Civil Salvage, p. 849; Military Salvage, p. 349;
Insurance Salvage, p. 349.

SALVAGE. There are three kinds of salvage: (1) civil salvage; (2) military salvage; and (3) insurance salvage.

1. Civil Salvage.-A service which saves or helps to save maritime property, e.g. a vessel, its apparel, cargo, or wreck, or the lives of persons belonging to any vessel when in danger at sea, or on the shore, or in tidal waters; such service being voluntary and not due to legal obligation, self-preservation, or official duty. The word salvage is often used to denote the reward as well as the service rendered. The right to salvage may arise out of an actual contract; but it does not necessarily do so. "It is a presumption of law, arising out of the fact that property has been saved, that the owner of the property, who has had the benefit of it, should make remuneration to those who have conferred the benefit upon him, notwithstanding that he has not entered into any contract on the subject," Sir J. Hannen, in the case of the Five Steel Barges, 15 P.D., at p. 146. Sir Robert Wiseman, a judge of the admiralty court, in his Law of Laws, London, 1657, refers the origin of salvage to the Roman law doctrine of negotiorum gestio (Dig., bk. iii. tit. 5), which gave an action to a person who had acted for another without any mandate (see Hunter's Roman Law, p. 661). Sir Christopher Robinson, in the Calypso, 2 Hagg., 209, adopted the same view, and showed that both military and civil salvage "resolved themselves into the equity of rewarding spontaneous services rendered in the protection of the lives and property of others." The reward is not, however, measured by the benefit derived by the shipowner, public policy is also taken into account, and to this extent the Roman law doctrine has been considerably extended. "Salvage is governed by a due regard to the benefit received, combined with a just regard for the general interest of ships and marine commerce," Dr. Lushington, The Fusilier, Br. and

349

Lush., at p. 347. On rendering the services the salvor acquires a lien in respect of his re. ward, and such lien takes precedence previously attaching to the subject matter. The lien can be enforced in a court of admiralty. The amount of the reward is within the discretion of the court, and depends on value of the property saved, the value of the property employed in the salvage service, the danger involved and the skill shown, the expense or delay incurred, and all other circumstances that appear to be material.

[Sir W. R. Kennedy, The Law of Civil Salvage, London, 1891.]

2. Prize or Military Salvage.—When a ship captured by the enemy is retaken it is restored to the owner on his paying the captor a reward for the expense and trouble of the recapture. This principle was recognised by the Consolato del Mare, and is discussed in detail by Bynkershoek, Quaestiones Juris Publici, 1. i., cc. iv.

V. The chief maritime states have embodied the principle in their legislation. In England the Prize Act 1864, 27 & 28 Vict. c. 25, provides that the owner is to pay as prize salvage a sum to be decreed by a prize court, not exceeding one-eighth the value of the prize • but where special difficulty or danger is in volved, the salvage may exceed one-eighth but

not one-fourth.

In the United States, the Act of Congress of the 3rd March 1800, c. 14, fixed the amount of salvage at one-eighth of the value if the recapture was by a public ship, and one-sixth if by a private ship.

[For the English and United States practice see Story's Notes on the Principles and Practice of Prize Courts, edited by Pratt, London, 1854.

For

Phillimore's Commentaries on International Law, vol. iii., contains a summary of the principles followed by the chief European states. France, see Pistoye et Duverdy, Traité des Prises Maritimes, Paris, 1855. For other European states, see De Marten's Essai sur les Armateurs, translated by Horne, London, 1881.]

3. Insurance Salvage.-The word salvage is applied to denote the residue of goods that remain unburned or partially burned after a fire, and in respect of which the insurance has to pay the sum insured. When a loss occurs by a fire, and goods are materially injured, it is usual to ascertain the amount of damage by a sale by auction, with the consent and for the benefit of all parties. The difference between the value of the goods at the time of the fire and the proceeds of the sale is then made good by the insurers.

[Bunyon, Law of Fire Insurance, London, 1875.]

