STATES U. BEYEB. 35 ,
A . UNITEDVSTATES QLBEYEB.
y `(0'rircuit Court, S. D. Georgia, E. D. May, 1887.) .
1. ADMIRLLTYT1lUBISDIUPI0N—CRIMINAL Orrnnsns. a
The United States courts have jurisdiction to try charges of crime com-
mitted on board any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States,
or any citizen thereof, at any point on the high seas, or in any river, haven,
creek, basin, or bay within the admiralty jurisdiction of the United` States,
and out of the jurisdiction of any particular state. ~
2. SHIPPI1S'B-AUTHOR.I'1‘Y or MASTEB—PERSONAL Cnssrmmumnr.
Whilea master of avessel has been held justitled in inflicting moderate
personal chastisement on a seaman for impertinent language and disobedience
ofogders, it would be far more decent to resort to ot er methods of punish·
‘ men . _
8. Ssmme-Assaum uron Snsu.m—Snns-Dmrnnsn.
Where the master assaults a seaman, the seaman may endeavor to escape,
and if pursued by the master and the assault is repeate , the seaman may re-
sist insucb manner as to protect himself from injury, and if the assault is
made with a deadly weapon, or otherwise dangerously, the seaman is author·
ized to use equivalent and necessary force in his own protection.
4. Sum. _
Where a master commits an assault upon a seaman, the seaman would not
be justiiiedin repelling it with a dangerous weapon unless the facts were such .
as to justify the belief that he was in serious bodily danger.
5. Baua—Smmsn’s Durrns.
Where a mate in command of a vessel lying at anchor, after working hours
ordered a seaman to wash his (the matc’s) clothes, and the seaman declined
in respectful terms, an assault upon the seaman was wholly unjustiiiable.
(Syllabus by the Ovurt.) q
Assault on the High Sea with a Dangerous Weapon.
Du Pont Guerry, U. S. Atty., for plaintiff.
A. R. Lawton, Jr., for defendant. V ·
Seann, J'., (charging jury.) The defendant, William Beyer, is charged
with assaulting with a dangerous weapon one Smith upon the high seas.
The assault is charged to have been committed upon an American vessel.
The jurisdiction of this court extends to assaults of that character com-
mitted upon an American vessel at any point on the high seas, or in any
arm ofthe sea, or in any river, haven, creek, basin, or bay within the
admiralty jurisdiction of the United States, and out of the jurisdiction of
any particular state, on board any vessel belonging in whole or in part
to the United States or any citizen thereof. If you believe from the ev-
idence that the assault was committed as charged, and that it was com-
mitted on an American vessel at the point designated by the witnesses
who testiiied upon that subject, to-wit, nine miles from the shore in the
roads of the river La Plata, this court would have jurisdiction to confer
upon you the power to find your verdict upon the mattersin issue in the
indictment. ·
I believe there is no dispute that the otiense was committed, if com- i
mitted at all, within the jurisdiction of the United States court, and
therefore you need not inquire further into that question. You will