striking spectacles of its kind. The archbishop wrote several
treatises of considerable value, including an Essai sur les
hieroglyphes egyptiens (Paris, 1834), in which he showed that
Champollion's system was insufficient to explain the hieroglyphics.
See Ricard, Les grands eveques de l'eglise de
France au XIXe siecle (Lille, 1893); L. Alazard,
Denis-Auguste Affre, archeveque de Paris (Paris, 1905).
AFFREIGHTMENT (from ``freight,'' q.v.). Contract of
Affreightment is the expression usually employed to describe
the contract between a shipowner and some other person called
the freighter, by which the shipowner agrees to carry goods
of the freighter in his ship, or to give to the freighter the
use of the whole or part of the cargo-carrying space of the
ship for the carriage of his goods on a specified voyage or
voyages or for a specified time; the freighter on his part
agreeing to pay a specified price, called ``freight,'' for
the carriage of the goods or the use of the ship. A ship may
be let like a house to some person who takes possession and
control of it for a specified term. The person who hires a
ship in this way occupies during the currency of his term the
position of shipowner. The contract by which a ship is so
let may be called a charter-party; but it is not, properly
speaking, a contract of affreightment, and is mentioned here
only because it is necessary to remember the distinction
between a charter-party of this kind, which is sometimes
called a demise of the ship, and a charter-party which is a
form of contract of affreightment, as will hereinafter appear.
Rules of law.
The law with regard to the contract of affreightment is,
of course, a branch of the general law of contract. The
rights and obligations of the shipowner and the freighter
depend, as in the case of all parties to contracts, upon the
terms of the agreement entered into between them. The law,
however, interferes to some extent in regulating the effect
to be given to contracts. Certain contracts are forbidden
by the law, and being illegal are, therefore, incapable of
enforcement. The most important example of illegality in
the case of contracts of affreightment is when the contract
involves trading with an enemy. The law interferes again with
regard to the interpretation of the contract. The meaning
to be given to the words of the contract, or, in other words,
its construction, when a dispute arises about it, must be
determined by the judge or court. The result is, that certain
more or less common clauses in contracts of affreightment have
come before the courts for construction, and the decisions in
these cases are treated practically, though not perhaps quite
logically, as rules of law determining the sense to be put
upon certain forms of expression in common use in shipping
contracts. A third way in which the law interferes is
by laying down certain rules by which the rights of the
parties are to be regulated in the absence of any express
stipulation with regard to the matter dealt with by such
rules. This is done either by statutory enactment, as by
that part (Part VIII.) of the Merchant Shipping Act 1804 which
deals with the liability of shipowners; or by established
rules of the unwritten law, the ``common law'' as it is
called, as, for instance, the rule that the common carrier
is absolutely responsible for the safe delivery of the goods
carried, unless it is prevented by the act of God or the king's
enemies. These rules of law, whether common law or statute
law, regulating the obligations of carriers of goods by
sea, are of most importance in cases which are uncommon
though not unknown at the present day, in which there is an
affreightment without any written agreement of any kind. It
will, therefore, be convenient to consider first cases of this
kind where there is no express agreement, oral or written,
except as to the freight and destination of the goods, and
where, consequently, the rights and obligations of the parties
as to all other terms of carriage depend wholly upon the
rules of law, remembering always that these same rules apply
when there is a written contract, except in so far as they
are qualified or negatived by the terms of such contract.
In defaults of express contract.
The rules of the common or ancient customary law of England
with regard to the carriage of goods were no doubt first
considered by the courts and established with regard to the
carriage of goods by common carriers on land. These rules were
applied to common carriers by water, and it may now be taken
to be the general rule that shipowners who carry goods by sea
are by the English law subject to the liabilities of common
carriers. (See, as to the grounds and precise extent of this
doctrine, the judgments in Liver Alkali Company v. Johnson
(1874), L.R., 9 Ex. 338, and Nugent v. Smith (1876) 1
C.P.D. 423.) In practice goods are not often shipped without
a written contract or acknowledgment of the terms upon which
they are to be carried. For each separate consignment or
parcel of goods shipped a bill of lading is almost invariably
given, and when a whole cargo is agreed to be carried the
terms are set out in a document called a charter-party,
signed by or on behalf of the shipowner on the one part,
and the shipper, who is called the charterer, on the other
part. But at present we are considering the relations of
shipowner and shipper independently of any express contract,
as in a case when goods are shipped and received to be
carried to the place to which the ship is bound for a certain
freight, but without any further agreement as to the terms of
carriage. In such a case the rights of the parties depend
on the rules of law, or, which is much the same thing,
upon the warranties or promises which though not expressed
must, as the courts have held, be implied as arising from
the relation between the parties as shipper and carrier.