J. E. C. M.

SAMPLE. A portion of a large quantity of goods tendered or shown as evidence of the quality of the whole. In the case of a sale by sample there is an implied warranty that the

350

Lulk will correspond with the sample in quality and condition.

[Chalmers on the Sale of Goods, London, 1894.]

J. E. C. M.

SAMPLING (CONDITIONING) is the testing commodities offered for sale. Sample is an abbreviation of ensample, a specimen. It is common in modern industry for travellers to go round to likely customers, carrying with them samples of the merchandise they have for disposal. This class of dealers, formerly called bag-men, now commercial travellers, has much increased of late, owing to more urgent competition and increased facilities of locomotion. In other instances sampling is performed at the places where the goods are actually made or sold.

R. W. C. T.

SANCTIS, M. A. See DE SANCTIS. SANCTUARY, ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF. The privilege of sanctuary, i.e. of securing protection by taking refuge within a church or other consecrated ground, and sometimes in other places also, is common to continental as well as to English law, and goes back to remote periods. In England the practice was in vogue in A.S. times. Ina, Alfred, Athelstan, all recognised the temporary immunity thus afforded, for the privilege did not remit but lessened the severity of the penalty and excluded death or mutilation. In the so-called laws of Edward the Confessor, it is for the first time connected with that essentially English institution "abjuration" so admirably described by M. Réville ("l'abjuratio regni" in Revue historique, 1. pp. 1-42). It is there mentioned in connection with thieves, but during the 12th century the usage seems to have extended to criminals also; and in the 13th we get a clear view of the working of the system. The fugitive having made a confession of guilt before the coroner, might take an oath to abjure the kingdom within a limited period, usually forty days, and was helped by officials to carry out this purpose. But if he failed to take the oath, the sanctuary might, after forty days, be sur rounded, and the victim, if unable to effect his escape, would be slowly starved into surrender. In the earlier period it is not easy to see what may have been the economic effects of this custom, and the recorded cases are fewer than might be expected (Réville, p. 23). But from the 14th century onwards the privilege of sanctuary was abused by debtors of all sorts, and frequent complaints are met with in the rolls of parliament on the subject. Thus in 1347 the citizens of London petitioned for redress against a debtor who, by fleeing into sanctuary, defrauded his creditors (Rolls, ii. 187 b); in 1376 it was decided that enfeoffment to friends followed by flight on the part of debtors to sanctuary, should be void as against creditors, if it could be shown that the debtor had profited (Rolls, ii. 369 a). The abuse was so

grave that in response to a petition the opinion of justices and doctors of both laws was taken in 1387 as to the limits of the privilege. Their verdict was that it only covered cases of life and limb (Rolls, iii. 37 b, 51 a). Wiclif laid a memorial before the parliament of Gloucester in 1378, which may have been the formal opinion presented by the experts. The circumstances are described in his Tractatus de ecclesia (c. vii. et seq.), from which some idea of the system may be obtained. This he vehemently denounces, and notes that the extension of the privilege to debtors was a recent innovation (Tractatus, p. 243). It was not, however, abolished, but in 1379 protection was given against debtors who having made " feigned " conveyances, fled to sanctuary; such were henceforth to appear, on proclamation, to the suits of their creditors, or be liable to an execution on their lands and goods (2 Ric. II. st. ii. § 3). Complaints of such conveyances continued (Rolls, vi. 110 a), and although, in 1487, Innocent VIII. by bull took away the privilege from fraudulent debtors, this was an ineffective measure, and it was found necessary early in Elizabeth's reign (1558-1603) to attach certain conditions to the privilege at Westminster with a view to preventing the admission of such debtors (Stow, Survey, ii. bk. vi. p. 39).

