flag

To every true American the flag is the symbol of the nation's power,—the emblem of freedom in its truest, best sense. It is not extravagant to say that to all lovers of the country it signifies government resting on the consent of the governed; liberty regulated by law; the protection of the weak against the strong; security against the exercise of arbitrary power; and absolute safety for free institutions against foreign aggression.

A symbol of nationality carried by soldiers, ships, etc., and used in many places where such a symbol is necessary or proper. For the law upon the subject of nationality of a cargo as determined by the fiag, see 5 East, 398; 9 East, 283; 3 Bos. & P. 201; 1 C. Rob. Adm. 1; 5 C. Rob. Adm. 16; 1 Dods. Adm. 81, 131; 9 Cranch (U. S.) 388; 2 Pars. Mar. Law, 114, 118, note 129.

A symbol of nationality carried by soldiers, ships, etc., and used in many places where such a symbol is necessary or proper. Nationality Is determined by the flag when all other requisites are complied with; 6 East 398; 3 B. & P. 201; 1 C. Rob. Adm. 1; 1 Dods. Adm. 81, 131; The Nerelde, 9 Cra. (U. S.) 388, 3 L. Ed. 7(59. A ship navigating under the flag and pass of a foreign country is to be considered as bearing the national character of the country under whose flag she sails; Wheat. Int L., 3d Eng. ed. § 340. A cargo documented as foreign property in the same manner as the ship by which it is carried, and covered by a foreign flag, is not, under the English rule, the subject of capture; 5 Rob. Rep. 2; id. 5, note. In that country, although the ship is held to be bound by the character imposed upon it by the authority of the government from which all the documents issue, yet goods which have no dependence upon the authority of the state may be differently considered; and if the goods be laden in time of peace, though sailing under a foreign flag, they are not subjects of capture; id.; but these licenses are construed with great liberality in the British courts of admiralty; Stew. Vice. Adm. 360. The doctrine of the courts in this country has been very strict as to this point, and it has been frequently decided that sailing under the license and passport of protection of the enemy in furtherance of his views and interests was, without regard to the object of the voyage or the port of destination, such an act of illegality as subjected both ship and cargo to confiscation as prize of war; The Julia, 8 Cra. (U. S.) 181, 3 L. Ed. 528; The Aurora, 8 Cra. (U. S.) 203, 3 L. Ed. 536; The Hiram, 8 Cra. (U. S.) 444, 3 L. Ed. 619; The Ariadne, 2 Wheat. (U. S.) 143, 4 L. Ed. 205; The Sybil, 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 100, 4 L. Ed. 522. These decisions placed the objection to such licenses on the ground of pacific dealing with an enemy and as amounting to a contract that the party to whom the license Is given should, for that voyage, withdraw himself from the war and enjoy the repose and blessings of peace. The illegality of such intercourse was strongly condemned; and it was held that, the moment a vessel sailed on a voyage with an enemy’s license on board, the offence was irrevocably committed and consummated, and that the delictum was not done away even by the termination of the voyage, but the vessel and cargo might be seized after arrival in a port of the United States and condemned as lawful prize. See 1 Kent 85, 164; Wheat. Int L. (3d Eng. ed.) 340. By the rules of the United States Navy before a shot is flred, and under no circumstances will it be allowable to commence an action or to flght a battle without the display of the national flag; Snow, Int L. 96. Law of the Flag. An expression applied to the municipal law of the country to which a ship belongs of which the flag is the symbol, when that law is resorted to in preference to the lea? loci contractus for the construction and effect of a contract or the determination of a liability affecting the ship or her cargo. The law of the flag is “to regulate the liabilities and regulations which arise among the parties to the agreement, be it of affreightment or by hypothecation, upon this principle, that the ship-owner who sends his vessel into a foreign port gives a notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the shipmaster, that he intends the law of that flag to regulate those contracts, and that they must either siibmit to its operation or not contract with him or his agent at all;” Foote, Priv. Int. L. 408; and in England this rule is usually followed, the tendency being that, in the absence of Indication of the intention of the parties, the presumption is in favor of the law of the ship’s flag; Scrutton, Chart. Part. 11; but in 3 Moo. P. C. N. S. 272; Liverpool & G. W. S. Co. v. Ins. Co., 129 U. S. 397, 9 Sup. Ct 469, 32 L. Ed. 788; 12 Q. B. D. 589; 10 id. 540, it was held that the lex loci contractus must prevail. In his treatise on merchant shipping (3d ed. 170) Mac Lachlin thus states the rule as to the effect of the law of the flag on the authority of the master. “The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag. The same law that confers his authority, ascertains its limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by It, there is no injustice. His notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners dnd freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power well defined under the national maritime law;” id.; this was suggested by the author quoted as a possible explanation of the apparently anomalous exception of bottomry bonds from the general rule that the lex loci contractus prevails. This rule was followed In Lloyd v. Gulbert, where the question was as to the master’s authority to bind the ship-owner; L. R. 1 Q. B. 115; 8. c. 6 B. & S. 100, and 83 L. J. Q. B. 245; s. c. on appeal 35 id. 74; 6 B. & S. 120. In this case. In the Queen’s Bench, Blackthe flag (French), which did not recognize a personal liability of the owner in a bottomry bond, as against the lex loci contractus (Danish), or the laws of the place of performance (English), or those of the place when the cargo was loaded (Haytien). The court, after noting the “singular absence of authority,” said that two American cases had been cited; