of Great Brittain have an undoubted right to the Soveraignty of the Seas of Great Brittain none but a few Mare Libertines and that for their own Interest ever scrupled Sir Hen Spelman gives us an Account of a very Ancient Record extracted out of the Laws of Hoelus Dha Regis seu Principis Walliae cir An. 928. which for the proof of the said Dominium quasi uno intuitu is here inserted in haec verba viz. Variato aliquantulum Nominis Vocabulo dici hic videtur Huwell Da qui superius Hoêl Dha Latine Hoêlus Hoelus alias Huval quem Malmesburiensis unum fuisse refert e quinque Wallensium Regibus Quos cum Cunadio Rege Scotorum Malcolmo Rege Cambrorum Maccusio Achipirata seu Principe Nautarum vel Marium Praefecto ad Civitatem Legionum sibi occurrentes Rex Anglorum Eadgarus in Triumphi pompam deducebat Una enim impositos remigrare eos hanc coegit dum in Prora ipse Sedens Navis tenuit gubernaculum ut se hoc spectaculo Soli Sali orbis Brittanici Dominum praedicaret Monarcham In this Ancient and Memorable Record King Edgar Neptune-like rides in Triumph over the Brittish Seas giving the world to understand that Dominium Maris is the Motto of his Trident. Consonant whereunto is that which the Law it self says Mare dicitur esse de districtu illius Civitatis vel Loci qui confinat cum mari in quantum se extendit territorium terrae prope mare In a word to this purpose the Renowned Learned Mr. Selden who hath left no more to say but with Jo Baptist Larrea in one of his Decisions of Granada That Authorum sententias non ex numero sed ex ratione metiri oportet pensitari debent juris fundamenta non Authorum Elenchum velut calculatione computari The Lord High Admiral is by the Prince concredited with the management of all Marine Affairs as well in respect of Jurisdiction as Protection He is that high Officer or Magistrate to whom is committed the Government of the Kings Navy with power of Decision in all Causes Maritime as well Civil as Criminal So that befide the power of Jurisdiction in Criminals he may judge of Contracts between party and party touching things done upon or beyond the the Seas Wherein he may cause his Arrests Monitions and other Decrees of Court to be served upon the Land as also may take the parties body or goods in execution upon the Land The Lord Coke in honour of the Admiralty of England is pleased to publish to the world that the Lord Admirals Jurisdiction is very Ancient and long before the Reign of Ed. 3. and that there hath ever been an Admiral time out of mind as appears not only by the Laws of Oleron but also by many other Ancient Records in the Reigns of Hen. 3. Ed. 1. Ed. 2. Thus as the Laws and Constitutions of the Sea are nigh as Ancient as Navigation it self so the Jurisdiction thereof hath universally been owned and received by all Nations yea and this Kingdome is by way of Eminency Crowned by Antiquity for the promulgation of the one and establishment of the other For otherwise without such Maritime Laws and such an Admiral Jurisdiction how could the Ancient Brittains long before Julius Caesar invaded this Isle restraine all Strangers Merchants excepted from approaching their Confines or regulate such Navies as were the wonder of that Age Or how could King Edgar in the Titles of his Charters have effectually styled himself as well Imperator Dominusque rerum omnium Insularum Oceani qui Brittaniam circumjacent as Anglorum Basileus or maintain in Naval Discipline these four hundred Sail of ships appointed by him to guard and scour the Brittish Seas And did not Etheldred after Edgar for the self-same end and purpose set forth to Sea from Sandwitch one of the greatest Navies that ever this Kingdome prepared Doubtless this was no Lawless Navy without Maritime Constitutions for the due regulation thereof according to the Laws of the Sea Consonant to that of the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty then in use and received by all the Maritime Principalities of Europe Whereas it is universally acknowledged That the Admiralty of England is very Ancient and long before the Reign of Edward the third who ever consults Antiquity shall find it farre more Ancient and long before the Reign of Edward the first even time out of mind before the said Edward the first To this purpose very remarkable is that ancient Record in the Tower of London entituled De Superioritate Maris Angliae jure Officii Admirallatus in eodem and out of the old French rendred into English by Sir John Boroughs in his compendious Treatise of the Soveraignty of the Brittish Seas pag. 25 c. edit Anno 1633. in which it evidently appears that the Admiralty of England and the Jurisdiction thereof was farre more Ancient then Edward the first and that from age to age successively and time out of mind even before the days of the said Edward the first it was so owned and acknowledged by this and all other Neighbour-Nations as appears by the said Record which was occasioned by a National Agreement of certain differences arising between the Kings of England and France in the 26 year of the Reign of the said Edward the first by reason of certain usurpations attempted by Reyner Grimbald then Admiral of the French Navy in the Brittish Seas in which Agreement the Commissioners or Agents for the Maritime Coasts of the greatest part of the Christian world of Genoa Spain Germany Holland Zealand Freezland Denmark and Norway then present made this memorable Acknowledgment and Declaration which is extracted out of the said Record as to so much thereof as relates to the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty viz. That the Procurators of the Admiral of the Sea of England and of other places as of the Sea-Coasts as of Genoa Catalonia Spain Almayne Zealand Holland Freezland Denmark and Norway do shew that the Kings of England time out of mind have been in peaceable possession of the Seas of England in making and establishing Laws and Statutes and Restraints of Arms and of Ships c. and in taking Surety c. and in ordering of all other things necessary for the maintaining of Peace Right and Equity c. and in doing Justice Right and Law according to the said Laws Ordinances and Restraints and in all other things which may appertain to the Exercise of Soveraign Dominion in the places aforesaid And A. de B. Admiral of the Sea deputed by the King of England and all other Admirals ordained by the said King of England have been in peaceable possession of the Soveraign guard with the Cognizance of Justice c. And whereas the Masters of the Ships of the said Kingdome of England in the absence of the said Admiral have been
good use in one age may afterwards be otherwise in another specially if the Rule Cessante Ratione cessat Lex should hold in this case as in others The Fiery Brazen Serpent when first erected was of happy use yet when abused by the people Hezekiah brake it in pieces yea though of Divine Institution yet when it became a snare to the people that good King did not scruple to call it Nehushtan The Court of Admiralty is one of the Courts Temporal one of the Courts of our Soveraign Lord the King and long since owned as such as appears by the Resolutions upon the Cases concerning the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty in Anno 1632. If the Court of Admiralty be one of His Majesties Temporal Courts then the old Argument of the Conservation of the Crown-Rights seems not to hold in this case and only for that Reason as to Prohibitions against the Admiralty as well for that the said Court is a Court Temporal as that it is one of His Majesties Courts specially in Cases that are either Locally or Materially Maritime It may not therefore be much material to inquire whether Prohibitions do lye as well against Temporal as Spiritual and Eccsesiastical Courts For admitting a Prohibition according to the Learned Fitzh g to be A Writ for the forbidding any Court either Spiritual or Secular to proceed in any Cause there depending upon suggestion that the Cognition thereof belongeth not to the said Court yet it is presumed that this doth not concern such Cases as primo intuitu appear to be Locally Maritime or according to the nature thereof have been time out of mind properly of the Admiral Cognizance For without doubt the suggestion mentioned in the said definition doth not in construction of Law pretend to any thing beyond the very truth of what is suggested or so as to transplea a Cause from one Jurisdiction to another absque minimo fumo probationis of the truth and reallity of the suggestion or that the Cognition of the Cause belongeth not to the Court Prohibited Thus having seen what a Prohibition is which in truth is no more but this viz. A Charge by Writ to forbear to hold Plea either in some matter or manner which as is supposed or suggested a man dealeth in beyond his Jurisdiction or otherwise then Law will warrant It follows That Every Prohibition is either Prohibitio Juris by the Law it self Or Prohibitio hominis where the Ministery of a competent Judge is used or Prohibitio Facti of meer Fact where it hath no fufficient ground or foundation in the Law The Second of these viz. the Ministery of a competent Judge is so essential as without which neither of the other can proceed Prohibitio Juris is a very Prohibition in it self and therefore it is a contempt to sue against it Prohibitions of Law are such as are set down by any Law or Statute of this Land whereby Ecclesiastical Courts are interdicted from dealing in the matters in such Statutes contained Such are the Statutes of 2 Ed. 6. cap. 13. whereby Judges Ecclesiastical are forbidden to hold Plea of any matter cause or thing being contrary or repugnant to or against the effect intent or meaning of the Statute of Westminster 2. cap. 3. the Statutes of Articuli Cleri Circumspecte agatis Silva Caedua viz. 43 Ed. 3. cap. 3. The Treatise De Regia Prohibitione Stat. 1 Ed. 3. cap. 10. Such also is the Statute of 9 Ed. 2. cap. 2. There are also other Statutes declaring in what Cases Prohibitions will not lye Such are the Statutes of 9 Ed. 2. cap. 1 4 5. Also 18 Ed. 3. cap. 5. 