Early in the 15th century the Commons complained that apprentices and servants living in London, or resorting thither, fled to the sanctuary of St. Martin's-le-Grand with their masters' goods and lived safely; also that the inhabitants of the sanctuary purchased from citizens, and had conveyed to them through their friends, goods for which payment was procurable; and the sanctuary was described as harbouring murderers, traitors, clippers of coin, thieves, and others who hid by day and went forth to do evil deeds by night (Rolls, iii. 504 a). To check the grave disorders at St. Martin's, an ordinance was passed in 1457 which somewhat limited the freedom of the inhabitants, and excluded pickers of locks, forgers, and counterfeiters of various commodities from its privileges, while artificers were forbidden to work on Sunday or feast days (Stow, i. bk. iii. p. 104). Merchant aliens apparently sometimes obtained merchandise, and fled with it into sanctuary without making payment; this led to an enactment that ready money alone should be taken from aliens (Rolls, iv. 360 b).

The sanctuary system, though maintained, was gradually modified by the Tudors. New openings for adventurous spirits, easier means of communication, more definite knowledge of distant lands—all these contributed to make voluntary exile a not unpleasant way of evading justice, and many abjured the realm. This was felt to be a serious danger from several points of view. It led not only to a diminu

tion of the able-bodied population available as skilled mariners or soldiers, and thus lessened the defensive force of the realm, but it provided the enemies of England with apt instructors in the practice of archery, who moreover divulged secrets of considerable importance. It was therefore enacted that, in future, men fleeing to sanctuary for murder, robbery, or felonysuch offences alone are mentioned in the statute -should, after confession and abjuration, proceed to some sanctuary within the kingdom and remain there to the end of their lives, but without being under any special discipline (22 | Henry VIII. c. 14). The lightness of the punishment proving an incentive to crime, irksome rules for the daily discipline of sanctuary men, certain limitations on their independence, both enforced by the authority given to " 'governors of sanctuaries" of whom we hear for the first time, were adopted in 1535 (27 Henry VIII. c. 19). Even this more stringent supervision did not check the evil; in 1540 the privilege of sanctuary was limited to churches, cemeteries, and a few definite places, and certain only of the offences punishable with death received immunity (32 Henry VIII. c. 12). The restrictions were practically repealed by Edward VI. with the elaboration of milder punishments. With the increased ability of the state to deal with offenders against justice all need for a system which had its use in times when the central authority was more or less powerless to protect individuals had passed away, and during the reign of James I. all statutes affecting sanctuaries were repealed (1 Jac. I. c. 25; 21 Jac. I. c. 28). Certain of the notorious London sanctuaries long remained the haunt of debtors, and successfully evaded the law; effective legislation did not touch them until the 18th century (8 & 9 Will. III. c. 27, § 15; 9 Geo. I. i. c. 28, § 1; 11 Geo. I. c. 22, § 1).

[For the privilege of sanctuary, see Shakespeare. Rich. III.-Rolls of Parliament (Record Commission).-Réville, A., "L'abjuratio regni" in Revue Historique, 1. (1892), a most valuable contribution. -Wiclif, J., Tractatus de ecclesia, ed. J. Loserth (1886). Bulmerincq, A. von, Das Asylrecht (1853).—Stow, J., Survey of London, ed. J. Strypey (1720)].

E. A. M.

SANDELIN, PIETER ALEXANDER (17771861), a Belgian judge. At the time of the Belgian revolution (1830) his house at Bruges was burnt by the mob on account of his fidelity to the Orange dynasty. He narrowly escaped with his life, fled to Holland, and was made, in 1844, a councillor of state of the kingdom of the Netherlands.

