The format of this book makes it attractive to both the general reader, interested in the bearing of the colonial period on the development of American law in the early years of the Republic, and the specialist, interested in how these courts worked, who used them and with what results. The main text describes how the unique features of the English admiralty appeared, or failed to appear, in colonial America and came to influence federal admiralty law and practice today.

Knowledge about the application of law to maritime commerce not only may prove financially profitable but also provides an exciting intellectual trip through the historical and legal developments behind commercial activities that depend upon the sea. This work analyzes the growth and formation of maritime law across the centuries, including its origin as England s admiralty law and its adoption into the United States Constitution. It sets out information on the jurisdiction and law appropriate for the carriage of goods by sea, personal injuries and death collisions, salvage and wrecks, marine insurance, and marine pollution. Lawyers, professors, and students of law and anyone involved in marine transportation - carriers, shippers, port managers, freight forwarders, and others - will appreciate this book's succinct and readable style. It includes references to statutes, conventions, and cases - including some historical and social background to enliven and clarify the development of admiralty and maritime law in the United States.

Taxation in Colonial America examines life in the thirteen original American colonies through the revealing lens of the taxes levied on and by the colonists. Spanning the turbulent years from the founding of the Jamestown settlement to the outbreak of the American Revolution, Alvin Rabushka provides the definitive history of taxation in the colonial era, and sets it against the backdrop of enormous economic, political, and social upheaval in the colonies and Europe. Rabushka shows how the colonists strove to minimize, avoid, and evade British and local taxation, and how they used tax incentives to foster settlement. He describes the systems of public finance they created to reduce taxation, and reveals how they gained control over taxes through elected representatives in colonial legislatures. Rabushka takes a comprehensive look at the external taxes imposed on the colonists by Britain, the Netherlands, and Sweden, as well as internal direct taxes like poll and income taxes. He examines indirect taxes like duties and tonnage fees, as well as county and town taxes, church and education taxes, bounties, and other charges. He links the types and amounts of taxes with the means of payment--be it gold coins, agricultural commodities, wampum, or furs--and he compares tax systems and burdens among the colonies and with Britain. This book brings the colonial period to life in all its rich complexity, and shows how colonial attitudes toward taxation offer a unique window into the causes of the revolution.

This text is a study of 16 individuals who lived during the colonial period of American history. These mini-biographies aim to highlight the exploits and actions of well-known and obscure individuals whose lives provide insight into the time in which they lived.

Essays in the History of Early American Law

Courts of Admiralty and the Common Law examines the origins of American admiralty jurisdiction. Drawing from a vast array of primary sources, ranging from Roman law to English records of the medieval and early modern periods, the author traces the development of English admiralty practice that provided the legal heritage of the new American nation. The book provides details of how the English High Court of Admiralty and its civil-law practitioners became embroiled in the struggle between Crown and Parliament in the seventeenth century, losing much of their traditional jurisdiction to the courts of common law at a time when the American colonies were just beginning to establish specialized tribunals for hearing maritime cases. With maritime jurisdiction in flux in the mother country, the Americans were free to adopt ad hoc solutions to the problem of jurisdiction, creating a system in which both the colonial common-law courts and the newly established colonial vice admiralty courts had concurrent power to adjudicate a wide range of maritime claims. Courts of Admiralty and the Common Law also sheds fresh light on the origins of the federal judiciary, showing how the debate over maritime jurisdiction was instrumental both in shaping the language of Article III of the Constitution and later in determining the structure of the federal courts in the Judiciary Act of 1789. Building upon an assortment of materials from the Constitutional Convention, the states' ratifying conventions, and other contemporary sources, the author explores the pivotal role that the debate over maritime jurisdiction played in determining the structure of the federal courts and explains the reasons underlying the first Congress' decision to grant concurrent jurisdiction over some maritime cases to the states' courts of common law. When the first Congress incorporated concurrent state/federal jurisdiction over several classes of maritime claims into the Judiciary Act of 1789, the author argues, it had not created a novel jurisdictional system, but merely had preserved the status quo established long ago in the colonial era. Congress had disregarded the dangers usually associated with two separate sets of courts interpreting the same body of substantive law, assuming that the lex maritima, as part of the law of nations, would be applied uniformly in both state and federal courts. Soon, however, both new technology, such as the introduction of steam power in maritime commerce, and changing views regarding the law of nations would challenge that assumption. As the original reasons for granting concurrent jurisdiction unraveled, American judges in the early nineteenth century sought to make overlapping jurisdiction work in a changing world. Courts of Admiralty and the Common Law concludes with an assessment of whether concurrent state/federal maritime jurisdiction continues to serve a practical purpose in the twenty-first century, examining how tensions between conflicting state and federal substantive rules may serve the greater interests of federalism and commerce. "Through his thorough account of the shipping industry's rise and fall and of the challenges admiralty jurisdiction posed to ideas about federalism, Professor Snell shows how commerce influenced the development of our unique governmental structure." -- Harvard Law Review "For those with an interest in the development in American courts of a distinct jurisdiction in cases sufficiently related to waterborne transport, this book should fit neatly between that of Prichard and Yale on the one hand and Robertson on the other. It is more comprehensive in research and perspective, synthetic in process, and thematic in design than the former. It offers more evidence than the latter and it addresses controversies that have ripened since 1970." -- Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce