To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Vice Admiralty Court (New South Wales)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Vice Admiralty Court was a prerogative court established in the late 18th century in the colony of New South Wales, which was to become a state of Australia. A vice admiralty court is in effect an admiralty court. The word "vice" in the name of the court denoted that the court represented the Lord Admiral of the United Kingdom. In English legal theory, the Lord Admiral, as vice-regal of the monarch, was the only person who had authority over matters relating to the sea.[1] The Lord Admiral would authorize others as his deputies or surrogates to act. Generally, he would appoint a person as a judge to sit in the Court as his surrogate. By appointing Vice-Admirals in the colonies, and by constituting courts as Vice-Admiralty Courts, the terminology recognized that the existence and superiority of the "mother" court in the United Kingdom. Thus, the "vice" tag denoted that whilst it was a separate court, it was not equal to the "mother" court. In the case of the New South Wales court, a right of appeal lay back to the British Admiralty Court, which further reinforced this superiority. In all respects, the court was an Imperial court rather than a local Colonial court.

The function of an admiralty court initially in the 14th century was to deal with piracy and other offenses committed upon the high seas. This was a manifestation of England's claim over the sovereignty of the seas claimed by her. However, it did not take long for those early courts to seek to manifest control over all things to do with shipping, such as mercantile matters. This led to a running battle between the admiralty courts and the common law courts as to which court had jurisdiction over particular issues. At times King Richard II and King James I were induced to arbitrate a solution to these disputes. Admiralty courts were run under the Roman civil law of the time, whereas the common law courts were run under the common law procedures. Litigants would prefer the simplicity of the admiralty courts over the complexities of the common law courts.[1]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    2 782
    1 465
    6 316
  • Portraits Like Bombs: Eric Kennington and the Second World War
  • Kampf um Norwegen | Feldzug 1940 | Subtitles [Multi Languaje]
  • Flagellation