He wrote on industry and the patent law, Considérations sur la situation actuelle de l'industrie, du commerce, et de la législation des brevets d'invention, 1846; also a general syllabus of economics, Répertoire général d'Économie Politique ancienne et moderne, 6 vols. Hague, 1846-48, com

351

In

He wrote, A briefe Treatise of Usurie, 1568, published at Louvain. His views are those general in his age. Starting from the standpoint that a loan is a free gift for a limited time, he condemns all loans made in the expectation of profit; and assuming that no man will lend to a richer than himself, he argues against usury as oppressive to the poor-only the poor requiring and receiving loans. Usury in fact is a "gentlemanly theft." He draws a distinction between the loan of (a) property which can be returned, e.g. a horse, and that of (b) property, e.g. food, immediately consumed by use so that only something similar can be returned. In the former the loss, if any, falls on the lender, in the latter on the borrower. the first class hiring-out for profit is regarded as lawful, but money, being classed with food because the identical coins will not be returned, must not be put out at interest. Shifting his ground, he next argues that as it is not usual to expect more goods to be returned than were lent (forgetting the hire of a horse for profit), so money, which merely repre sents goods, is barren, and cannot really produce interest. Yet in one place he allows business profits to be legitimate; and though he does not dwell on the consideration that men will not lend without interest because repayment of the principal is uncertain, he yet suggests that those who are not sure of repayment need not lend.

The confusion of his ideas is shown by the fact that, in several passages, rent is considered as equivalent to interest, and from first to last his arguments rest on the assumption that loans were instituted for the good of the borrower, and on the inference that they ought not to be turned to the good of the lender.

[Cunningham, Industry and Commerce, Modern Times, p. 83.-Dictionary of National Biography.]

E. G. P.

SANDYS, THOMAS. See INTERLOPERS. SAN SALVATORE (Di), PADRE ANTONIO— one of the regular clergy (17th century), wrote a treatise on exchanges, in answer to the critique on cambi colla rincorsa, by Padre Giustiniani. GIUSTINIANI) were not lawful, according to the The latter maintained that these exchanges (see doctrines of canonists, because they were not real, but fictitious, exchanges, serving to conceal usury. San Salvatore, being asked by merchants to give an opinion on the subject, supports the lawfulness of this class of transaction, observing that it is possible to have banking-houses in several places which can be relied on, and maintaining that, the different legal points involved in the transaction seing lawful, it must as a whole be lawful. this is merely a play upon words, a quibble, which was attempted to justify a transaction

All

352

to the doctrines of the canonists; a quibble employed to resist a doctrine which no longer corresponded to the requirements of the day.

Trattato della ricorsa e continuationi dei cambii fatte a se' stesso, e di quei che si fanno da fiera a fiera, Milan, 1623.

[Gobbi, L'economia politica negli scrittori italiani del secolo XVI-XVII., Milan, Hoepli, 1889.]

U. R.

SANSOVINO, FRANCESCO (1521-1586), was the son of the celebrated Italian sculptor and architect.

66

In his book Del governo dei regni e delle repubbliche cosi antiche come moderne (Venice, 1561), he describes the administration of ancient and contemporary states, and may, in some respects, be considered as one of the forefathers of statistics. He mentions with praise More's Utopia, an agreeable fiction written in order to teach men how to live honestly"; he also describes the foundation and working of the Bank of St. George in Genoa. His Concetti Politici (Venice, 1578) refer to wealth, taxation, dearths, etc.

[U. Gobbi, L' economia politica negli scrittori italiani del secolo XVI-XVII., pp. 12 and 65 (Milan, 1889).]

E. Ca.

SARCHIANI, GIUSEPPE (1746-1835), was born at San Cassiano in Tuscany. He was one of the most active and able co-operators in the extensive and liberal economic reforms made by Pietro Leopoldo I., grand duke of Tuscany (17651790). Sarchiani was director of the diplomatic archives in Florence and secretary of the academy of the Georgofili.

With the view to convince the public of the usefulness of freedom in trade and labour, and to prepare them for the abolition of corporations (abolished in Tuscany, 1770), Sarchiani, by order of the minister Tavanti, translated a pamphlet by Abbé Coyer (a species of satirical romance showing the absurdities of corporate regulations), he then wrote several anonymous articles illustrating the advantages of liberty and free competition, and the defects of the corporations. In his treatise on commerce he gives the history of Tuscan arts and crafts. His articles on the gilds of the goldsmiths and the silversmiths, of the shoemakers and the leather-makers, are full of spirit and advocate the abolition of all privileges.

Sarchiani, like other Tuscan authors of the day, accepts the doctrines of the PHYSIOCRATS, whose influence on the Tuscan statesmen, who carried out the Leopoldine reforms, is undeniable; his work on public taxation contains a clear and detailed explanation of the doctrine of the physiocrats on the subject of the single tax. Sarchiani supports the claims of the physiocrats to the honour of establishing in theory the basis of a true and fair system of taxation, advocating, with them, a single tax on land, criticising all other forms of laxation, and advising gradual reform in taxation as desired by the physiocrats.

Ragionamento sul commercio, etc., Florence,

1783.-Intorno al sistema delle pubbliche imposi zioni, Florence (Accademia dei Georgofili), 1796.

[Cossa, An Introduction to the Study of Political Economy, London, Macmillan, 1893.-Alberti, Le corporazioni d' arti e mestieri, e la libertà del commercio, etc., Milan Hoepli, 1888.- Ricca Salerno, Storia delle dottrine finanziarie in Italia,

Rome, 1881].

U. R.

SARPLER (OF WOOL). See MEASURES AND WEIGHTS.

SARTORIUS, GEORG FRIEDRICH (17661828), was born at Cassel, and became in 1783 a student of theology at Göttingen, but soon directed himself to the study of history. From 1792 he lectured as privat-docent on the history of the 18th century and on politics. In 1797 he became extraordinary, and in 1802, ordinary professor of philosophy in his university. He succeeded SCHLÖZER in 1814 as professor of politics, and at Goethe's suggestion was employed by the grand duke Karl August of Weimar as a sort of confidential adviser of the representatives whom he sent to the congress of Vienna. From 1815 to 1817 he was a member of the Hanoverian assembly of estates, and thenceforward devoted himself exclusively to his academic labours. In 1827, in consideration of his scientific services, he was ennobled hausen, to enable him to hold a noble estate by the king of Bavaria as Baron of Walterswhich he had purchased. He died after thirtyversity of Göttingen. one years of activity as a teacher in the uni

Sartorius was a man of real eminence, and did much for the education of the people of Germany That he exercised a powerful and healthy influence on the young men of promise with whom he was in contact, is testified alike by men so different as Heinrich Heine and J. F. Böhmer. His importance in the history of political economy lies in the fact that he was the first to introduce the teaching of Adam Smith at a German university. "Convinced that the doctrine was true, he felt it his duty," he says, "to contribute to its diffusion." He published accordingly a series of extracts from the Wealth of Nations for use in academic lectures. His most important original work on economics is his Abhandlungen die Elemente des NationalReichthums und die Staatswirthschaft betreffend, 1806, in which, whilst adopting Smith's views in the main, he differs from him on several points; where he diverges from him he has been followed by the great majority of later German economists. Acknowledging free-trade as the general rule, he admits exceptions, and holds that the government must interfere in economic life to prevent private interest from compromising the public weal. Sartorius saw the value of historical studies in relation to politics, and, in particular, to economic politics. He was himself the author of three approved histories-of The German Peasant War, 1795; of The Hanseatic League, 1802-1808; and of The Ostrogoths in Italy; this last won a prize offered by the French institute, 1811. His widow, a gifted and highly-cultivated woman, wrote

memorials of him-Zum Andenken an G. Sartorius, which have been reprinted with additions by his son, also known as an economist, and who, after having filled a chair at Zürich, became a professor in the university of Strasburg.

[Frensdorff in Allg. Deutsche Biogr.-Schmidt in Handb. der Staatswissenschaften.— Roscher, Gesch. der N. 0., p. 615].

SASINE (SCOTS LAW).

