by order in council made under 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65, 8. 2 refers the claims of all parties whomsoever to the property captured to the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty, who is to take into considera

parties (see Rymer's Foedera, vol. v., p. 376). Again, in the reign of Henry VI., in the year 1426, a proclamation was issued to all sheriffs of counties, by which it was declared that nothing taken upon the seas in whatever manner was to be distributed, separated, or sold on the sea, or in any port or harbour into which they were brought, but were to be kept entire until the Council of the King, the Chancellor of England, the Admiral of England, or his deputy.general for the time being, should be certified of the above prize, and duly informed if the goods there taken belonged to friends or enemies; and that they (the council, &c.) being certified, should give good and quick attention thereto; that it was a good test whether goods belong to friends or enemies if the persons from whom they are taken were brought to shore and put to ransom or not; and it was directed that persons capturing goods and bringing them ashore without the persons from whom they were captured should be imprisoned until it was known to whom the goods belonged: (Rymer's Foedera, vol. x., p. 368). These two instances show clearly that at that date the Admiralty Court was not the sole court, and hence it is not probable that a distinct prize commission then existed. This view is again corroborated by the Instructions issued by Henry VIII. to the Admiral on the occasion of the invasion of France in 1512 (see Rymer's Foedera, vol. xiii., p. 329; Robinson's Collectanea Marittima, p. 1). These instructions greatly consist of extracts from the Black Book of the Admiralty, and would seem to show that the Admiral himself dealt with prizes taken by the fleet, and dealt with them of his inherent right: (see paragraphs 19, 20, 21; the latter two being translations from the Black Book; see Twiss's Black Book of the Admiralty, vol. i., p. 28, sects. 8, 9.) The Black Book itself very clearly indicates the position and powers of the Admiral, and yet no mention there occurs of distinct prize powers. It is pretty clear that in the reign of Elizabeth the Admiralty jurisdiction, both instance and prize, had become pretty well defined, for we find that a commission was issued on Jan. 30, 1585, to two civilians) Dr. Valentine Dale and Dr. Julius Cæsar) to execute the Admiralty jurisdiction during the vacancy of the office of Lord High Admiral (see State Papers, Domest. Eliz., vol. ccxxxvii., fol. 66; vol. clxxvi.), This commission was not a special prize commission, and in fact, makes no mention of prize as distinct from any other part of the Admiralty jurisdiction. The war with Spain commenced in 1586, and in 1587 and 1588 the Spanish Armada was prepared and sailed for England; Lord Howard of Effingham was then Lord High Admiral, but there is no trace to be found of any separate prize, commission being issued to hear and adjudge prize causes. Between this period and the reign of Charles II., although there are many commissions existing giving power to the High Admiral to will and require the judge of the Admiralty Court to issue letters of marque and others appointing divers persons to hear appeals from the Admiralty Court in prize causes, there is no trace of a separate prize commission, and the ordinary commis. sion of the Lord High Admiral and of the judge makes no mention of prize (see Rymer's Foedera, vol. xx., pp. 115, 1628; vol. xviii., p. 1052; vol. xix., p. 300). The first trace of any special authority in prize matters is to be found during the Commonwealth, when an Act or ordinance was passed by the Parliament (April 17, 1649, cap. 21) directing that the Admiralty Court should proceed against all captures, taken from persons supporting the King and from foreigners his friends, as lawful prize; and in pursuance of this Act an order was issued in 1850 which is recorded in the Admiralty Registry as order of the pretended Parliament in 1650 for the judges of the Admiralty to proceed to the adjudication of the French ships and goods taken by the fleet." T en came the Restoration, and at the commencement of the first war in the reign of Charles II. (with the Dutch in 1664), the office of Lord High Admiral of England and Ireland was in commission, and so far as can now be ascertained no special prize commission was issued. Shortly afterwards James, Duke of York, was created Lord High Admiral of England, Ireland, and Scotland; this is the first instance on record of the appointment of one Lord High Admiral

66

an

[ADM.