50 Ed. 3. cap. 4. Prohibitions of Fact are such as having no sollid foundation as the other on the Laws and Statutes of this Kingdome may yet pro tempore have some kind of operation like Prohibitio Juris because therein also is Prohibitio hominis or the Ministery of the Judge or Superiour Magistrate Such Prohibitions of Fact where they happen may administer more matter for Lawyers to work on then possibly the merits of the Cause require and have in former times occasioned several Complaints by reason of the perplexity of Law-Suits uncertainties in matters of Jurisdiction multiplicity of litigious Controversies excess of Charges delayes of Proceedings retardations of Justice and the like Hence it was that Sir Tho. Ridley in his View of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Law so long since on this Subject said That the Right of the Supreme Magistrate is not to be supposed by Imagination but to be made plain by Demonstration And so both the Statute of 18 Ed. 3. cap. 5. is whereby it is Provided That no Prohibition shall issue but where the King hath the Cognizance and of right ought to have which is very observable And also by the fore-mentioned of 2 Ed. 6. which prohibits Prohibitions to be granted otherwise then upon sight of the Libel and other Circumstances in the said Statute expressed By which it is intended the meaning of the Law-givers was not that every idle suggestion of every Atturney should breed a Prohibition but such only should be granted as the Judge according to Law should think worthy thereof if there were Right to deserve it Where the said Sir Thomas Ridley goes on and says That as emulation between the two Laws in the beginning brought in these multitude of Prohibitions either against or beside Law so the gain they brought to the Temporal Courts maintaineth them which also they are his words makes the Judges that they sesse not Costs and Damages in Cases of Consultation although the Statute precisely requires their assent and assignment therein because they would not deterre other men from suing out of Prohibitions and pursuing the same Though this was the Observation and these the very words of Sir Thomas Ridley upon this Subject in his time yet we may not thence inferre that so it is also now in our time specially now that Justice runs again in its proper channel and her ballance equally poized It was too true that in late years of unhappy memory the said words and observation of that Civilian were too sadly verified which now no doubt will in some short time as is already in a good degree be completely rectified In order to a Prohibition there is to precede such a suggestion as may be proved not such a suggestion as is not capable of proof Improbable suggestions lay no foundations Non-Entities are no Basis for Existencies It hath been a Rule without Exception ever since the Creation That Ex nihilo nihil fit By suggesting the Place where a Contract is supposed to be made to be at Burdeaux in France in Islington in the County of Middlesex seems to imply as if the alledging the Place viz. to be within the body of some County within the Realm were essential for the entituling of that Jurisdiction where such suggestion is made to a
and to award satisfaction to such as suffered wrong and damage But also that those very Laws and Statutes which were so to be Corrected Declared Expounded and Conserved by the Authority of the Office of the Admiralty were the Sea-Laws published at Oleron by King Richard the First So that the said Laws of Oleron gave the Rule and seems to be the usage concerning the Admiralty in the time of Edward the Third wereof the said Statute of 13 R. 2. speaks and by which Laws all Maritime affairs whether upon or beyond the Seas are properly Cognizable in the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty And in those Laws of Oleron so published by Richard the First are comprehended the matters of Admiral Cognizance whereunto that Form of Proceedings in these Records mentioned to be ordained by Edward the First and afterwards to be resumed revived and continued by Edward the Third relates Which very Records are also verbatim transcribed and published by the Lord Coke in that part