liable. De Vaux 7. Salvador, 4 Ad. & El. 420. The case of Peters v. Warren Ins. Co., 3 Sumn. (U. S.) 389; 14 Pet. (U. S.) 99, is contra, but is opposed by General Mar. Ins. Co. v. Sherwood, 14 How. (U.S.) 352. Insurance on the ship while it is being built does not include timber or materials intended for the vessel, but not as yet incorporated with it. Parsons Mar. Ins. 524; Mason v. Franklin F. Ins. Co., 12 Gill & J. (Md.) 468; Hood v. Manhattan F. Ins. Co., 11 N. Y. 532. The identity of the vessel insured is not affected by repairing, no matter how extensive. Le Cheminant v. Pearson, 4 Taunt. 367; Livie v. Janson, 12 East 648. Prior total loss may be insured against. Hughes 7. Mercantile Ins. Co., 44 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 351; Insurance Co. v. Folsom, 18 Wall. (U. S.) 237; Continental Ins. Co. v. Allen, 26 Ill. App. 576. Goods. This covers such articles as are on the vessel for the purposes of commerce. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 27; Brown v. Stapylton, 4 Bing. 121, per BEST, C. J.; Hill v. Patten, 8 East 374, per LD. ELLENBOROUGH; Thwing v. Great Western Ins. Co., 103 Mass. 401 at 406. So it includes bullion, coin, jewels, etc., on board for purposes of commerce. Da Costa v. Firth, 4 Burr. 1966; Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 Pick. (Mass.) 429; American Ins. Co. 7. Griswold, 14 Wend. (N. Y.) 399. See Seton v. Delaware Ins. Co., 2 Wash. (U. S.) 175 at 178, per WASHINGTON, J. But not such articles worn on the person. 1 Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 27. It covers also an immigrant's equipments. Wilkinson v. Hyde, 3 C. B., N. S. 30; 27 L. J. (C. P.) 116. The catch of a whaling vessel is covered by insurance of "goods." Hill v. Patten, 8 East 373; Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 Pick. (Mass.) 429. "Goods" does not include ship's provisions. Ross v. Thwaites, 1 Park Ins. 23. Nor its outfit for whaling. Hill v. Patten, 8 East 373. But see Paddock v. Franklin Ins. Co., 11 Pick. (Mass.) 227. Nor provender for live stock. Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 Pick. (Mass.) 429. Nor live stock itself. Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 Pick. (Mass.) 429. Unless live stock is the usual cargo carried in the trade for which the insurance is made. Allegre v. Maryland Ins. Co., 2 Gill & J. (Md.) 136; Chesapeake Ins. Co. v. Allegre, 2 Gill & J. (Md.) 164. Nor the captain's clothing. Duff v. Mackenzie, 3 C. B., N. S. 16, 26 L. J. (C. P.) 313. Nor bank notes. Palmer v. Pratt, 2 Bing. 185. Nor (semble) Thomas v. Royal Price 95. bills of exchange. Exch. Ass. Co., I Profits, however, have been held properly insured as "goods." Pritchet v. Ins. Co. of N. A., 3 Yeates (Pa.) 458. Where the word "property" was used it has been held to include bank bills carried for purposes of trade. Whiton v. Old Colony Ins. Co., 2 Met. (Mass.) I. And commissions of the master. Holbrook v. Brown, 2 Mass. 280; Wiggin v. Mercantile Ins. Co., 7 Pick. (Mass.) 271. The phrase "goods, specie and effects" has been held to cover money advanced by the master for the benefit of the ship. Gregory v. Christie, 3 Doug. 419. Whether goods laden on deck are included in an ordinary policy on goods, see under title JETTISON. Freight. The French law does not allow insurance of freight, and some other Continental laws are in accord. I Arnould (6th ed.) 33; Lowndes Mar. imals. Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 But the English and American law permits freight to be insured. 3 Kent Com. 270; Lucena 7. Craufurd, 3 B. & P. 102; Michael v. Gillespy, 26 L.J., C. P. 306; 2 C. B., N. S. 627; McGaw v. Ocean Ins. Co., 23 Pick. (Mass.) 405. "The word comprises all that is implied in the benefit derived by the ship owner from the employment of his employment of his ship." I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 31; Flint 7. Flemyng, 1 B. & Ad. 45; Riley v. Delafield, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 522. I Thus, besides ordinary freight, it includes chartered hire. Winter v. Haldimand, 2 B. & Ad. 649, per LORD TENTERDEN; Forbes v. Aspinall, 13 East 323, per LORD ELLENBOROUGH; Etches 7. Aldan, 1 Man. & Ry. 157; Clark 7. Ocean Ins. Co., 16 Pick. (Mass.) 289; Cheriot v. Barker, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 