tion any capture that may have been made of any property during the operations by any of the claimants and is to make such order as to him shall seem right both in regard to the persons who

for all three Kingdoms; and in 1672, when the second war in that reign with the Dutch commenced, we find for the first time a special commission issued to the Lord High Admiral authorising him to require the Admiralty Court of England to proceed to the adjudication of prize causes, and this has continued until recent times. The cause of this change, if change there was, was probably to enable the Crown to keep the prize jurisdiction in the hands of the English Admiralty Court, and stop the exercise of that jurisdiction by the Irish and Scotch courts. As the judges of the Admiralty Courts were considered as lieutenants of the admirals, the directing of one only to exercise the prize jurisdiction would have the effect of excluding the others. The Irish and Scotch courts have nevertheless continued to claim to exercise prize jurisdiction, but with little success, as the practical result of these commissions has been to bring all prize causes before the English court. Since 1672 prize commissions have always been issued at the commencement of each year, and the Admiralty Court has not exercised prize jurisdiction until such a commission has been issued. Hence it has come to be generally supposed that the prize jurisdiction is not inherent, but is called forth by the prize commission, and this opinion is expressed by Lord Mansfield in Lindo v. Rodney (Dougl. 572): but it must be remembered that that learned judge searched the records whilst they were all in confusion, without indexes, and before the calendars of State papers had come into existence. The opinion that prize jurisdiction was inherent was clearly entertained by the judges of the Vice Admiralty Courts first created in our West Indian and American colonies, for they claimed to and did exercise this jurisdiction without any special prize commission, and by virtue of the general commission only, which makes no mention of prize. The commissions of these courts were (in A.D. 1801) revoked by order of the King, and new commissions issued without holding the prize jurisdiction, and all ViceAdmiralty Court commissions are now issued in this form. Prize jurisdiction was only given to certain courts, and then only by virtue of a special prize commission issued to the Lords of the Admiralty, and this continues to the present time.

The mode of giving prize jurisdiction has hitherto been as follows:-The Crown first declares war, and an order in council is issued commanding general reprisals, and the seizure of all ships, vessels, and goods belonging to the hostile state or its subjects, or others inhabiting its countries, territories, and the bringing of "the same to judgment in such Court of Admiralty within Her Majesty's dominions, possessions, or colonies, as shall be duly commissionated to take cognisance thereof." And the order continues: "And to that end Her Majesty's Advocate-General, with the Advocate of Her Majesty in her Office of Admiralty, are forthwith to prepare the draft of a commission, and present the same to Her Majesty at this board, authorising the Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral to will and require the High Court of Admiralty of England, and the Lieutenant and Judge of the said court, his surrogate and surrogates, as also the several Courts of Admiralty within Her Majesty's dominions, which shall be duly commissionated, to take cognisance of, and judicially proceed upon, all and all manner of captures, seizures, prizes, and reprisals of all ships, vessels, and goods that are or shall be taken, and to hear and determine the same, and according to the course of Admiralty and the law of nations, to adjudge and condemn all such ships, vessels, and goods as shall belong to the "hostile state, &c.; "and they are likewise to prepare and lay before Her Majesty a draft of such instructions as may be proper to be sent to the said several Courts of Admiralty in Her Majesty's dominions, possessions, and colonies for their guidance herein." Such a commission is thereupon prepared thus:

"V. R.

"VICTORIA, by the grace of God, &c.

To our right trusty, &c. (naming the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty) our Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral of our United Kingdom

are, and the proportions in which such persons are. entitled to share them... reserving, however, to H. M. the right to direct the rates or scale of distribution according to which the property or

of Great Britain and Ireland, and dominions thereunto belonging, and to the commissioners for executing that office for the time being, greeting-Whereas, we having taken into consideration the injurious and hostile proceedings of (name of sovereign or state) as set forth in the declaration of this date, issued by our command; and we, therefore, having determined to take such measures as are necessary for vindicating the honour of our crown and for procuring reparation and satisfaction, do, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, order that general reprisals be granted against the ships, vessels, and goods of (name of sovereign or state) and of his subjects or others inhabiting within any of his countries, territories, or dominions, so that our fleets and ships shall and may lawfully seize all ships, vessels, and goods belonging to (name of sovereign or state), or to his subjects or others inhabiting within his countries, territories, or dominions, and bring the same to judg ment in any of the Courts of Admiralty within our dominions, which shall be duly commissionated. These are therefore to authorise, and we do hereby authorise and enjoin you our said commissioners now and for the time being, and any three or more of you, to will and require our High Court of Admiralty of England and the Lieutenant and Judge of the said court, and his surrogates, and also the several Courts of Admiralty within our dominions which shall be duly commissionated; and they are hereby authorised and required to take cognisance of, and judicially to proceed upon, all and all manner of captures, seizures, prizes, and reprisals of all ships, vessels, and goods already seized and taken, and which hereafter shall be seized and taken, and hear and determine the same, according to the course of Admiralty and the law of nations, and to adjudge and condemn all such ships, vessels, and goods as shall belong to (name of sovereign or state), or to any of his subjects or others inhabiting within any of his countries, territories, or dominions. In witness whereof we have caused our Great Seal of our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland to be put and affixed to these presents. "Given at our Court at the

in the year of our Lord' 187 year of our reign."

day of

and in the

Thereupon the Lords Commissioners issue their warrant to the High Court of Admiralty in a form similar to the following:

By the Commissioners for executing the Office of
Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland.