Transcription

Well, good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much for turning out in such cheering numbers on this rather sort of dreich afternoon here in Chelsea. So I’m talking about Eric Kennington, and particularly the work that he did during the Second World War, logically enough, considering that we’re in the National Army Museum, about the...concerning the British Army. It’s entitled ‘Portraits Like Bombs’ and this was a quote and the title was applied in September 1943 by an art critic to many of the series of portraits of men that Kennington had drawn in the Home Guard, but who were also Great War veterans. Now I’m just showing an image of the man himself, our hero for the hour, this is Eric Kennington aged about 30, drawn in 1918, so it gives you an idea of what the man looked like. But the epithet ‘Portraits Like Bombs’, which I mention in my title, was applied by a contemporary critic in September 1943 to one of these home guardsmen who was also a Great War veteran. And this is the fearsome-looking ex-Gordon Highlander, Sergeant Moir, of the 3rd Battalion, the Aberdeen Home Guard, which I am showing on the screen at the moment. Moir was interpreted by many of the critics reviewing this exhibition as ‘both thoroughly modern and yet also somehow timeless’, a type oft-celebrated earlier on in the history of art by artists such as Leonardo da Vinci. So if you look at Sergeant Moir from 1943 and then compare with the equally forbidding warrior...‘Portrait of a Warrior’ by Leonardo da Vinci from about 1475. And critics in this...in responding to Kennington’s exhibition at the Leicester Galleries in September 1943, where he showed this series of Home Guard portraits, also compared portraits such as Moir favourably to works by that sort of 16th-century master of portraiture working at the court of Henry VIII, Hans Holbein the Younger. This is his portrait of Sir John Godsalve from 1532. Now, a little bit of information about the man himself, a little bit of biographical detail. Kennington was born in Fulham into a sort of solidly professional and middle-class late-Victorian household. His father, Thomas Benjamin, was vice-president of the Royal Institute of Painters in Oils from 1906 to 1916. He was also a founder member of the New English Art Club. Kennington was educated at St Paul’s School, and the Lambeth School of Art, and just prior to the outbreak of the First World War he was beginning to gain recognition for a series of paintings and drawings depicting costermongers. And I’m showing you on the screen here, this is his ‘The Costardmongers’ which was exhibited at the International Society in April 1914, and it was one of the works that helped to bring him to public attention, and the work itself was actually bought by the then very famous society portraitist William Nicholson. Anyway, on 6 August 1914, Kennington volunteered to serve as a private in the 13th Battalion, The London Regiment, Princess Louise’s Own Kensingtons. I think mainly because the recruiting office for this unit was just around the corner from Kennington’s studio, which was off Kensington High Street. He undertook basic training near Abbots Langley between August to November 1914, and then he was sent...or went to France. He was in the front line in north-eastern France until he was wounded in the left foot in mid-January 1915. He...his middle toe on his left foot was amputated and he almost lost the entire foot to infection. And recovering in hospital, first in London and then in Liverpool, and then he was released from the Army with an honourable medical discharge in June 1915. And then the rest of that year, of 1915, he devoted to painting in oils and gold and silver paint in reverse on glass - a sort of icon-like, jewel-like work, ‘The Kensingtons at Laventie, Winter 1914', which immortalised his comrades in Number 7 Platoon, C Company of The Kensingtons. And you can just see this is Kennington, who has included himself in...he’s in the top left-hand corner wearing the balaclava. So he’s amongst the members of his old platoon. Certainly you can say that Kennington knew what war at the sharp end in the trenches was like. He had seen men shot through the head by snipers, riddled with machine-gun bullets as well as blown to pieces by high explosive shells. In fact during the time he was with the battalion in France, the Kensingtons suffered 127 causalities, about 20 per cent of the unit’s strength when it had arrived in France in mid-November 1914. Now this work, ‘The Kensingtons at Laventie’, touched on an episode after he’d...Kennington and his platoon had spent four days and nights in the firing line with the temperature at 20C below zero. The battalion had just made its way down a mile of communication trenches, frozen mud up to their waists, sometimes up to four feet deep, to the relative safety of the much-shelled village of Laventie, which was still coming under intermittent shellfire. And the scene that Kennington depicts in the work, his platoon’s about to begin a five-mile march to reserve billets, which were out of range of the German artillery. And in fact by the time that Kennington had completed the painting towards the end of 1915, 90 per cent of the 700-strong battalion which he had arrived with in France early in November 1914, had become causalities - many during the battles of Neuve-Chapelle in March 1915, and particularly Aubers Ridge in May 1915. Now this...the painting, ‘The Kensingtons at Laventie’, created a sensation when it was exhibited in a charity exhibition at the Goupil Gallery on Regent Street during April-July 1916. And Kennington was hailed by a number of leading critics as ‘the painter who knew how to properly portray the stoically enduring British Tommy’. For example, The Times declared: ‘He [Kennington] has painted the real war for us in all its squalor and glory.’ And the following year, the celebrated portraitist Sir John Lavery wrote in support of Kennington, as Kennington’s application to become an official war artist working with the Department of Information, and I quote: ‘Mr Kennington, in my opinion, has painted in “The Kensingtons”, the only picture of the Great War that I have seen so far that will actually live.’ So Kennington was appointed an official war artist attached to the Department of Information in the spring of 1917, and he was sent off to France in August 1917, and he spent about seven months out in France. So after...and it’s interesting that additionally he was only supposed to spend a month out in France in August 1917, but after the first month had expired, he simply refused to come home and kept sending pleading letters to his employers at the Department of Information asking that he be allowed to stay much longer to, as he said, ‘learn the war’. And I’m just going to quickly show you a selection of the drawings that he produced between... these marvellous drawings, often drawn in less than three-quarters of an hour in, or near, the front line during this period of August 1917 to March 1918. So this is a Royal Engineer laying a field telephone wire from September 1917. In red chalk on a white background. A particular favourite of mine, a portrait of a 19-year-old trench raider from the Lancashire Fusiliers that he drew in October 1917. The ‘Raider with a Cosh’ - a man from the 3rd Battalion, the Rifle Brigade, that he drew preparing for a trench raid in February 1918, which is in the Tate Gallery’s collection. Also he didn’t just do portraits, he also did some quite sensitive drawings and also watercolours and pastels of the sort of camps in which resting soldiers were living, such as this rest camp from 1918. He also did some drawings of some of the wounded. He had to be admitted to a casualty clearing station himself suffering from trench fever - this was a malady caused by infected lice bites. And so while he was recovering from a bout of trench fever in a casualty clearing station, he drew a series of very sensitive drawings of some of his fellow sufferers, some of the other patients in the casualty clearing station. So this is a man who’s being treated for the effects of mustard gas, which had been introduced for the first time on the Western Front by the Germans in July 1917. And here’s another sufferer from mustard gas effects drawn in 1918. So eventually Kennington was persuaded to come back to England in March 1918, and in June-July 1918 a selection from the over 170 drawings in pastel and charcoal and watercolours were exhibited in an exhibition at the Leicester Galleries, backed by the Ministry of Information. The exhibits were widely hailed as masterpieces, and Kennington was identified as a portraitist to rival such great figures from the past as Albrecht Dürer, Ingres, Holbein the Younger, as well as contemporaries such as Augustus John, William Nicholson, William Orpen, and the American John Singer-Sargent. For example, in The New Statesmen, the poet Laurence Binyon, an art critic, wrote of Kennington’s exhibits, and I quote: ‘Mr Kennington has a genius for reality. He has not only the gift of exact and faithful record, but the power of giving expression to the latent vehemence, energy and passion that make up the controlled strength of a man. If a foreigner wished to see the British soldier, he could not do better than see him with Mr Kennington’s eyes.’ Kennington, however, was not happy with the Ministry of Information, and was still suffering from the lingering effects of trench fever, and in effect he resigned from the Ministry as a war artist in September 1918. However, two months later, in November 1918, he signed up with the Canadian War Memorial Scheme which was the brainchild of Lord Beaverbrook the newspaper magnate, and late in November 1918 was sent out to France as a temporary first lieutenant attached to the Canadian Army and attached himself to the 16th Battalion Highlanders of Canada, part of the 3rd Infantry Brigade of the 1st Canadian Division. And while in France between November 1918 and March 1919, he made a series of over 40 studies of individual soldiers from the battalion who fought their last major battle of the war in October 1918. And then early in 1920 he painted a large tribute in oils to the formidable-looking men of the much-decorated unit entitled ‘The Conquerors’. And this was exhibited in Ottawa during the summer of 1920, and then in October-November of the same year Kennington held a solo show at the Alpine Club gallery in London. And on the basis of this painting, this oil ‘The Conquerors’, the art critic of The Sunday Times, Frank Rutter, wrote that ‘Kennington is...’, and I quote, ‘...one of our foremost portrait painters’. It’s interesting that one visitor to the exhibition just before it closed was the celebrated leader of our irregular troops, TE Lawrence, who bought two of Kennington’s drawings of soldiers. Now Kennington may have thought that he was finished with the British military, but Lawrence persuaded Kennington to come out to the Middle East to draw personalities who appeared in his account of the war with the Ottoman Turks that he was writing at the time, which was eventually published as ‘The Seven Pillars of Wisdom’. And so Kennington was persuaded by Lawrence to go out to the Middle East to draw some of the characters, or some of the personalities who appeared in The Seven Pillars, including... this is a portrait he did of Lawrence from when he was in...he met Lawrence in Cairo in March 1921. Lawrence, in the end, wouldn’t allow this work to be reproduced in The Seven Pillars of Wisdom’s luxury subscribers edition, because he said that it was ‘too obviously the spider in a web of its own spinning’. He thought it was just too revelatory of this, you know, incredibly enigmatic and rather sort of tricky personality. But somebody else that he drew at the time was Field Marshal Allenby who was then the Commissioner...the High Commissioner for Egypt in Cairo, and this was drawn in less than an hour in March 1921 in the Semiramis Hotel. And just to show you how Kennington could catch a likeness, this is him, a photograph of him taken the year before, and then this is the man himself drawn by Kennington. Kennington remained friendly with Lawrence until Lawrence was killed in his tragic accident in May 1935. Now for the next sort of four years, Kennington devoted himself to carving a remarkable tribute in stone to his friend, a recumbent Lawrence in the guise of an Arab sheikh wearing Arab dress in the form of a recumbent tomb effigy which is now in the small Anglo Saxon church of St Martin’s, Wareham in Dorset. So this is sort of showing you an image here of the head of the tomb effigy that Kennington carved, and more-or-less was just finishing, putting the finishing touches to, as the Second World War broke out. But he also did some other military figures just before the war broke out, as he kept contacts with the military thanks to Lawrence’s continuing connections with the RAF and also with the Tank Corps. And this is Kennington’s portrait of ‘the father of the tank’, and the Oxford military historian, Major General Sir Ernest Swinton that was drawn in 1938. The sitter was amused that Kennington had made him look like, and I quote, ‘Attila the Hun, the wrath of God’. But he was amused - he rather liked being portrayed in such a formidable light did Sir Ernest. So this is at the Tank Museum in Bovington. Now, late in November 1939, the War Artists Advisory Committee was created as part of the Ministry of Information, chaired by the then director of the National Gallery, Sir Kenneth Clark. And one of the first of the 30 artists or so that Clark considered for employment was Kennington, specifically as identified as the portraitist...or likely to be an excellent portraitist of, and I quote, ‘the fighting man’. So Kennington was appointed as an official war artist in December 1939, with a remit to, or a brief, to draw in pastel or charcoal, portraits at 25 guineas a time. And the artist estimated that he would need at least three hours per sitter. And Kennington promptly asked to draw the fearsome chief of the Imperial General Staff, the 6-foot-4-tall general Sir Edmund Ironside, which he did in January 1940. And I’m showing you an image... this is Ironside drawn by Kennington in Cairo in 1921, and then he drew him again in January 1940 as an official war artist. Now I think Kennington was soon having trouble with the War Artists Advisory Committee as he did not get on with the War Office representative on the committee - a newspaper man called Colin Coote. The War Office gave him the distinct impression, according to Kennington, that it was not interested in, and I quote, ‘vulgar publicity’. Kennington was supposed to go to France to draw the commander of the British Expeditionary Force, Lord Gort, but the trip was repeatedly postponed. And it was only after sort of constantly nagging at the War Office representative on the War Artists Advisory Committee, Coote, that Kennington was...that a series of other portrait sittings were set up with other personalities within the War Office. And in March 1940, he drew this marvellous portrait of Major General RH Dewing who was the Director of Military Operations, in again less than three hours. I love the fact that his moustache looks as though it’s about to leap off and tackle the Germans by itself. But it’s a bit of a leitmotif in that Dewing was somebody who had been a rising star in the British Army at the time towards the end of the First World War, but the war had ended really before he could actually get his hands on a sort of suitably senior position, and so he was just a little bit too old when the Second World War broke out and had to retire about 18 months after this portrait was drawn. So I think Kennington always, as a Great War veteran himself, felt a lot of sympathy for those who were in that sort of position, who hadn’t quite made it to the top at the end of the First World War, and therefore were just deemed to be a little too old to shine in the Second World War in a sort of high capacity. So Kennington eventually persuaded the Admiralty to send him off to Plymouth where he drew a series of portraits of sailors who distinguished themselves, first of all in the Battle of the River Plate in December 1939, such as this marvellous portrait here of Senior Stoker Andrew Martin of HMS Exeter, which was drawn in April 1940. But he also drew portraits of heroes of the twin naval victories of Narvik in April 1940, such as Petty Officer Barnes of HMS Eclipse with this sort of lovely evocation of a Norwegian fjord over his shoulder. So he was still sort of a little in bad odour with the War Artists Advisory Committee for being one of the artists who proved to be the sort of most troublesome, or, you know, members of the awkward squad, because Kennington was always asking to be sent to...be given more sitters than he was being allotted. So actually Kennington jumped before he could be pushed, and actually when, with the creation of the Home Guard, the Local Defence Volunteers, in mid-May 1940, he jumped at the chance to join that, and he left the War Artists Advisory Committee as an official war artist in mid-May 1940. And he resigned, convinced he was doing far more for the war effort by joining the Home Guard, and by early July 1940 he was in charge of a section of six countrymen in the south Oxfordshire countryside, defending an observation post he’d set up to the north of his home in Ipsden. And at the time, in letters that he wrote to his older brother William, it’s clear that Kennington did not at all romanticise the Home Guard, or over idealise its personnel. Their equipment was pitiful, weapons were non-existent, senior officers displayed little drive and initiative and impotently buried themselves in red tape and paperwork. And he noted to his older brother: ‘The men, if not suitably motivated, did not report for duty in the evenings, but sloped off after roll call to go poaching, fishing, or playing cards in the pub.’ So just keep that in mind when you look at some of these amazing portraits that he later drew of home guardsmen, and that he actually did know the reality of...he wasn’t sort of starry-eyed about the organisation. So, as I said, Kennington had left the War Artists Advisory Committee as a war artist in mid-May 1940, but it quickly became clear when the War Artists Advisory Committee held an exhibition of official war art that it had commissioned at the National Gallery in July 1940, that Kennington was by far the most popular artist on display, and he was the star portraitist. His portraits of generals and sailors were singled out for particular praise, and certainly after defeat in France in May-June 1940, the country needed urgent reassurance that it actually still had the men who could, and I quote, ‘win the war’. Art critic H Granville-Fell expressed a sentiment felt by many visitors, and I quote: ‘Kennington’s harsh iron technique...’ I’m just showing you a few images looking suitably debonair in his Home Guard uniform from 1940. But just go back to Stoker Martin. Talking about this particular work, H Granville-Fell wrote: ‘Kennington’s harsh iron technique has a force admirably suited to conveying unflinching and dauntless resolution in the faces of his seamen and soldiers. I know of no other artist who can so convincingly depict the salt of the earth, and evoke palpably, in a portrait, the very essence and savour of courage.’ So the War Artists Advisory Committee in August 1940 rather had to eat a little humble pie, asking Kennington if he would return to work for it to draw portraits this time of RAF personnel. And the committee’s secretary, who rejoiced in the marvellous sobriquet of E Montgomery O’Rourke Dickey - there’s a name to conjure with - wrote to Sir Kenneth Clark that month, and I quote: ‘The best of this artist’s portraits [ie Kennington] of sailors in the exhibition at the National Gallery have, in the eyes of the public, a nobility not shared by any other work that’s on display at the National Gallery. These portraits typify the fighting man who’s going to win the war for us.’ So Kennington started working for the War Artists Advisory Committee again as an official war artist in September 1940 as the Battle of Britain was reaching a crescendo, and by the end of the year he’d completed over a dozen portraits of Battle of Britain fighter aces, such as this lovely portrait of Flight Lieutenant Albert Gerald ‘Zulu’ Lewis, who was a South African, drawn in October 1940, and also Pilot Officer James ‘Ginger’ Lacey who, not surprisingly from his sobriquet, had red hair, drawn again in October 1940. So Kennington worked as an official artist attached to the RAF throughout 1940-41. But typically with Kennington it meant, being a member of the God’s awkward squad, he was soon falling out with the Royal Air Force representative on the War Artists Advisory Committee, a man called Air Commodore Harald Peake. And twice in May 1941 Kennington threatened to resign because Peake wanted him to draw too many, as he put it, ‘knobs’...too many senior officers. But he was talked out of this action by no less than Air Marshal Sir Charles Portal, chief of the Air Staff, who you'd think probably had more other things to do in the middle of 1941 than to talk him out of resigning. However, so Kennington stayed with the RAF as a war artist, and meanwhile, at the same time, works by him were still being exhibited at the National Gallery, but some criticism of the work was beginning to creep into the press. For example, Eric Newton, who was the art critic of The Sunday Times, wrote, and I quote: ‘Eric Kennington goes on and on with his over-life-size portraits of supermen. They are strident things whose assertiveness almost hurts the eyes.’ But then he did concede: ‘They do look like men who are going to win the war. Some are positively frightening. Dropped as leaflets over enemy country, I can imagine them being as effective as a bomb.’ Now Kennington had a habit of accepting commissions, or just generally drawing portraits of people he admired, when Air Commodore Peake, the RAF representative, thought he should really be focusing entirely on men of the RAF. So for example in September 1941, Kennington drew a compelling portrait of an exhausted Field Marshal Sir Archibald Percival Wavell, to whom Kennington had been first introduced initially in the early 1920s by none other than TE Lawrence. Now Kennington drew Wavell in September 1941 when he was briefly passing through London before assuming command of the British forces in the Far East. Wavell had inflicted a spectacular defeat on the Italians in Libya in late 1940 - early 1941, before in turn suffering a drubbing at the hands of Rommel in the spring of 1941, culminating in the failure of the Battleaxe offensive of June 1941 which Wavell had launched, against his better judgment, at the urging of Prime Minister Churchill. And I think it’s interesting that in this portrait, Kennington does not try to disguise the fact that Wavell had lost an eye on the Western Front in the First World War, and the field marshal was rather self-conscious concerning this disfigurement. A man of few, if no words, famously taciturn, according to his son Wavell could relax with Kennington because he was an old friend of their mutual friend Lawrence. Wavell thought that this portrait was all too revealing of his state of mind in the wake of the Battleaxe fiasco and his abrupt removal from command of the British forces in the Middle East, having lost the confidence of a certainly more eloquent and more voluble Churchill. So two months after drawing Wavell, Kennington secured two months’ leave from the War Artists Advisory Committee to visit the 11th Armoured Division, which was based near Ripon in North Yorkshire. And he’d been invited to draw men of this division by its new commander, the maverick theorist of tank warfare, Major General Percy Hobart, who just happened to have been a friend of Kennington’s since about 1919. Now Hobart had joined the Tank Corps in 1923, rising to command the Army’s sole armoured brigade in 1935-36. Rather like Kennington, he had a positive gift for putting the noses out of joint of his seniors over him, and he’d actually been sacked as commander of the 7th Armoured Brigade in Egypt at the beginning of the Second World War. However in 1941 Churchill was horrified and amazed to discover that Hobart was no longer on the active list, but actually was serving as a sergeant in his local Home Guard, and the prime minister insisted that Hobart be given a new armoured division to command, train and inspire. I’ll just sort of show you an image of Wavell. So there’s Hobart that Kennington drew during this stint at the 11th Armoured Division late 1941 - early 1942. And while with the division, he...oh, there’s just an image of Hobart as he was in 1942, and this is Kennington’s portrait of him on the top of his command tank in January 1942. And the idea was that he would draw a series of works, or a series of people within the division, and then these would be reproduced in a sort of illustrated booklet, which was eventually published in December 1942 as ‘Tanks and Tank Folk’, and there’s the front cover of that. But while he was with the division, typically enough Kennington seized the opportunity to drive a Crusader tank himself, and this is a portrait drawn of his instructor, Sergeant Birch, who told the artist: ‘You’ll find it bumpy, noisy, smelly, rather cramped.’ And then continuing: ‘“Push the levers right home, now take these two banks, four feet down across the road, five feet up, don’t stop on the top, keep her going, rev up, push this tree over.” That was a revelation. The tree made obeisance gently, and cast its branches, which hopped and leapt in smithereens, but not a crackle came through to us. Our own noise of the tank filled the world. Outer happenings were as unreal as a silent musicless film. It made clear how, apart from the brutality of their makeup, the Germans could crush civilian crowds. They could not hear the screams or see the gory havoc.’ He drew on top of tanks, and inside tanks - this is one of Gunner Aspinall. As Kennington later remarked about this drawing: ‘He was all shut in, and there was no room for a drawing board. Even to scribble notes was the act of a contortionist. Every time you touch something you get a little bit more grease on you.’ Also, other individuals caught his eye for one reason or another, such as this ‘Sentry’ from 1941. Seen by another officer from this division, and I quote: ‘Look at the “Sentry”. He was not sure himself whether he was a soldier, or a civilian muffled up in too many clothes. He very nearly looked it too. However, EK [Kennington] gaily strengthened him, and the artist successfully places the accent on watchfulness, but the picture is still incredibly like the man, and a sentry into the bargain.’ He also drew the formidable Trooper Lewis, who Kennington described as: ‘...in khaki denim, leaning against the door of a nissen hut. Blue-eyed. Anglo-Saxon. A bit ferocious.’ And then also Corporal Hardy: ‘...in black overalls, tough, not always as grim as this. It is most difficult to portray gaiety, and easiest to paint people serious or solemn. They’re apt to become either, or both, when they sit still for their portrait - a job especially irksome to a naturally active man like Hardy, who was ex-Royal Tank Regiment, and experienced. He does not drive a little toy of a tank like that in my picture.’ Hardy had initially told the artist, and I quote: ‘“You must draw my tank as well as me,” referring to “her” by name, but I made a great error, and drew not only somebody else’s tank, but one of a different breed.’ But he also took, apart from the portraits, he did some rather lovely, I think very sort of sensitive landscapes of the sort of environment in which he found himself while staying with the 11th Armoured Division, and this is ‘Nissen Land’ from 1942, from the spring of ’42. And also this image of the ‘Officers’ Mess’, ‘...a nissen hut brightly lit and hot as an oven, and stuffed with hearty youth. Light, warmth and a well-stocked bar are likely to produce good nature, high vitality, and a welcome for the oddest guest.’ And then he also kept in touch, after he’d left the division in the spring of 1942, he kept in touch with the Royal Armoured Corps, and he produced this...a series of a couple of cover designs for this pamphlet about a history of the Armoured Corps in 1943. So this is one version, and another version focusing on the head of a driver. Now Kennington commented later, in ‘Tanks and Tank Folk’, which I mentioned was published in December 1942, that, and I quote: ‘Tanks were male monsters. The jolly feminine names chalked or painted on them won’t fit. I imagine the embodiment of what is left of a man when all his culture is removed, and then add strength and combativeness a thousandfold. The result is the tank.’ Now he returned to work for the RAF in the spring of 1942, but I think he missed his time at the 11th Armoured Division, and I think more generally he missed his time with the Army. The visit had reawakened memories of his time in the Kensingtons and on the Western Front in the First World War as a war artist. Moreover, the War Office’s Head of Public Relations, Major General JH Beith, was keen actually to poach Kennington from the War Artists Advisory Committee. Beith was not happy at all with the calibre of portraitists that the War Artists Advisory Committee had been sending him, artists such as Anthony Devis, Henry Carr, Henry Lamb, and I’m showing you an example here of the work of William Coldstream. Coldstream was a particular sore point, he was held in very high regard by Sir Kenneth Clark, but the portraits that he produced of soldiers in North Africa, and later in Italy, such as this example here of Gurkha officer Havildar Kulbir Thapa VC, were deeply disliked by their sitters and by the commanding officers of the units to which they belonged. Their features, Beith complained, were hard to make out. They looked as if they’d been caught in a heavy rain shower, and they were not easy to reproduce. And when they were, they did not at all resemble heroes. So Beith was also keen to initiate a campaign to raise the profile of the Army, to promote its heroes at a time when it had recently suffered a string of defeats in France and Norway in 1940, in Greece and North Africa in 1941, and then in Malaya and Burma during the first half of 1942. So Kennington resigned as an official war artist with the War Artists Advisory Committee and for the RAF in September 1942, and he went to work for the War Office under Major General Beith. And he drew a series of portraits of heroic soldiers that could be translated into portraits. Kennington drew the men who’d been preselected for him, who’d displayed great bravery, for example, under fire during the retreat to Dunkirk in May-June 1940, such as Regimental Sergeant Major Christopher Roby, DCM of the Royal Green Jackets, and also Regimental Sergeant Major Sutton, who’s in the National Army Museum’s art collection - he was of the Essex Regiment, drawn late 1942. And also Private...I think probably one of the most sensitive ones of a private who’d won the military medal in Eritrea and then wounded again...had been wounded during the first battle of El Alamein in June 1942. Kennington also drew a haunting portrait of one of the few British officers to distinguish himself during the disastrous Malayan campaign of 1941-42. This is Lieutenant Colonel Ian Stewart, DSO, MC of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. And I think this man looks as if he is still, in his own mind, back in Malaya in a desperate battle for survival against the apparently unstoppable Japanese. And some of these portraits, including that of Colonel Stewart here, were reproduced in articles written by the Scottish writer Eric Linklater, for publication in The Illustrated London News, Picture Post, and also Military Illustrated. Now Major General Beith, the Head of PR at the War Office, backed by the acerbic Secretary of State for War, Sir Percy James Grigg, were also keen to portray, and raise the profile, and improve the image of the much-mocked Home Guard in 1943. And in fact its reputation had received a drubbing in recent films such as ‘Went the Day Well’, released in December 1942, and probably even more notoriously in ‘The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp’, which was released in April 1943. So in the spring of 1943, Beith commissioned Kennington to produce a series of portraits of home guardsmen from across the United Kingdom, in their workplaces, in uniform or in their civilian garb, with uniform and equipment ready to hand, and these would be reproduced in magazines such as The Illustrated London News, The Studio, and Country Life. Oh, just an image here of one of his more interesting ventures into the symbolic realm. This was his tribute to the 8th Army entitled ‘The Eighth’, drawn after the surrender of German forces in North Africa at Tunis. But starting with the works that he drew as part of his Home Guard series, which was eventually reproduced in a book as ‘Britain’s Home Guard: A Character Study’ in February 1945, he first drew in April 1943 a London home guard, Private Mills, who was serving in a Home Guard heavy anti-aircraft battery on Clapham Common. And in relation to this drawing of Private Mills, he drew this sort of wonderfully evocative image of a Home Guard battery in action on Clapham Common on an evening in April 1943. So, it’s Home Guard anti-aircraft gunners in action. And in this fine...another sort of fine ‘tache here from Lance Corporal Robertson who was a Great War veteran serving...he was a postman in civilian life, but he was serving in the 11th Battalion of the Edinburgh Home Guard. You also have the very tough-looking Sergeant Moir, who I showed you at the beginning of the talk, who was a ghillie and a gamekeeper in civilian life, who qualified as a marksman on the Western Front, serving with the Gordon Highlanders in 1917 - a sort of lovely evocation of a sort of Aberdeenshire forest over his shoulder. And then here, of another Gordon Highlander, another veteran of the Western Front in the First World War, Aberdeen farmer Sergeant McLeod, also of the 3rd Battalion of the Aberdeen Home Guard, with this sort of lovely, almost Van Gogh-like evocation of a sort of summer field, looking through the entrance to his barn. Now, this is one that he drew of somebody at home. This was a Welsh...a miner from south Wales, Corporal Melvin Jones of the 9th Battalion of the Monmouth Home Guard, with whom Kennington actually spent about two or three days staying in his home in Pontnewydd in south Wales at the eastern end of the valleys. And this is a...well it’s quite a remarkable image, which is now in Torfaen Museum, of Melvin