346; Huth v. N. Y. etc. Ins. Co., 8 Bosw. (N.Y.) 538; Robbins 7. N. Y. Ins. Co., 1 Hall (N. Y.) 325; Mellen v. Nat. Ins. Co., I Hall (N.Y.) 452. And the benefit to the owner of both ship and cargo accruing from the transportation of her goods to a market. Flint 7. Flemyng, 1 B. & Ad. 45; De Vaux v. J'Anson, 5 Bing. N. C. 519; Miller v. Woodfall, 8 E. & B. 493: 27 L. J. (Q. B.) 120; Paradise . Sun Mutual Ins. Co., 6 La. An. 596; Hart . Delaware Ins. Co., 2 Wash. (U. S.) 346; Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 Pick. (Mass.) 429; Dumas 7. Jones, 4 Mass. 647; Stillwell v. Commercial Ins. Co., 2. Mo. App. 22. A charterer may insure his interest in freight under the general general term "freight." I Parsons Mar. Ins. 174; I Arnould Mar. Ins. 35; 1 Phillips Ins. (5th ed.), § 480; Clark v. Ocean Ins. Co., 16 Pick. (Mass.) 289; Higginson v. Dall, 13 Mass. 96; Sansom v. Ball, 4 Dall. (Pa.) 459. The contra has been held in New York. Riley v. Delafield, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 522; Robbins v. New York Ins. Co., Hall (N. Y.) 325. Where also it was held that when a person had sold vessel reserving the right to receive the freight due at the end of the voyage assured this would not be covered as freight. Mellen 7. National Ins. Co., Hall (N. Y.) 452. This is disapproved by 1 Parsons Mar. Ins. 174, and by 1 Phillips Ins. (5th ed.), § 480. 66 66 Freight on board" is equivalent to freight" simply. Robinson v. Manufacturers' Ins. Co., 1 Met. (Mass.) 143. It has been held that "freight " alone would not cover the freight on live an14 C. of L.-21 The freight insured may be for either the whole or any part of a voyage. Violett v. Allnutt, 3 Taunt. 419; Taylor v. Wilson, 15 East 324; Leathely v. Hunter, 7 Bing. 529; Barclay v. Stirling, 5 M. & S. 6; Hall v. Brown, 2 Dow's P. C. 367; Michael v. Gillespy, 26 L. J. (C. P.) 306; 12 C. B., N. S. 627. The case of Murdock v. Pott, 2 Park Ins. 399, contra, is overruled. Freight' does not include passage money. Denoon 7. Home & Col. Ass. Co., L. R., 7 C. P. 341. Profits. Insurance of profits, though not allowed in France, Lowndes Ins. (2nd ed.) 15, is valid in England and the United States. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 37; 1 Parsons Mar. Ins. 191; 1 Phillips Ins., § 181; 3 Kent Com. *271; Grant . Parkinson, 6 T. R. 483; Barclay 7. Cousins, 2 East. 544; Eyre v. Glover, 3 Camp. 276; 16 East 218; Fosdick v. Norwich Mar. Ins. Co., 3 Day (Conn.) 108; French v. Hope Ins. Co., 16 Pick. (Mass.) 397; Mumford v. Hallett, 1 Johns. (N. Y.) 433,439; Abbott z'. Sebor, 3 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 39; Tom v. Smith, 3 Cai. (N. Y.) 245. But not on a bare expectation that a profit will be earned by a cargo not yet contracted for. Knox v. Wood, 1 Camp. 543; and see Lucena v. Craufurd, 3 B. & P. 84; Anderson v. Morrice, L. R., 10 C. P. 621, per BLACKBURN, J. They may also be insured as part of the value of the goods. Ionides v. Pender, L. R., 9 Q. B. 531 at 535: Profits expected from his investment by a shareholder in a company formed to lay an Atlantic cable are insurable. Wilson v. Jones, L. R., I Ex. 193; 2 Ex. 129: Paterson v. Harris, 30 L. J. (Q. B.) 354. The goods from which the profit is expected must have been actually exposed to risk. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 38; McSwiney v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co., 14 Q. B. 634, 646; Halhead v. Young, 6 E. & B. 312; 25 L. J. (Q. B.) 290. And, in England, the assured must be legally interested in the goods at the time of the loss. Stockdale v. Dunlop, 6 M. & W.224. But not so in the United States. French v. Hope Ins. Co., 16 Pick. (Mass.) 397; 1 Parsons Mar. Ins. 192. The English law is clear that there can be no recovery unless there would 321 in fact have been a profit on the goods, I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 38; Grant v. Parkinson, 3 Doug. 16; Hendrickson v. Margitson, 2 East 549; Hodgson v. Glover, 6 East 316; Eyre v. Glover, 16 East 218. The law of the United States is otherwise, there being a conclusive presumption that there would have been a profit. I Phillips Ins. (5th ed.), § 318; i Parsons Mar. Ins. 281; Patapsco Ins. Co. v. Coulter, 3 Pet. (U. S.) 222; Alsop v. Commercial Ins. Co., I Sumn. (U. S.) 451; Fosdick v. Norwich Mar. Ins. Co., 3 Day (Conn.) 108; Mumford 7. Hallett, Johns. (N. Y.) 433; Loomis v. Shaw, 2 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 36; Abbott v. Sebor, 3 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 39; Locke v. North American Ins. Co., 13 Mass. 61. Profit must be named in the policy. Lucena v. Craufurd, 2 B. & P. N. R. 315; Anderson 7. Morrice, L. R., 10 C. P. 609, 622, 624; cf. Niblo . North Amer. Fire Ins. Co., I Sandf. (N. Y.) 551; but were held covered as property" in Holbrook v. Brown, 2 Mass. 280. Commissions.