gards the parricide, was still in vigor, but the difficulty of procuring the animals designated by the Roman law made it obligatory to submit the criminal to other chastizements.

They were often given over to wild beasts, but more commonly they were tied to a horse's tail or placed on a hurdle and were led in this detestable condition to the place of execution, where they were beheaded and then fixed to an elevated wheel. At the same time, their belongings were confiscated. It was even left to the initiative of the judge to increase the torture, if on account of the gravity or the circumstances attending the crime, it was considered necessary. Damhouder also tells us that the same penalty was applied in cases where death did not result from the criminal attempt, and even in those cases where there was only intention on the part of the criminal without the commencement of the execution of the crime. It is quite curious to note that the accomplices, particularly the druggist or the physician who gave the poison to the parricide for his crime, were also punished by the

same sentence.

On the other hand, anger or weakness of the mind were not admitted as excuses for the crime, but were considered as implying a condition of irresponsibility, in which case the sentence of death was replaced by imprisonment. The latter punishment was only the means employed for the prevention of similar acts being again undertaken by the criminal.

Towards the end of the 16th Century, a considerable progress will be found to have been made in the jurisprudence of the parricide. In the 17th and 18th Centuries, the evolution which occurred in French society had its repercussion in the codes, and as a result it caused the barbarous antique laws to lose part of their influence, and it finally ended in the formation of the old French jurisprudence which was completely reno

vated at the Revolution. The sentences were still numerous and varied according to the atrocity of the crime and the social standing of the culprit of the parricide was always severely punished. In the first place, he was obliged to make an honorable attonement, and his right hand was cut off; then he was usually beaten until the blood ran; his body was burnt, and his ashes thrown to the winds. Oftentimes his lips were split open and his tongle cut out. Out of public decency, women were not submitted to punishment by the wheel; they were either hung or burnt. A few years before the Revolution, the Marquise de Brinvilliers was beheaded and was then thrown into a fire.

The terrible punishments and mutilations, old souvenirs of the ancient times, ceased to exist with the Revolution, and the death sentence was abolished under the Republic from the day of the publication of general peace, a promise that the law of 1791 never realized.

The sentence of death was still retained, and was even increased by other chastizements. The criminal who was condemned to death for parricide was conducted to the place of execution in his shirt, his feet bare and head covered with a black veil. He was exposed on the scaffold, while a sergeant read the conclusions of the court relative to his sentence to the people and immediately afterward the condemned was executed

If one examines the contemporary legislation of various countries, it will be found that parricide is more rigorously punished than other crimes. It is evident that the legislation in our own country, in England, Germany or Holland, have no special sentence for the parricide, treating the case as one of voluntary homicide, or murder in the first degree, but numerous other countries, whose codes take into consideration the bonds which unite the son to the father. consider them as a cause of increase of the severity of the punishment. For example,

in Italy, the crime of murder committed by a person aged from eighteen to twenty-one years, is punished by reclusion; from twentyone to twenty-four years of age the murderer of an adopted father is punished by the same sentence, while the murder of a legitimate or natural father is punished by the sentence of hard labor until death, because capital punishment no longer exists in Italy. In Spain, the murder of the legitimate, natural or adopted parents, is punished by death, as is assassination, while ordinary mur

derers are only sentenced to life imprisonment in chains. In Austria the sentence for an ordinary murder is from five to ten years, while the parricide receives a sentence from ten to twenty years, when it is a case of murder in the second degree, but when there has been premeditation, he is condemned to death. The Swedish legislation considers the murder of parents as an aggravating circumstance, taking into consideration the bonds. which unite the victim and his assassin.

E

VER since the McGuire Act has called

the attention of the great American public to the scandalous abuses which were in vogue on American vessels, the tendency of modern times has been along the lines of remedial legislation. Congress has time and again placed upon the statute books laws which provide for a revolutionary change in the treatment meted out to seamen in the past. The doctrine of involuntary servitude, which was in vogue, no longer holds sway over the lives and liberties of those who "go down to the sea in ships." By concerted action on the part of the sailors employed in our merchant marine, they have, through the instrumentality of their organized unions, worked out their own salvation. Now a fisherman is a sailor whose peculiar avocation calls for expert knowledge in that particular line, so that as well as being skilled in navigation, and the handling of sails, and doing all the work of an able-bodied seaman before the mast, he has to know how to catch fish in the most approved and expeditious manner. Then again, the contract between the master and the fisherman differs

materially from the usual shipping articles. which the sailor in the merchant marine signs before going on board his vessel; the latter contracts to give his services as an able-bodied seaman on board the vessel, and in return he is to receive a monthly wage which is agreed upon; he is to be accommodated with suitable quarters on board the vessel, and the food which he is to receive each day on the voyage and in port is fixed by acts of Congress; a scale of provisions so-called, is set out, and a copy thereof is hung up in the sailors' quarters of every American vessel; failure on the part of the master to supply the food as provided by the acts aforesaid and on proper demand by the seaman, is punishable by extra compensation to the seaman, which can be recovered as wages in the usual manner by proceedings in rem against the vessel, or by a suit against the master in personam. There is also a provision in our Federal laws against undermanning-which provides that "In case of desertion or casualty resulting in the loss of one or more seamen, the master must ship, if obtainable, a number equal to the number

of those whose services he has been deprived of by desertion or casualty, who must be of the same grade or rating and equally expert with those whose place or position they refill."

