245
thought to abuse the privileges of his Office.
8:
He moreover presses entirely by the given of the chartering of the Prince Albert for the specific purpose of her voyage, as alleged by her owner and says that the Master's simple asseveration of having been in quest of a missing junk, and his assertion that he had been driven into Port through fear of Piratical looking craft in the offing, could not come under the head of reasonable evidence. I have already fully shown that the object of the "Prince Albert's" voyage did not rest on the Master's testimony only, and therefore to imply, as Sir Rutherford does [Vide Governor to State 328 of 8 July 1867], that such was the case, seems a grievous injustice to the owner and a depreciation in a similar manner of the evidence regarding Pirates is justifiable, because, if the only possible evidence, namely that of the Master and his crew, is to be treated as inadmissible, then the absurd conclusion would follow that to prove danger from Pirates the Master should have awaited the capture of his vessel, or have found means to produce the Pirates bodily afterwards to be brought to justice.
I also deny that it is generous or just to offer uncalled for and depreciatory remarks on the absence of money, Cargo on board &c because
9
245
thought to abuse the privileges of his
Office.
8:
He
moreover
positive evidence
#
presses entirely by the given of the chartering
of the Irince Albert for the specific purpose of her voyage, as alleged by her
owner
and
says that the Master's
simple afseveration of having been
quest of a missing junk, and his apertion that he had been driven into Part
loothing craft shows th
through fear of Siratical looking craft
the offing,
in the
could not come under
the head of reasonable evidence. I have
already fully shewn that the object of
the "Prince Albert's
voyage
did not rest
on the Masters testimony only, and therefore to imply, as Sir Rutherford does
Vida Governor to of State 328 of 8 July 1807!
that such
was
the
case,
seems a
Ch
grievous injustice to the
owner
depreciation in a similar the evidence regarding
more
manner
His
of scarcely
regarding Pirates is justifiable, because, if the only
possible evidence, namely that of the Moaster and his crew,
is to be treated
ab
inadmissible, then the absurd
conclusion would follow that to
prove
danger from Pirates the Master should have awaited the capture of his Nefsel,
OV
have found
means
produce the Pirates bodily
in
afterwards to bourti
q
I also
deny
that it is
generous
on
just to offer
uncalled for
and
Cargo
ar
money
depreciatory remarks on the absence of
on
board &c because
9
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.