Jones in his sort of day job as a miner, deep beneath the surface at his punishing day job, hacking at a seam of coal in a tunnel only four feet high. Then he went off to the south of England and Cambridgeshire, and I think it’s interesting that Kennington was an admirer of Oliver Cromwell, and he drew this intriguing symbolic representation of Cromwell’s bronze statue by Frederick Pomeroy, which was erected in the centre of St Ives where Cromwell had lived in the mid-1630s. And Pomeroy’s statue was unveiled in 1601 [sic - 1901]. And I think, just in passing, to note that Cromwell’s reputation had undergone something of a revival during the Second World War, and the image of his statue outside the House of Commons, for example, was used by the London Passenger Transport Board as the basis for a poster which was issued in 1940. So that’s the statue by Thornycroft that was the basis for the poster, and in fact the New Model Army that Cromwell was so associated with, was taken in the summer of 1940 as a possible model for the future development of the Home Guard by writers such as Basil Liddell Hart, John Brophy and Tom Wintringham. And in fact while he was in St Ives, he drew this I think marvellous...marvellous and sort of gritty portrait of 50-year-old farmer, Sergeant John Henry Jack Stokes of the 2nd Battalion of the Huntingdonshire Home Guard, I think primarily because they reminded him, or in his mind’s eye, of one of Cromwell’s Ironsides. So, another Great War veteran. Similarly with this portrait of a man in Portsmouth, a VC winner, Private James Ockendon, who was then serving with the 18th Portsmouth Dockyard Battalion of the Hampshire Home Guard. He was a crane operator at the time that Kennington drew him. But Ockendon had won the Victoria Cross in October 1917 for single-handedly capturing a German machine-gun post, killing its crew of three, and a further four Germans who attempted to recapture the position. Ockendon had then proceeded to lead his platoon to capture a fortified farmhouse, taking 16 German prisoners. Then in the autumn of 1943 he moved on to Cumbria, where he drew 48-year-old Company Sergeant Major William Ernest Waters in Barrow-in-Furness town hall, overlooking the town’s important shipyards. In civilian life Waters had been a lead miner, and was a municipal electrician at the time that Kennington drew him. During the First World War, Waters had served for three years on the Western Front with the 4th Kings Own Royal Lancasters, and towards the end of his time in the trenches, Waters qualified as a company sniper and amassed an impressive total of kills. The sitter thought the portrait a faithful likeness, though he apparently complained at the time that Kennington had made his nose a little on the big side. And during this period while he was in Barrow-in-Furness with the Home Guard there, he drew a series of quite sort of striking evocative scenes of the home guards in action, such as this image of coastal defence searchlights looking out over the Irish Sea at the heavily mined beaches of south-west Barrow. And then also this is a work called ‘The Toggle Rope’ showing the home guards practising house-to-house fighting. And then he moved briefly to Leeds where he drew the wonderfully craggy-faced Battery Sergeant Major Dawson, yet another Great War veteran in charge of a battery of anti-aircraft guns. In fact Home Guard anti-aircraft gunners, certainly in the south-east of England, were extensively deployed during the summer of 1943 and ‘44 against the V1 Doodlebug flying bombs. And in civilian life, Dawson was the foreman of a munitions factory. After Kennington drew him, there was a fire in the factory, and Dawson was later rewarded the George Medal for putting the fire out at great personal risk to himself. And one of his last Home Guard portraits, which was drawn in November 1943, was of the splendidly knobbly-nosed Sergeant Edgar Bluett of the Penzance Home Guard, and appropriately enough he’s depicted here by Kennington standing guard over a section of rugged south Cornish coastline. Another Great War veteran, Bluett had been a Lewis gunner with the Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry on the Western Front in 1917-18. And I think looking at this drawing here with this marvellous evocation of the coastline of Cornwall over his shoulder, it’s as if Kennington purposely evokes John O’Gaunt’s famous speech in Act II, Scene I of Shakespeare’s ‘Richard II’, in which John O’Gaunt, the grizzled old soldier, imagines England as, and I quote, ‘...this little world, this precious stone set in the silver sea, this blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England’. And in fact Kennington quoted this very passage in the catalogue to his September 1943 solo show, at the Leicester Galleries, which included two-thirds of his Home Guard portraits. Just in the last few minutes of my talk I just want to wrap up on what he did after the Home Guard period, his Home Guard series, and this is just an image of ‘Britain’s Home Guard’ published in February 1945. But he also did a series of works, I think on the basis of the work that he exhibited in September 1943 which was, again, very highly praised, very well received by most of the critics. He received a commission to draw six portraits of employees of London Passenger Transport Board, or London Transport, who distinguished themselves during the great blitz, the big blitz of September 1940 to May 1941, and this was issued as a series of posters throughout the network in April and...or between April and June 1944 as ‘Seeing It Through’. And I just want to show you here, there’s a couple...three of the sitters were women, proof...and I just wanted to show you proof that he was more than capable of convincingly depicting female subjects, such as here, this is Underground porter Elsie Birrell who was based at Stockwell station whom Kennington drew in February 1944, who displayed great presence of mind when Stockwell station was bombed in November 1940. Now it’s interesting, this is the original pastel from which the basis for the... from which the lithographic poster was made. When the committee that commissioned these posters first saw them, they...one of the members remarked that he’d made Birrell look as though she’d just been dug up in Tutankhamun’s tomb, not from Stockwell at all, but more like the Valley of the Kings. So it had to be slightly sort of toned down for when it was produced as a poster. He also drew this wonderful portrait of a 20-year-old bus conductress, one of the first generation of female bus conductors employed by London Transport in November 1940. She’d only been in the job about a fortnight when a bus she was in was caught in the blitz, and she shielded with her own body two young children, and also helped passengers who’d been injured when the bus was riddled with shrapnel from a bomb exploding nearby. She came from Poplar and was based at Athol Street garage. Kennington said that she had...she was ‘like a Rubens Venus’ and she had a complexion that was ‘edible as a peach’. So these were drawn early in 1944, and issued in the spring and summer of 1944 over the network. And as the war in Europe was coming to a close, Kennington occasionally accepted commissions from military men he’d met during his work for the War Office in 1942-43, such as... I think it’s a rather striking portrait...unfortunately I don’t have an image of it in colour, but this is 64-year-old ex-Home Guard commander former Major General Sir James Burnett with his boxer...with his dog, Junior. There’s a rather sad story behind this in that he looks rather sort of melancholic, because he had two sons - one was killed in a traffic accident at the beginning of the war, and this was drawn in June 1945, and six weeks earlier his second surviving son had been killed during the attack on...or advance across the Rhine - Operation VERITY - and serving with his old regiment the Gordon Highlanders. So it’s his bulldog, Junior, here. And when...and I think he’s...sorry, just returning to something I said at the beginning of the talk, when Kennington drew him, I think he was conscious that Burnett was a Great War veteran for whom great things had been predicted in 1918 – he’d already been awarded the DSO and Bar, and Burnett in 1918 was one of the British Army’s youngest brigadier generals aged only 36, but he’d never quite fulfilled his potential and had not been given the senior command during World War Two he probably merited on the grounds of age. So I think we’ll just finish off here with Kennington resting in his den in his garden at Homer House in south Oxfordshire, reading about the end of the war and VE Day in May 1945. So, thank you for your time.