of his Instit concerning the Court of Admiralty which speaks of the Superiority of England over the Brittish Seas and of the Antiquity of the Admiralty of England which he there proves expresly as high as to the time of Edward the First and by good inference of Antiquity and Ancient Records much higher For it appears by Ancient Records That not only in the days of King Edward the First but also in the days of King John all Causes of Merchants and Mariners and Things happening within the Floud-Mark were ever tryed before the Lord Admiral Again For the clearer understanding of what was the Usage in the time of Ed. 3. concerning the Admiralty it may be observed That in the beginning of these Records in Edward the Third's time it is said That a Consultation was had and the whole Bench of Judges advised with To the end that the Form of Proceedings heretofore ordained by Edward the First and his Councel should be resumed and continued not only for the retaining and conserving the ancient Superiority of the Sea of England but also the Office of the Admiralty as to the Correcting Expounding Conserving and Declaring the Laws and Statutes long since made by his Predecessors for the maintaining of Peace and Justice c. If upon a full Consultation in Ed. the Third's time That Form of Proceedings which had been formerly ordained by Ed. the First and his Councel shall be again resumed and continued it seems then requisite in the next place to inquire a little farther what was ordained by the said Edward the First and his Councel over and above what is already mentioned in the said Record And it appears that in the days of the said Ed. the First thâ—râ— was a good provision and remedy ordained for such Complainants as by Prohibitâ—ons issuing out of one Court to surcease the Legal prosecution of their rights in another could obtain redress in neither For by the Statute of the Writ of Consultation in Anno 24 Ed. 1. It is enacted That where there is a surceasing of Proceedings upon Prohibitions and the Complainants could have no remedy in the Kings Court that then the Lord Chancellour or Lord Chief Justice upon sight of the Libel should write to the Judges before whom the Cause was first moved that they proceed therein notwithstanding the Kings Prohibition directed to them before In a word therefore The said Statute of 13 R. 2. mentions the Usage in the time of Ed. 3. Edward the Third resumes and continues the Laws of Oleron published by Rich. 1. and what was ordained in the time of Ed. 1. And Edward the First ordained as in the Records aforesaid and Statute of Consultation The Expositor of the Terms of Law in his description of the Lord Admiral says That he is an Officer to Judge of Con Contracts between party and party concerning things done upon or beyond the Seas And in another of ancient Authority it is said in these words viz. That if an Obligation bear date out of the Realm as in Spain France or such other it is said in the Law and truth it is they are the Authours words that they be not pleadable at the Common Law Also the Learned Mr. Selden in the fore-cited place says That the Jurisdiction of the Common Law extends not it self beyond the Seas and without the Realm of England For as he speaks In the Law of the Land it is reckoned among the Priviledges of such as are absent That they who shall be out of the Realm of England at the levying of a Fine of any Land and making Proclamation thereupon are not so bound either by a yearly prescription as heretofore or by a five years prescription as is usuall of later times but that their right remains entire to them upon their return home So that being beyond Sea and without the Realm of England at that time and nothing of prejudice in that case fastned on them by reason of any Non-Appearance it seems as without the reach of the Common Law And Mr. Selden in the same place proves That to be beyond the Seas or extra quatuor maria doth in the Common Law-Books signifie the very same thing with extra Regnum And again Mr. Selden for 't is but due as well to the Truth as his Memory to repeat his Authority in the same place asserts concerning Things relating to Actions for Matters Maritime That they were not wont to be entered in express tearms heretofore in the ordinary Courts of the Common Law whose Jurisdiction was ever esteemed of such a nature that an Action Instituted about a matter arising in any other place then within the bounds of the Realm was by the ancient strict Law always to be rejected by them After which manner as it hath been a Custome now for many years that an Action ought to be rejected unless the matter have its rise within the Body as they call it of the County that is within some Province or County of the Island usually given in