The obligations on the one side and the other may be defined
shortly to be as follows:--The shipper must not ship goods
of a nature or in a condition which he knows, or ought,
if he used reasonable care, to know to be dangerous to the
ship, or to other goods, unless the shipowner has notice
of or has sufficient opportunity to observe their dangerous
character. The shipper must be prepared, without notice from
the shipowner, to take delivery of his goods with reasonable
despatch on the arrival of the ship at the place of destination,
being ready there to discharge in some usual discharging
place. The shipper must pay the agreed freight, and will
not be entitled to claim delivery until the freight has been
paid. In other words, the shipowner has a lien on the
goods carried for the freight payable in respect of the
carriage. On the other hand, the obligation upon the shipowner
is first and foremost to deliver safely at their destination
the goods shipped, and this obligation is, by the common
law, subject to this exception only that the shipowner is
not liable for loss or damage caused by the act of God or
the king's enemies; but by statute (Merchant Shipping Act
1894, Part VIII.) it is further qualified to this extent
that the shipowner is not liable for loss, happening without
his actual fault or privity, by fire on board the ship, or
by the robbery or embezzlement of or making away with gold
or silver or jewellery, the true nature and value of which
have not been declared in writing at the time of shipment;
and, further, the shipowner is not laable for damage to or
loss of goods or merchandise beyond an aggregate amount, not
exceeding eight pounds per ton for each ton of the ship's
tonnage. The shipowner is bound by an implied undertaking,
or, in other words, is made responsible by the law as if
he had entered into an express undertaking: (1) that the
ship is seaworthy; (2) that she shall proceed upon the
voyage with reasonable despatch, and shall not deviate
without necessity from the usual course of the voyage.
It is not our purpose in this article to discuss minute or
doubtful questions; but in their general outline the obligations
of shipper and shipowner, where no terms of carriage have
been agreed, except as to the freight and destination of the
goods, are such as have been described above. The importance
of appreciating clearly this view of the relations of shipper
and shipowner arises from the fact that these fundamental rules
apply to all contracts of affreightment, whether by bill of
lading, charter-party or otherwise, except in so far as they
are modified or negatived by the express terms of the contract.
Bills of Lading. The document signed by the master or agent
for the shipowner, by which are acknowledged the shipment of a
parcel of goods and the terms upon which it is to be carried,
is called a Bill of Lading. Very many different forms of
bills of lading are used. For the purpose of illustration the
following form (from Mr Scrutton's book on Charter-parties
and Bills of Lading) has been selected as a sample:--
Shipped, in apparent good order and condition by in
and upon the good Vessel called the now lying in the port of
and bound for , with liberty to call at any ports in
any order, to sail without Pilots, and to tow and assist Vessels in
distress, and to deviate for the purpose of saving life or property;
and to be delivered in the like good order and condition at the
aforesaid port of unto or to his or their assigns, freight
and all other conditions as per Charter Party. The act of God, perils
of the sea, fire, barratry of the Master and Crew, enemies, pirates,
and thieves, arrests, and restraints of princes, rulers, and people,
collisions, stranding, and other accidents of navigation excepted,
even when occasioned by negligence, default, or error in judgment
of the Pilot, Master, Mariners, or other servanis of the Shipowners.
Ship not answerable for losses through explosion, bursting of
boilers, breakage of shafts, or any latent defect in the machinery or
hull, not resulting from want of due diligence by the Owners of the
Ship, or any of them, or by the Ship's Husband or Manager.
General Average payable according to York-Antwerp Rules.
In Witness whereof, the Master or Agent of the said Ship hath
affirmed to three Bills of Lading, all of this tenor and date, drawn
as first, second and third, one of which Bills being accomplished, the
others to stand void.
Dated in this day of 188 .
The bill of lading is an acknowledgment of the shipment of
goods in a named vessel for carriage to a specified destination
on terms set forth in the document. It is usually signed
by the master of the vessel, but very commonly by the agents
of the shipowner or sometimes of the charterers of the
vessel. A vessel may be employed by its owners to earn
freight in various ways: (1) It may be placed, as it is said,
on the berth as a general ship, to receive cargo from any
shippers who may desire to send goods to the port, or one of
the ports, to which the vessel is bound. The mate or chief
officer usually superintends the loading, and, as goods are
shipped, a mate's receipt is given as an acknowledgment of the
shipment. The mate's receipt is afterwards exchanged for
the bill of lading. In the case of a shipment by a general
ship the bill of lading is the evidence and memorandum of the
contract between the shipowner and the shipper. (2) A shipper
may, however, require the whole cargo space of the vessel to
carry, for example, a full cargo of grain. In such a case the