Establishment

The court in New South Wales was established by letters patent dated 2 April 1787 issued by the reigning monarch of England, King George III. These letters authorized the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to constitute and appoint a Vice Admiral for the colony, as well as a Judge and any other officers needed for the court to function in the new colony that was soon to be established. The Admirals had authority to appoint vice-admirals and judges in any existing colony. However, as the colony of New South Wales was not yet established, the Admiralty obtained additional letters patent to ensure that there was no legal defect in the constitution of the court. Those further letters patent authorized the Admiralty to make appointments in the new colony.[2][3]

Arthur Phillip, first Vice-Admiral of New South Wales

On 30 April 1787, the High Court of Admiralty issued those letters patent which appointed the first Governor of New South Wales Arthur Phillip as Vice Admiral. Further letters patent were also issued to Robert Ross who was appointed as the first judge of the court. Their commissions gave them power to deal with all civil and maritime causes according to the maritime laws and customs which prevailed in what used to be called the High Court of Admiralty in the United Kingdom.[4] At the time of establishment, this included commercial disputes involving ships, seamen's wages, collisions, and salvage. This is what is commonly called an Admiralty Court's "Instance Jurisdiction".[5]

Whilst the British admiralty court had jurisdiction over criminal offenses committed upon the high seas, the jurisdiction of the court was rarely invoked. The civil law was well suited to dealing with commercial transactions. However, it could not cope adequately with criminal offenses.[1] The court needed to rely upon the old Roman civil law to establish any breaches.[6] Former Chief Justice Frederick Jordan noted that criminal cases often fell through because sailors weren't available to give evidence (whether by malice or design). A sentence of death could only not be imposed unless two witnesses could be produced.[1] To deal with this problem, the British Parliament passed the Piracy Act 1698 (UK). This enabled the Crown to appoint seven commissioners to try offenses of piracy under that Act. Whilst that latter court was often called a vice-admiralty court, Australian legal historian John Bennett has shown that that court should not be confused with the present court.[3] The latter court was legally distinct as it was constituted under a separate letters patent dated 12 May 1787 as the Court of Vice-Admiralty and it was constituted by commissioners rather than a judge.

The court sat as a Prize Court, although Bennett points out that there are no records of a prize commission being granted.[7] The first sitting in Prize was in May 1799 when Captain Henry Waterhouse RN ordered the Spanish vessel Nostra Senora de Bethlehem condemned as a prize of war. Other Spanish vessels condemned during this time were the El Plumier, Euphemia and the Anna Josepha[7][8][9]

In 1810 Judge Advocate Ellis Bent questioned the jurisdiction of the court to consider proceedings in prize.[7] As a result, the Admiralty issued warrants and documents to Bent in June 1812 to authorize the court to consider prize, but subsequently revoked Bent's authority in October 1813. As a result, The Eringapatam was unable to be dealt with in New South Wales in 1814 when it was brought into port.[10]

Work of the court before 1840

The first sitting of the court purported to be in 1798 when Governor Hunter convened the latter court to deal with charges of mutiny and attempted piracy. As Bennett has shown, whilst the court was convened as a vice-admiralty court, it was in fact the Court of Vice-Admiralty. No harm was done as the defendant was acquitted on the basis of insufficient evidence.[7]

The majority of the work of the court was administrative in nature. Archive records from the court indicate that this related to the granting and revoking of letters of marque and the provision of sureties by masters or shipowners.[5] After the death of Ellis Bent, deputy judge advocate of the colony and also judge of this court, his brother Jeffery Hart Bent, offered to serve as judge. Jeffery Bent was the judge of the Supreme Court of Civil Judicature. His offer was declined by Governor Hunter and he was never commissioned. However, when he left New South Wales after his appointment as judge of the Supreme Court was revoked, he took the Admiralty court seal entrusted to his brother Ellis with him back to the United Kingdom.[3] Castles says that the removal of the seal was to cause litigants in the court to bitterly remember Bent. This was because that documents from the court could not be sealed until a new seal arrived from the United Kingdom, frustrating litigation in the court.[11]

In 1823, the Third Charter of Justice created a new Supreme Court of New South Wales. That court was to be presided over by Chief Justice of New South Wales Francis Forbes. However, the British authorities did not transfer the admiralty jurisdiction of the vice admiralty court to that new court. Until 1911, this court and the new Supreme Court operated side by side. In some cases, both courts had concurrent jurisdiction, such as over criminal offenses committed upon the high seas. However, in practice, criminal cases were brought in the Supreme Court [3] probably because of the difficulty in finding seven commissioners to sit. In practice, the senior judge of the Supreme Court was also appointed as a judge of the vice-admiralty court. This could cause problems as when the judge was unavailable through leave or absence, there was a belief that no other person who could perform the role.[3] For example, in the case of the Almorah, the Attorney General of New South Wales Saxe Bannister thought that there was no actual admiralty court as Forbes did not hold an actual commission from the United Kingdom as a judge in Admiralty. Bannister advised that the case should be tried in Calcutta, India.[12]

In 1841, the Admiralty in England decreed that the chief justice should be the judge in admiralty. This changed the previous practice of directing appointing a person to be judge.[13] However, under Chief Justice Alfred Stephen, the vice-admiralty commission was given to Justice Samuel Milford instead. Milford regularly sat in the court at least one day a week. However, when Milford was appointed the Resident Judge at Moreton Bay (being the precursor of the Supreme Court of Queensland, Stephen offered to resign his commission as judge in vice-admiralty. The British authorities declined that request and advised that if Stephen was to resign his admiralty commission, by necessity, he would have to resign his commission as chief justice of the Supreme Court.[3][12]

Work of the court after 1840

The jurisdiction of the British court of admiralty was extended in both 1840 and in 1861 by the Admiralty Court Acts of 1840 and 1861. That increase in jurisdiction did not flow down to the New South Wales court. The British Parliament passed the Vice Admiralty Courts Act 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 24 (UK)) to confirm the colonial jurisdiction of the courts as well as giving them jurisdiction over ships mortgages, disputes over ownership or possession of ships, employment, the earnings of any registered ship, claims for master's wages, towage and building or repairing ships. The Act provided for an appeal to the Privy Council and also allowed the judge of the court to appoint a registrar or marshal locally, rather than wait on an appointment from the United Kingdom. However, these changes did not make the court a local court, and the court was still an Imperial Court of the United Kingdom.[4]

In 1868, the Victorian registered schooner Daphne chartered by Ross Lewin and skippered by John Daggett recruited islanders from the islands of Tanna, Erromango, Efate, Loyalty and Banks as indentured labour for employment on Queensland sugarcane fields. This was under Queensland's Polynesian Labourers Act.[14] That Act required a ship to have a license to undertake that work. The license required the vessel to uphold certain minimum conditions as to the state and fitness of the vessel to carry labourers. The license for the Daphne was for a maximum of 58 labourers that could be conveyed to Queensland on each voyage.

At this some point during a second voyage to Queensland, it was decided to sail to the island of Fiji where the recruiters could obtain six pounds Sterling for each of the 108 islanders, rather than nine pounds Sterling for the 58 islanders which they were permitted to carry to Queensland. The licence was in Lewin's name but he remained on the island of Tanna. The Daphne sailed on to Levuka where it was intercepted by HMS Rosario on patrol from Sydney. The ship's captain George Palmer suspected that the Daphne was a slaver ship, detained it, and conveyed it to Sydney.

Palmer brought proceedings in the court to have the Daphne condemned under the British slave trade laws. An earlier magistrate's committal hearing for the crime of piracy was dismissed. The case was heard by Sir Alfred Stephen, who was the Chief Justice of New South Wales, and held the appointment of judge commissary in the Vice-Admiralty Court. Stephen dismissed the case on 24 September on the basis that the British Slave Trade Act 1839 did not apply to the South Pacific Ocean[15]

1890

1890 saw the enactment of the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890 (Imp). That Act provided for the abolition of the Imperial Courts of Admiralty and replace them with local courts to be called Colonial Courts of Admiralty. It was widely considered unsatisfactory that the Imperial court should exist separately to the colonial courts, yet use the same facilities and personnel of the colonial courts.[4] Every superior court not named in that Act would become a Colonial Court of Admiralty automatically. The Act commenced operation on 1 July 1891, but it did not apply to either this Court or the Victorian equivalent, as the Act named those courts as exclusions. This was apparently due to local concerns.[4] The act was to fix the court's jurisdiction as at 1891. This Act was to remain the main source of jurisdiction for Australian Courts to act under for Admiralty work until the passing of the Admiralty Act 1988 (Cth).[16]

In 1899 the court heard the case of the Glencairn. In this case, the Glencairn was being towed to Newcastle, New South Wales during a gale and heavy seas. The tugboat which was towing it lost its towline to the Glencairn. Another tugboat belonging to another owner rescued it and brought her in safely. The presiding judge awarded the owners £125 for the rescue, £100 to the master of the boat for his promptitude and skill, and £75 to the crew to be divided equally amongst them.[17]

Appeals

There was a right of appeal to the High Court of Admiralty in England.[18] This was in contrast to the earliest civil courts in New South Wales, being the Court of Civil Jurisdiction, the Governors Court and the Supreme Court of Civil Judicature. Each of those courts either had no right of appeal, or instead, had a right of appeal to the Governor sitting as a Court of Appeal.

Abolition

The court was abolished when the court's jurisdiction was finally given to the Supreme Court of New South Wales on 4 May 1911 through an order made by the British Privy Council. This order was made under the previous Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890 (UK). From that time on, the Supreme Court was the Colonial Court of Admiralty and exercised the jurisdiction of that court.

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d Jordan (1983).
  2. ^ "Charter of Justice 2 April 1787 (UK)". Documenting a Democracy: 110 key documents that are the foundation of our nation. National Archives of Australia. Retrieved 5 March 2008.
  3. ^ a b c d e f Bennett (1974).
  4. ^ a b c d Australian Law Reform Commission (1986). "Chapter 2 The Development of Admiralty Jurisdiction". Civil Admiralty Jurisdiction Report 33. Retrieved 9 January 2021 – via AustLII.
  5. ^ a b "Concise Guide to the State Archives (S – Y) : Vice Admiralty Court, 1787-1911". State Records of New South Wales. Archived from the original on 29 August 2007. Retrieved 19 June 2007.
  6. ^ In re Piracy jure gentium [1934] UKPC 54, [1934] AC 586, 589, Privy Council.
  7. ^ a b c d Bennett (1974), p. 155.
  8. ^ Shergold, Christine M. "Vice Admiralty Court of NSW, 1787-1911". State Records Authority of New South Wales. Retrieved 9 January 2021.
  9. ^ "AGY-1048 Vice Admiralty Courts". State Records Authority of New South Wales. Retrieved 9 January 2021.
  10. ^ Bennett (1974), p. 156.
  11. ^ Castles (1982).
  12. ^ a b "Admiralty Court (1823 – 1970)". State Records Authority of New South Wales. Archived from the original on 3 September 2007. Retrieved 19 June 2007.
  13. ^ Ying, p. 241.
  14. ^ "Polynesian Laborers Act 1868". Queensland Government Gazette. Vol. IX, no. 47. 4 March 1868. p. 217. Retrieved 9 January 2021 – via Text Queensland.
  15. ^ Mortensen, Reid. "Slaving In Australian Courts: Blackbirding Cases, 1869-1871". (2000) 4 Journal of South Pacific Law 7. Retrieved 9 January 2021.
  16. ^ Court Forms Precedents & Pleadings – NSW, LexisNexis
  17. ^ Fenwick v The "Glencairn" (1899) 15 WN (NSW) 166 cited in J Fenwick & Co Pty Ltd v The "Goldean Falcon" her cargo freight and bunkers – (1990) 24 NSWLR 611 at 620.
  18. ^ Empire Shipping Co Inc v Owners of the Ship "Shin Kobe Maru" [1991] FCA 499, 32 FCR 78; 104 ALR 489 at page 516 per Justice Gummow, Federal Court.

Sources

This page was last edited on 26 February 2024, at 23:24
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.