J. K. I.

In Scotland, under the forms of the feudal system, the root idea of land transfer is actual delivery, analogous to the English livery of seisin (see LIVERY). In early times this was carried out by the appearance of the granter and the grantee upon the lands the granter gave the grantee "heritable state (estate) and sasine" by a ceremony of handing over to him earth and stone or other appropriate symbol. The grantee was then said to be infeft in the lands; and the transfer, or the ceremony, was called infeftment (see FEOFFMENT). It soon became the practice for a notary to accompany the parties and draw up an authenticated narrative of the facts, to be retained by the grantee, and to serve him as written evidence of the transaction; and this was called an "instrument of sasine." Subsidiary complexities soon arose through the growth of a custom under which the granter and grantee did not appear personally on the lands, but sent their representatives. Then a deed had to be drawn up, specifying the grant and directing the granter's representative, or bailie, to give sasine on behalf of the granter to the grantee's attorney. Between these representatives the symbolic ceremony had to be gone through, and the notary again drew up his instrument of sasine ; but now he had better material at hand-the granter's written deed-than he had had when all proceedings were oral; and he was therefore able to make his instrument of sasine precise, and to give a clear account of any limitations or conditions or reservations to which the grant was subject. Thus the notarial instrument of sasine became a means of proving title to redeemable rights (mortgages) and limited titles as well as absolute legal titles. As time went on, it became the custom for the granter to draw up a formal deed of grant or DISPOSITION, in the course of which he directed his representative to give sasine as before, but left the name of his representative blank this deed was handed to the purchaser, who had thereafter to appoint some one to act as the vendor's representative and give sasine to his, the purchaser's, own attorney. We may now look at the purchaser's right in three successive stages: (a) when he had made a contract with the owner to give him a grant, at which time he had a personal right, founded on contract, as against the owner, but had as yet no right in the land, his right being only to lead an adjudication in implement, that is, to go to the

VOL. III

:

66

353

court to help him in an action against the owner, by giving him the land in execution, which would be done in terms of the contract if no third party had acquired a right in the meantime; (b) when he had received his deed of grant or disposition" but had not yet gone through the ceremony of taking sasine, at which time he had a right, but a merely personal right, in the lands, liable to be defeated by some other grantee getting sasine before him; and (c) when he had taken sasine of the land on the land, at which time his right had become a real right, properly feudalised by infeftment in the lands themselves, and he was the lawful owner of the lands. In the first of these stages he had to go back to his vendor to receive his deed of grant; in the second he had got it, and it was his own fault if he did not go on and complete his title, for the whole matter was in his own hands; and in the third he was fully vested in the rights which had been conveyed to him. The same principles of law still apply under the altered formalities of the present day. The conclusive document was then the instrument of sasine, which showed that the third stage had been reached; and this was the title-deed to the lands. This scheme of transfer was simple though somewhat cumbrous, but was found to be open to abuse in respect that there might be fraudulent concealment of latent rights affecting the lands, for a man might show an intending purchaser his instrument of sasine and yet fail to disclose the existence of reversionary rights or mort gages. Therefore in 1617 an act was passed by the Scots parliament enacting that all instruments of sasine, and generally all documents of title to rights affecting land, were to be registered within sixty days (see LAND REGISTRATION), and that unless registered they were to be ignored by the courts so far as they might be prejudicial to third parties acquiring just and lawful rights. This act was not completely obeyed, and in 1693 and 1696 other acts were passed under which all sasines were declared preferable according to the date and priority of registration, and no sasine or other writ (i.e. deed) affecting land was to be of force against any but the granter and his heirs unless duly booked in the register, so that if not booked within sixty days they became mere nullities as against third parties. After these acts there were therefore five steps: (1) the bargain and the obligation to convey; (2) the delivery of the deed of grant to the purchaser; (3) the purchaser securing infeftment by taking sasine of the lands; (4) the drawing up of a notarial instrument of sasine; and (5) the purchaser hastening to get this instrument of sasine registered so as to secure priority and prevent his sasine being reduced to a nullity as against third parties by the lapse of the sixty days. Thus things went on until 1845, in which year 2 A