--1 Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 39; Lowndes Ins. (2nd ed.) 18; 3 Kent Com. *271; Flint 7. Le Mesurier, 2 Park. Ins. 563; Barclay v. Cousins, 2 East 544; King v. Glover, 2 B. & P., N. R. 206; Wells v. Philadelphia Ins. Co., 9 S. & R. (Pa.) 103; Putnam v. Mercantile Mar. Ins. Co., 5 Met. (Mass.) 386; Holbrook v. Brown, 2 Mass. 280. The goods on which the commissions are to be paid must be actually on board at the time of the loss. I Arnould Mar. Ins. 39; Knox v. Wood, 2 Park. Ins. 563; I Camp. 543. Passage Money.-1 Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 36; Lowndes Ins. (2nd ed.) 58; Truscott v. Christie, 2 B. & B. 320; Gibson v. Bradford, 4 E. & B. 586; 24 L. J. (Q. B.) 159; Willis v. Cooke, 5 E. & B. 641; 25 L. J. (Q. B.) 16. These Bottomry and Respondentia. interests are insurable. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 40; Lowndes, Ins. (2nd ed.) 19; 1 Parsons Mar. Ins. 210; Glover v. Black, 3 Burr. 1394; 1 W. Bl. 396; Kenney v. Clarkson, 1 Johns. (N.Y.) 385. They must be named. Glover v. Black, 3 Burr. 1394; 1 W. Bl. 396; Simonds v. Hodgson, 3 B. & A. 50; RobUnited Ins. Co., 2 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 250; cf. 1 Phillips Ins., § 427. But only the lender can properly insure. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 40; 1 Phillips Ins., § 307; Williams v. Smith, 2 Cai. (N. Y.) 138; Cai. Cas. in Error (N. Y.)119. inson 2'. Salvage.--Lowndes Ins. (2nd ed.) 21. General Average.-1 Arnould Mar. Ins. (6th ed.) 68; Lowndes Mar. Ins. (2nd ed.) 21; Briggs 7. Merchant Traders' Ass., 13 Q. B. 167. Lien.-Lowndes Mar. Ins. (2nd ed.) 9. 21; Ebsworth v. Alliance Mar. Ins. Co., L. R., 8 C. P. 596; Donath v. Ins. Co., 4 Dall. 463; Russell v. Ins. Co., 4 Dall. 421; Murray v. Columbian Ins. Co., 11 Johns. (N. Y.) 302. Advances. I Arnould Mar. Ins. (5th ed.) 62; Lowndes Ins.(2nd ed.) 21;1 Phillips Ins. (5th ed.), § 204; Anon., 2 Shaw 283; DeSilvale v. Kendall, 4 M. & S. 37; Wilson v. Martin, 2 Exch. 684; Hicks 7. Shield, 7 E. & B. 633; 25 L. J. (Q.B.) 205; Allison v. Bristol Mar. Ins. Co., I App. Cas. 209; Williams 7. North China Ins. Co., 35 L. T., N. S. SS4; The Karnac, L. R., 2 P. C. 505, 514; Currie v. Bombay Native Ins. Co., L. R., 3 P. C. 72, 83; cf. Watson v. Shankland, L. R., 2 S. & D. App. Cas. II. L. 304; Russel v. Union Ins. Co., 1 Wash. (U. S.) 409; Seamans 7. Loring, 1 Mason (U. S.) 127; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Chadbourne, 31 Fed. Rep. 300; Burnham v. Boston Marine Ins. Co., 139 Mass 399; Wright v. Williams, 20 Hun (N. Y.) 320; cf. The Thyatria, 8 Pro. Div. 155. But advances are insurable only when the debt or the security will be extinguished by the loss. Lowry v. Bourdieu, 2 Doug. 468. Thus, if the owners of a fishing ves sel have a lien on the catch for money expended for bait, such money may be insured under the term "advances." Burnham v. Boston Ins. Co., 189 Mass. 399; Swift v. Mercantile Ins. Co., 113 Mass. 287. A shipowner who is liable to refund advanced freight may insure it. Hall 7. Janson. 4 E. & B. 500; 24 L. J. (Q. B.) 97. A part owner of a vessel, who makes advances and disbursements on a venture engaged in by himself and the other owners, is in the position of a partner making advances to his firm, and has a lien on the vessel and cargo for his reimbursement, which constitutes an insur able interest. International Mar. Ins. Co. v. Winsmore (Pa.), 16 A. 516. Where the agents, in New York, of the owners of a vessel in Georgia advanced, at the request of the owners, the necessary money to enable the vessel to proceed upon a voyage, taking out a policy of insurance to secure the money advanced, and on the loss of the vessel collected the insurance money, |