"Her Majesty having been pleased, under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, bearing date the day of 187, to authorise us to the effect following, as by the commission itself herewith sent you to remain of record in the registry of the High Court of Admiralty of England doth more at large appear:-These are in Her Majesty's name and ours to will and require the High Court of Admiralty of England and you, the Lieutenant and Judge of the said court, and your surrogate and surrogates, and you are hereby authorised and required to take cognisance of and to judicially proceed upon all and all manner of captures, seizures, prizes, and reprisals of all ships, vessels, and goods that are or shall be taken, and to hear and determine the same and according to the course of Admiralty and the law of nations to adjudge and condemn all such ships, vessels, and goods as shall belong to the (name of sovereign or state), or his subjects or to any others inhabiting within any of his countries, territories, or dominions which shall be brought before you for trial and condemnation. And for doing so this shall be your warrant.

"Given under our hands and the seal of the Office of Admiralty this day of A.D. 187 (Signed)

,

"To the Right Hon. S. L.,

"A. B. "C. D.

Judge of the High Court of Admiralty of England.

By command of their Lorships,

(Signed)

"V. L."

To the Vice-Admiralty Courts selected for prize juris

[ADM.

the proceeds thereof is to be repaid to the several ranks of the force or forces to which such property may be adjudged, and the court proceeds to adjudye certain claimants entitled to share, and in pursuance thereof sums of money on account of the booty are distributed among the successful claimants; the High Court has no jurisdiction, on the application of the successful claimants, complaining that the Government have refused to pay over and distribute the remainder of the booty, to order that such remainder be brought into the registry of the High Court, and abide the event of the suit; under such an order of reference the High Court has no power of distribution. THIS was a motion, made to the Court of Admiralty on behalf of Major-General Colin Mackenzie, C.B., president of "The Select Prize Committee of the Saugor and Nerbudda Field Force," duly appointed for the protection of the interests of parties entitled to the Banda and Kirwee Booty, and on behalf of others, captors or their representatives, upon the facts stated in the petition set out below, "for an order that the petitioners should have leave to enter appearances as interveners or plaintiffs in the cause or in either character, and further to order that a citation issue from the court calling upon the Most Honourable Robert Arthur Talbot, Marquis of Salisbury, Her Majesty's then present Secretary of State for India in Council to appear and show cause why a monition should not issue against him as Her Majesty's Secretary of State in Council for India from the court monishing him to bring into the registry of this court, the said principal sums claimed by the petitioners (see petition below) and also to account for and to bring into the registry all interest due upon the said principal sums in order that the same might abide the event of this suit."

The petition above-mentioned was, so far as is material, as follows:

1. That in the year 1857 a rebellion broke out in several parts of the territories belonging to the East India Company in India, and amongst others in those parts of their territories known as Central India and Bandelkund for the suppression of which a military force was organised by the Madras Government, and placed by it under the command of the original plaintiff in this cause LieutenantGeneral Sir George Cornish Whitlock then brigadiergeneral.

2. That the said force known as the Saugor and Ner. budda Field Force was composed partly of troops in Her Majesty's service, and partly of troops in the service of the Honourable the East India Company, and was during the year 1858 employed in operations against the Mahratta chiefs of Kirwee which resulted in the capture in that year of their persons at Kirwee and of the town of Kirwee on the 5th and 6th June respectively with moveable property of very great value.

