|
|
Down North on the Labrador Circuit:
The Court of Civil Jurisdiction 1826 to 1833
by Nina Jane Goudie
The Legal System in Labrador
While the Labrador Court differed in structure to that of Newfoundland, its day-to-day operations differed little from Circuit Courts on the island. Both were itinerant. They traveled by boat out of St. John's, anchoring at as many communities as possible in the fall of each year. Court facilities were scarce. On the island there were few courthouses or jails. Court was usually held onshore, probably at a local fishing room or merchant store. Court facilities were nonexistent in Labrador and the resident population was so small and thinly spread along the coast that court was always held on board the judge's ship. The vessel anchored offshore; the sheriff, clerk and constables rowed to shore as required to post notices, issue summons and serve writs. However, there was one impediment that the Labrador Court referred to constantly and was never mentioned in the Proceedings of the Northern Circuit Court of Newfoundland: the weather. Delays were common. In some cases court was cancelled and, as per the tragedy recounted at the beginning of this paper, sometimes was the cause of death.82
From 1826 through 1833, 120 cases were brought before the court (see Figure1 / Table 2 - page 28). Over half of these cases (66) were debt related, usually between merchant and fisherman, 16 were actions of trespass and six for damage to property. Over 25% of the total number of cases (32) were withdrawn, dismissed or settled out of Court. Outside of debt, the subject matter varied: damages related to the supply of bait, child maintenance, harbouring servants and in one case, theft.83 The latter case was a minor criminal matter. Serious cases would be transferred to the Supreme Court. Those were rare.
The volume of cases was modest but the issues were typical of the period, reflecting day-to-day disputes that occurred between merchants, planters, and their families concerned to eke out a living. It was customary for masters to supply their servants with food. One group of servants complained to the Court of Sessions that the amount of bread and provisions supplied was insufficient. The Court responded by enforcing a minimum weekly allowance.84 The largest pro-portion of cases involved debts owed by planters to firms for food and fishing supplies from the previous year, but also included monies owed for firewood, a pair of boots, washed clothes and medical services.85 There were disputes over wharf space, fishing rooms, the hiring of servants and wages.86 Women did not avail of the court often although they were essential workers in the Labrador fishery. Tucker noted that women “are expert in this business [salmon]... and engage in hard and laborious toils of fishing with as much zeal and activity as males.”87 Innis noted that many women were employed through the fishery, working for meager wages to clean the fish or the vessels, as the need may be. Women surfaced on the court docket several times. Mary Broomfield was a key witness for the plaintiff in a suit for trespass; William Reid sued Samuel Summers on behalf of his daughter for maintenance of their child; and Sarah Clarke appeared in court in answer to a debt on her husband's estate.88
As minute books, the court records provide few details for most cases, but we can piece together enough to illustrate that some planters were having particular problems. James Crawford was one such man living near Cape Charles who struggled to make ends meet each year. In 1826 the firm of Wise, Baker and Howard charged that Crawford owed them £49.14.11 from dealings the previous When he tried to serve a summons, the constable discovered that Crawford was in St. John's. The case was held over to the next year but didnot surface again on the docket. In 1828 Wise, Baker and Howard once again charged Crawford for money owing on account from the previous year. As it turned out, poor weather prevented the officer from serving the writ. The case was held over but once again did not reappear in the records.89 Crawford also appeared to have problems retaining workers. He lodged complaints against Jonathan Cole and James Feltham for damages of £30 and £40 respectively for “harbouring and employing” servants who allegedly were “deserters from his service.”90 Both cases were dismissed when Crawford was unable to prove his case. Two days earlier Thomas Loveridge, probably another former servant, appeared in court alleging that Crawford owed him £5 for clothes Crawford had belonging to him. Crawford did not show up in Court. But his confidence was rewarded as Paterson found Loveridge's evidence insufficient and dismissed the case. In a case later that week, John Kelloway claimed that Crawford owed him £19 for wages since 1825 and an additional £22 for clothes. This time Crawford capitulated, agreeing to return Kelloway's clothes and to submit the complaint about wages to two arbitrators.91 These cases demonstrated the role the Court provided as go-between in the settling of disputes. The fact that the Court formally resolved neither of these cases did not mean its time had been wasted. Its presence enabled an amicable resolution to a disagreement that could potentially have polarized community relations.
| Table No. 2 |
| Year |
Start |
End |
# Places |
Debt |
Trespass |
Damage |
Other* |
Total |
Value |
| 1826 |
30 Aug |
27 Sept |
7 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
14 |
£870 |
| 1827 |
9 Aug |
29 Sept |
11 |
9 |
2 |
|
2 |
14 |
£550 |
| 1828 |
4 Aug |
29 Sept |
11 |
9 |
2 |
|
2 |
14 |
£884 |
| 1829 |
21 Aug |
2 Oct |
9 |
11 |
|
2 |
2 |
15 |
£632 |
| 1830 |
22 Jul |
14 Sept |
12 |
11 |
1 |
|
4 |
17 |
£616 |
| 1831 |
19 Jul |
29 Aug |
9 |
3 |
1 |
|
5 |
9 |
£95 |
| 1832 |
3 Aug |
19 Sept |
15 |
7 |
|
|
5 |
12 |
£115 |
| 1833 |
27 Jul |
26 Sept |
19 |
7 |
|
|
4 |
12 |
£126 |
|
|
|
Totals |
66 |
16 |
6 |
32 |
120 |
£3,888 |
|
|
|
Percent |
55% |
13.3% |
5.0% |
26.7% |
100% |
| *Cases withdrawn dismissed, settled out of Court or referred to arbitrators. |
Source: Blaikie and Simms, Report, pp. 1-196.
|
|
|
|