charge to certain Governours or Officers known to us by the name of Sheriffs So also is it in the Sea-Province belonging by the ancient received custome to the high Admiral or his Deputies not only so far as concerns its defence and guard but also as to matter of Jurisdiction Likewise in the same place Mr. Selden in honour of the Admiralty says That in ancient Records concerning the Customes of the Court of Admiralty It was an usual custome in the time of King Henry the First and of other Kings both before and after him That if any man accused of a capital crime done by Sea being publickly called five times by the voice of the Cryer after so many several days assigned did not make his Appearance in the Court of Admiralty he was banished out of England de mer appurtenant au Roy d'Angleterre or out of the Sea belonging to the King of England for forty years more or
thereof or is Naturalized a Denizon of that Countrey Reprizals may not be Exercised on Pilgrims or such as travel for Religion sake nor on Students Scholars or their Books or other Necessaries Nor on Ambassadors or their Retinue nor on Women or Children Likewise Goods found with a Merchant of another place then that against which Reprizals are granted albeit the Factor of such Goods were of that place are not subject to such Reprizals nor ought the presumption of the Place though strong enough for Condemnation where proof of an innocent property failes prevail against fuller Evidence Ecclesiastical persons are also by the Canon Law expresly Exempt from Reprizals So likewise such persons as by Storm or Stress of weather are driven into Port have an Exemption from the Law of Reprizals according to the Jus Commune what the Edict of any particular State in that case may doe is not here determined But a ship or Goods belonging to the Subjects of another Prince against whom Reprizals are granted coming into a Port of that State issuing such Letters of Reprizal not by storm or stresse of Weather but to avoid Confiscation for some delict committed at home in their own Countrey may be subject to Reprizals in Port. This Right of Reprizals which as some would have it answers to the Saxon Withernam is not only admissable in cases of denyal or protelation of Justice as when Judgement may not be had within the time prescribed by Law but also when Judgement is given plainly against the Law and no Remedy to be had against such wrong Judgement either in the ordinary course per viam Provocationis A Appellationis ad Jâ—dicem superiorem nor in the extraordinary per viam supplicationis ad principem understand thus when the matter in Controversie is tam quod merita quam quod modum procedendi not Doubtful for in Doubtful matters the Presumption is ever for the Judge or Court But a wrong Judgement in matters not Doubtful must be redress'd one way or other specially if such be given to the prejudice of Foraigners over whom the Authority of a Judge though in his own Jurisdiction is not so exactly the same as over his own Subjects And although it be a Rule in Law Res judicata pro veritate habetur yet it is as true that Judex male judicans pro injuria tenetur nor doth a Judgement or a Definitive diminish the merits though it may alter the Case Therefore Paulus the Lawyer held that a Debtor that is a Debtor indeed though Judicially absolved yet by nature remains a Debtor still and therefore when this happens to be a Foraigners Case he may if all other Legal Expedients fail for redress have recourse to the Jus Gentium which holds conformity with the Law of Nature Subjects indeed may not by force oppose the Execution even of an illegal Judgment nor forcibly prosecute their denyed rights and that by reason of the Energie of that Power and Authority which is over them the Subjects obedience being in the Emphasis of the Magistrates Authority But yet Foraigners can fly to the Jus Gentium to Right themselves by way of Compulsion which they could not effect by any Legal prosecution so long as their Right is reparable by Judgment according to Law but infeazible by reason of the denegation or protelation of Justice contrary to the regular proceedings of Law It seems at least Summum jus if not plus justo that the Goods of his Innocent Subjects that denyed Justice should be taken and seized for that â—njustice wherof they appear no more guilty then the original Complainants The truth is this is not introduced by the Jus Naturae but yet being commonly received by Custome and National practise is now become qualified for an allowance or tolleration by the Jus Gentium whether this were sufficient for Nestor to plunder the Elidenses for taking away his Fathers horses or for others on the like peccadilloes in this Age to Centuple their Losses on their Innocent Neighbours