Now the contract which the master of a fishing vessel makes with the fisherman, makes no stipulation as to a monthly wage; it is agreed that the fisherman shall receive an individual share of the profits of the sale of the fish caught on the trip; that is, the net profit after the expenses are deducted, and the owners' share is also taken out, so that the outfit and provisions are all supplied by the owner, and these are charged up against the general account and deducted as expenses for the running of the vessel.

Now if the trip should prove unsuccessful, as sometimes happens, instead of having any money due to them for their services, the members of the crew will be in debt to the owner. So we see the fisherman's life is a precarious one, and his share of the profits at the end of the voyage depends altogether on the amount of fish taken; and, of course, incidentally this is an incentive to concerted action and master and crew work with willing hands to get the biggest "take" possible, and get their cargo to market in the shortest possible time; the scale of provisions provided for on board American vessels does not apply to fishing or whaling vessels. Of course this would be explained to a certain extent, by showing that the sailors and captain on board of a fishing schooner are more or less co-partners, with the exception of a certain percentage which the captain receives from the owner of the vessel-otherwise he shares alike with the seamen. that the provisions being charged to the general account, and everyone being interested, there is rarely, if ever, any cause for complaint in the matter of food supplies on fishing schooners. The provision in the Federal statute against undermanning does not apply

So

to fishing schooners or vessels of any kind in the fishing trade.

The laws in relation to deserters are practically the same as on board all other vessels, the penalty being forfeiture of all clothing and effects, and all pay earned up to date, and, of course, in the fishing trade, a forfeiture of any share of any public allowance which may be paid as the result of the voyage.

One salient feature which marks a great difference is the different law in regard to the master's lien on the vessel in shipping on fishing vessels and in all other kinds. In the merchant marine, of course, the doctrine is a cardinal one, in regard to the wages of the seaman: he is the ward of the admiralty courts, and from time immemorial the learned judges sitting therein, in England and America, have promulgated this wellknown doctrine: that the seaman's claim is regarded as a first lien on the vessel, which "adheres to it as long as a plank is left afloat;" hence, the greatest protection is given to the seaman, and the courts mindful of the proverbially careless happy-golucky character of the sailor, and his ignorance of business affairs such as shipping articles and the like, have examined with great care these contracts for seamen's wages, so as to safeguard the poor unwary seaman from the malicious designs of conniving, unscrupulous skippers, who would. prey upon his credulity and ignorance. Who would seem to have the greatest reason to be entitled to more consideration than the seamen? We may well answer, the captain. He is the responsible party; his watchful eye has to see everything; the whole management of the vessel, and her best interests are intrusted to his control; and on his efficiency depends, in a great measure, the success of the voyage; when the storm is raging, and all the elements combined seem to make a terrific onslaught on the doomed vessel, and

word is given to lower the boats, and the cry is "sauve qui peut," the captain stands sadly on the deck of his loved vessel, which perchance under his watchful care has weathered many a gale, and sees that everyone else is saved before he leaves the ship. Yet of all the seamen, cooks and firemen, engineers, etc., the master is the only one who has no lien on the vessel for his wages and services. The general admiralty law denies to the master the lien it gives to the cabin-boy and to the sailor before the mast. But here we encounter another radical difference in the law in relation to vessels engaged in the fishing trade. The Federal statute provides that the master has a lien on the vessel, in common with all the others on board, who have a claim against it for wages or services.

This applies to a case where the usual contract has been made, and any fish caught on board a vessel are delivered to the owner, or his agent for cure, and sold by such owner or agent; then such vessel shall, for the term of six months after such sale, be liable for the master's and every other fisherman's share of such fish, and may be proceeded against in the same form and to the same effect as any other vessel, liable by law, may be proceeded against for the wages of seamen in the merchant service. This action in the admiralty courts does not preclude the fisherman, in common with all other mariners, from having his action at common law, for his share or shares of fish or the proceeds thereof.

Thus we see that in the case of fishermen

there is a marked difference from that of the ordinary seamen in the merchant marine. Á good deal of remedial legislation will be required to bring the status up to the level where every man will have a fair wage and good working conditions. From time immemorial the men who follow the sea have. been the prey of the crimps and the land sharks, whose only interest in the sailor was to get his money in the most expeditious manner possible. But thanks to themselves and their organizations, sailors have, within the past few years, made wonderful strides toward success, and there are brighter and better days in store for them in the future. As there is no more dangerous calling, no occupation where the chances of disaster are more apparent, so it would seem meet and just that all men who love justice and fair play, should see with pleasure the trend of modern times, which gives those who follow this avocation a chance to fight life's battle like every other self-respecting wage earner, and to get a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. As one of the secretaries of the International Seamen's Union expressed it to me a short time ago, "the sailor is well cared for nowadays; the sailor's havens and missions, etc., take care of his soul, and we take care of his body."

If the combined efforts of the two will help to uplift a most deserving open-hearted class of workers, and make life better and sweeter for them, they will have earned the undying gratitude of all those who love justice and are interested in the welfare of those who follow "a life on the ocean wave."