3. That the said Mahratta chiefs, Narrain Rao, and Madho Rao were representatives of the dynasty of the diction, a similar warrant is issued, the main difference being that a copy only of the commission accompanies it. Upon these warrants the prize jurisdiction has hitherto been, and in the case of Vice-Admiralty Courts still will be, based. In the case of the High Court of A Imiralty of England the necessity for the special commission and warrants have been done away with by the Naval Prize Act 1864 (27 & 28 Vict. c. 25), by the 4th section of which it is enacted that "The High Court of Admiralty of England shall have jurisdiction throughout Her Majesty's dominions as a prize court." The jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court is now vested in the High Court of Justice, and prize causes having been within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court, the Admiralty Division will have exclusive cognisance of all prize causes (See The Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873, 88. 16 & 34.)-ED.

forces under the command of the said Sir Hugh Rose, Sir George Whitlock, and Sir Henry Roberts respectively. And whereas the prize agents of the force under the command of the said Sir George Whitlock have preferred a claim that the said property captured at Kirwee and Banda, should be granted exclusively to the force under the command of the said Sir George Whitlock. And whereas the late General Lord Clyde preferred a claim on behalf of himself and his personal staff, that he and they should participate in the same on the ground that he, as Commander-in-Chief in India, directed the operations which led to the capture thereof. And whereas the said Sir Hugh Rose had preferred a claim that he and the force under his command should also participate in the same on the ground that such force co-operated in the actions or movements of the troops which led to the capture of the said property. And whereas MajorGeneral Smith has preferred a claim for participation in the same on behalf of himself, and a brigade under his command in the event of the claim of the force under the command of the said Sir Hugh Rose being allowed, the said Major-General Smith stating that the brigade under his command was detached from the before mentioned force under the command of the said Major-General Sir Henry Roberts, and co-operated in the actions or movements of the force under the command of Major-General Sir Hugh Rose. And whereas a claim has also been preferred by Colonel William Middleton, on behalf of himself and a force under his command known as the Futteypore moveable column for a participation in the same property. And whereas other claims may be preferred by or on behalf of the same or other persons to the property or some part thereof captured during the aforesaid operations. And whereas by an Act passed in the 4th year of the reign of Her Majesty entitled 'An Act to improve the practice, and extend the jurisdiction of the High Court of Admiralty of England,' it was enacted that the said High Court of Admiralty shall have juris. diction to decide all matters and questions concerning booty of war or the distribution thereof, which it shall please Her Majesty by the advice of Her Privy Council to refer to the said court, and in all matters so referred the court shall proceed as in cases of war, and the judgment of the court therein shall be binding upon all parties concerned. And whereas it is Her Majesty's pleasure to refer under the authority of the said recited Act ali claims to share in the property captured during the aforesaid operations, and in the proceeds thereof to the judgment of the High Court of Admiralty of England. Now, therefore, Her Majesty is pleased to order and it is hereby ordered by and with the advice of Her Privy Council, that the claims of all parties whomsoever to the property captured during the aforesaid operations, and the proceeds thereof be referred to the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty of England, who shall take into consideration if it shall appear to him necessary for the purposes of justice any capture that may have been made of any property during the said operations by any of the claimants, and shall make such order as to him shall seem right both in regard to the persons who are and the proportions, in which such persons are entitled to share therein and to the costs and expenses incurred in relation thereto by the respective claimants, whether before or subsequently to this order, reserving, however, to Her Majesty the right to direct the rates and scales of distribution according to which the said property or the proceeds thereof shall be paid to the several ranks of the force or forces to which such shall be adjudged."

10. That in obedience to and for carrying out the purposes of the reference made by the said order in Council, this suit was instituted, and after a lengthened hearing of the claims therein preferred to share in the said booty, judgment was on the 30th Jnne 1866, delivered by the then judge of this court, whereby he pronounced the personal representatives of the late General Lord Clyde and the officers of his staff personal as well as general, who were in the field at the time were entitled to share in the booty captured at Banda and Kirwee in April and June 1858, and subject to this right he awarded the whole of the said booty to Lieutenant-General Sir George Cornish Whitlock and the force under his command called the Saugor and Nerbudda Field Force, including among the latter the officers and troops under Lieutenant-Colonel Keating and any other troops left by General Whitlock on his march, who, at the time of the capture formed a portion of his division, and were still under his

[ADM.

command, and he disallowed all other claims to the said booty.

11. That in conformity with orders issued by the East India Company, all the said prize or booty of war includ ing the sums payable or received on the said public and private debts due to the said chiefs was handed over to or taken possession of or retained by the said Fast India Company until such time as the same should become distributable as prize amongst the captors, and remained under the custody of or were retained by the said East India Company, until the transfer under 21 and 22 Vict. c. 106 of the Government of India from the East India Company to Her Majesty the Queen.