for their Princes omissions under colour of Letters of Marque is easier to question then proper to determine But whether Christian blood should be ingaged in the quarrel which originully was but of Private Interest would soon be decided where no Military man hath the Chair By the Law of Nations all the Subjects of the Dominion doing wrong whether Natives or Strangers making their aboad there are within the reach of Reprizals whereby 't is evident that Strangers not permanent there nor under any of the aforesaid qualifications are excepted for Reprizals being in their nature quasi onus Publicum are introduced for the satisfaction of Publick Debts to which Strangers that are meerly such are no way obliged indeed to the Laws of the Land where their present being is they are subject but yet are not Subjects And whereas it is formerly said that Ambassadors are Exempt from Reprizals as also their Retinue and Goods understand it not of such as are Commissionated to any Prince or State in enmity or actual hostility against that Prince who issues such Letters of Marque Lastly by the Law of Nations in matters of Reprizals whatever is taken immediately upon the Capture accrues ipso facto to the Captor in point of Propetty so far as the Original debt or damage with all incident costs and charges doth amount unto and the surplus to be restored which Equity in this case the Venetians long since used to the ships they took on this accompt from the Genuises But by the Civil Law Monitions or Citations after a seizure ought to issue and the parties concerned are not to carve for themselves but submit the whole matter to a Judicial Examination in order to their Satisfaction which ought to ballance the Damnum Emergens but not to exceed by way of Supplement in reference to the Lucrum cessans for the Law of Reprizals though otherwise rigid enough yet Restitutio in integrum is its ultimate design and as no man ought to be enriched by anothers Losse so no man ought to gain by his own Losse when it may not be repaired otherwise then by Remedies extraordinary if not unlawful Having glanced at some general Heads of the Law of the Admiralty quasi in transitu by way of Introduction the least whereof in its due Latitude requiring more Volumes then are Pages in this and therein the Custom paid with other ordinary Port-charges usual in such cases It may now be free to sayl from the Law to the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty being the Port of Discharge in the Design of this Adventure The Wind seems Fair the Seas well purged of Rovers and Nereus reinvested with his Trident The Ensurance therefore need run but Low the Danger is not great now that we have Peace with all Our selves yea the Loss is but small though the Ship miscarry so the Cargo be preserved for that 's of value indeed a Jewell without which the whole World would
Contracts though Vltra-marine But the Lord Hobard in Bridgmans Case goes farther and says That it hath been often Resolved That if any Obligation were made at Sea yet it could not be sued in the Admiralty Court because it is an Obligation which takes his course and binds according te the Common Law So that it hence follows that if it be made beyond Sea wherein the Common Law can administer Justice the Court of Admiralty hath not any Jurisdiction And if it be made at Sea it cannot be sued in the Admiralty Court because it takes its course and binds according to the Common Law Thus betwixt Land and Water between Contracts made beyond Sea and Obligations made at Sea the Admiralty seems like a kind of Derelict But probably it is not hereby meant or intended that every Contract made beyond Sea shall be tryed at the Common Law but only such as are there made for doing some Act within the Realm or otherwise wherein the Common Law can administer Justice and give ordinary remedy Nor every thing done at Sea but only Obligations which have their course and bind according to the Common Law and also when these things done at Sea be not as Bridgmans Case farther puts it of the same nature and respect that is as the said Case explains it an Obligation made at Sea for security of a debt growing before at Land cannot be sued in the Court of Admiralty because it is not for a Marine cause No man 't is presumed doth question but there may be debts growing at Land for Marine Causes as in respect of Shipping Navigation and the like Otherwise a Skipper signing Bills of Lading at Land might pretend such Bills of Lading so signed by him did not oblige him to a delivery of the goods therein expressed according to the consignation thereof A Marine Contract may be made and a Nautical debt contracted as well by Land as by Sea for security whereof Obligation may be afterwards made at or beyond the Sea and be within the Cognizance of the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty which would not signifie much in this or any Nation if it could not administer Justice in any Cases save only such as have their Birth Life and Death their foundation negotiation and consummation precisely Super altum mare specially where a surmize or suggestion may be material quoad examen though the Case oft times happens to prove otherwise quoad merita Sir George Croke in the foresaid Resolutions upon the Cases of Admiral Jurisdiction seems to be of another opinion where it is said That if a Suit be commenced in the Court of Admiralty upon Contracts made or other things done beyond the Seas or upon the Seas no Prohibition to be granted or awarded There respect seems to be had more to the Place where the Contract is made then whether it be for a Marine cause There are some things that wherever they be made or done whether this side the Sea upon the Sea or beyond the Sea may be properly Cognizable in the Admiralty Such are Charter-parties Bills of Lading and the like There are other things wherein the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty is limited as to the Locallity upon or beyond the Sea Personal Actions may sometimes be or not be of Admiral Cognizance according as they are here or there Local at other times they are regulated quoad subjectam materiam about which they are conversant for as there are some certain Places that sui natura are subject to the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty so there are some certain Things that are likewise sui natura subject to the same Jurisdiction And as a Maritime Place may without respect to the subâ—ect matter entitle that Jurisdiction to a Cognoslibility of a Case so sometimes the subject matter as the said Charter-parties Bills of Lading and such like may without such absolute respect had to the Place have the same operation were it otherwise it might be something difficult to find a Case simply and absolutely of an Admiral Cognizance for Contracts though made even upon or beyond the Seas are generally to take effect at Land And that which is purely Marine in the Cause may be Terrene in the Effect Bills of Lading that are so properly inherent in the Admiralty take effect at Land though made and firm'd a ship-board for the most part upon or beyond the Seas Likewise Contracts for Fraight and Mariners wages take effect at Land yet for the most part are made a ship-board upon or beyond the Seas These Obligations for they are Obligations though they are for doing some Act within the Realm as in Bills of Lading for the safe delivery a shore the dangers of the Sea excepted of such goods to the Consignatory as are therein mentioned and in Contracts of Fraight and Mariners wages for the due payment of mony on the Land yet are all within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty When a Contract is really made Super altum mare vel ultra quatuor maria specially in matters sui natura maritime though in order to something afterwards to be done or performed in whole or in part upon the Land This seems by the Ancient Customes style and practice of the Admiralty to be within the Jurisdiction thereof yea properly and exclusively unless you hold the doctrine of Universal Concurrency And herein the Admiralty may safely appeal to the words of that great Oracle of the Law whereof mention hath been made in the precedent Chapter viz. Que chose fait hors del Royalme n' aient poet estre trie diens Le Royalme per Le serement de 12. A thing done out of the Realm may not be tryed within the Realm by the oath of twelve men This is the judgement of him whom the Lord Coke styles not only by the name of a Lawyer but of the Law it self No surmize or suggestion can cause that to be which in sui natura is not nor cause that legally to seem to be which in rerum natura is not capable of being The Question is not whether an Alien born out of the Dominions of the Realm of England may as a Demandant bring his real Action nor is it imagined by any that because he is an Alien that therefore his Case may not come to Tryal for want of a suggestion To feign a Native of France to be born in such a certain place in England doth not reach the Case in hand For though it be impossible for one and the same individual person to be born in both places yet it is not impossible but that he who is surmized or suggested to be born in one place might in truth be born in another nor contrary to the Rules of Law to surmize a translocation of a mans Nativity which admits a possibility in any place within the habitable parts of the whole Universe therefore such a surmize or suggestion may be regularly consisteâ—t with the Law of Fictions and consequently