12. That upon the said transfer of the Government of India to Her Majesty the Queen the said prize or booty of war, and all the liabilities in respect of the same including the obligation to pay the said public debts, came under the custody and control of or were transferred to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, who is liable to account for the same to your petitioners, and those whom they represent as the sole grantees of Her Majesty the Queen of the same.

13. That since the said order of this court of the 30th June 1866, part only of the proceeds of the said prize or booty of war has been paid to the parties entitled thereto or reserved on account of unclaimed shares according to the said judgment of this court, namely, two principal sums with interest due thereon that is to say:-

First, a sum of 5,550,000 rupees specifically named in a Royal Warrant of Distribution (Rs.4,854,664 15a. 1p. thereof being for principal and the residue for interest due on such principal) which said Warrant of Distribution is dated the 22nd Nov. 1866, reciting amongst other things the captures of the said towns of Banda and Kirwee, and that on the occupation thereof property was captured which had been since duly sold, and the sale proceeds have been realised by the prize agents employed for collecting, selling, and realising the said booty, or have been otherwise realised or are about to be realised amounting, or computed to amount with interest after deducting costs to the sum of 55 lacs 50,000 rupees or thereabouts and reciting the said Order in Council of the 10th June 1864, and the said judgment delivered in this cause on the 30th June 1866, Her Majesty was pleased to grant to Her Secretary of State for India in Council for the time being all the aforesaid booty mentioned to have been captured at or in the said towns of Banda and Kirwee, and the proceeds thereof as aforesaid in trust for the use of the personal representative or representatives of the late Lord Clyde, formerly, Sir Colin Campbell, the Commander-in-Chief, and his staff personal as well as general, who were in the field at the time, and the said Major General Sir George Cornish Whitlock, and the officers and men belonging to the forces engaged in the said captures as aforesaid including the troops under Lieutenant-Colonel Keating and any other troops left by General Whitlock on his march, and who, at the time of the captures, formed a portion of his division, and were still under his command such booty and proceeds to be distributed by Her Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, for the time being or by any other person or persons he might appoint in the manner in the said warrant after directed.

Secondly, a sum of Rs.743,829 la. 2p., namely, Rs.523,253 4a. 6p. for principal and Rs.220,565 12a. Sp. for interest thereon which is not specifically named in the said warrant of distribution, and was not previous to the date thereof comprised in the amended returns made by the India Government of the prize or booty of war to the captors.

14. That in addition to the four several sums claimed and referred to in the 5th paragraph of this petition the following further sums for or in respect of prize or booty of war so granted to the captors as aforesaid by Her Most Gracious Majesty the Queen are still due to your petitioners, and those whose interests they represent namely

(1) Rs.110,000 in respect of interest on a principal sum of Rs.532,190 6a. 11p. part of certain moneys by the Indian authorities erroneously severed from and afterwards restored to the prize fund from the 29th July 1858 to the 28th Nov. 1862, which said principal sum was erroneously severed from the prize fund, and appropriated to the purposes of the Indian Government.

(2) A sum estimated at 600,000 rupees in respect of on interest Sonwat rupees 1,465,335 and other prize or

(3) 45,000 rupees erroneously deducted by the Government of India from the proceeds of the said prize or booty of war on account of auction commission together with interest for the same from the date of such deduction.

15. That since the payments of the said portions of the said booty mentioned in the 12th paragraph of this petition claims have been preferred on behalf of your petitioners, and those whose interests they represent, to Her Majesty's late and present Secretary of State for India in Council for payment of the said remaining sums due in respect of the said booty, and that the justice of such claims has been by the Secretary of State for India in Council at one time admitted in respect of claim No. 2 in the 13th paragraph of this petition mentioned, and partially in respect of claim of No. 1 in the same paragraph mentioned, but that your petitioners and those whose interests they represent have been unable to obtain payment of either of the said sums from the late or from the present Secretary of State for India, although repeated applications have been made to them for the same.

16. That as to the other sum mentioned in the 13th paragraph, and the sums mentioned in the 5th paragraph of the petition, notwithstanding that the said public and private debts due to the said chiefs were prize or booty of war, and belonged to Her Majesty the Queen by Her Royal prerogative, and not to the East India Company, and notwithstanding that your petitioners, and those whose interests they represent are the sole grantees of the Crown of the said prize or booty of war including the said public and private debts and notwithstanding the said order in Council of the 10th June 1864, and the said judgment of this Court, Her Majesty's late and present Secretary of State for India in Council have, without title or lawful authority, refused to pay the said sums to the parties entitled thereto and still retain the same.

The petition concluded with a prayer in the terms of the motion, and the facts thereof were substantiated by an affidavit. The section of the 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65 governing the question was as follows:

Sect. 22.-And be it enacted that the said High Court of Admiralty shall have jurisdiction to decide all matters and questions concerning booty of war, or the distribution thereof, which it shall please Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, by the advice of her and their Privy Council, to refer to the judgment of the said court; and in all matters so referred the court shall proceed as in cases of prize of war and the judgment of the court therein shall be binding upon all parties concerned.

Dr. Tristram, Haughton, and Willis Bund, for the petitioners.-By 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65, s. 22 all questions concerning booty of war referred to this court are to be proceeded with as in cases of prize of war, that is to say maritime prize; and it has always been the practice of this court sitting as a Court of Maritime prize to order the prize money in the possession of any person to be brought into the registry. By the order in council set out in the 9th article of the petition the court is empowered to proceed with the claims there set out, and has accordingly pronounced that certain persons, including the petitioners, are entitled to share in the booty. We now ask the court to enforce that judgment. [Sir R. PHILLIMORE.—Did not the judge by giving that judgment discharge the authority given him by the order in council? Is not the court functus officio? I do not see how I can do anything to enforce the judgment. maritime prize the money is paid into court no doubt, but in that case the jurisdiction is original and does not arise by statute.] That is true, but the Act giving the jurisdiction over land captures expressly says that the practice shall be that of prize. [Sir R. PHILLIMORE.-In the original judgment (Banda and Kirwee Booty, L. Rep. 1 Adm. & Ecc. 109, 268) it is expressly said that the court has

In

[ADM.

| nothing to do with the distribution of the prize.] Nothing to do with the rates or scales in which the amount granted is to be distributed among the several ranks held entitled, but the court has something to do with enforcing the payment to the claimants, irrespective of distribution, of the amounts due to them under the royal grant. The order in council expressly reserves rights as to the scale of distribution, but this is all that is reserved and consequently the court has jurisdiction in all other matters, and although it is nowhere expressly said that the money may be ordered into the registry, still as the court has full control over the case, it follows that it must have power over the proceeds of the booty, and can take the necessary steps to enforce the payment. In the Capture of Chinsurah (1 Acton's Rep. 179), where there was a capture of a town by sea and land forces, an order was made to bring the money into the registry and it was brought in. The court might in the first instance have ordered all the money, the proceeds of this booty, to have been brought into court if in the hands of persons where it was not safe. [Sir R. PHILLIMORE.-In the present case the order in council gives no power over the question of quantum, but you contend that my jurisdiction arises out of the statute. Do you say that any person has been refused his share, or only that enough has not been distributed?] We submit that the award has only been partially carried out; certain persons have not had enough; as soon as Her Majesty signified that the amount captured was to go to the troops, and directed that it should be distributed, the petitioners became entitled to their proportion of the whole, but the whole has not been distributed. [Sir R. PHILLIMORE.-The order in council refers the question to this court to pronounce, not the amount but who were the rightful claimants. You do not come here to enforce your judgment on the latter point, but upon the ground that the admittedly rightful claimants have not received a certain sum of money. The court could enforce its judgment if anyone disputed your right to share, but has it any jurisdiction to compel payment of any specific sum?] The jurisdiction springs from the statutes, and is to be exercised as in cases of prize. If the court refuses the motion it is laying down that it has no power to enforce the judgment. [Sir R. PHILLIMORE.-No, I can enforce the judgment in respect to the matters referred to the court, but not outside them.] By 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 53 s. 2, booty of war, which formerly, even after gift by the Sovereign, could be recalled (Alexander v. Duke of Wellington, 2 Russ. & M. 35), now becomes irrevocably the property of the grantees after grant by the Crown. The grantees acquire a legal right to the booty, and this is the tribunal in which their rights are enforced. If we have a right and have suffered a wrong in respect thereof, we have a remedy. The court has seisin of the cause, and therefore jurisdiction over the subject matter, and can give the remedy. The only reservation in the order in council is as to the distribution. The grant was of the booty of war captured and we say we have only had part of it; we do not ask the court to distribute it, but to take measures to enforce its payment to the parties entitled; the rate of distribution and the mode of it we do not ask the court to interfere with. It is well settled that once the prize court has decided prize or no prize it has power to enforce its judgment;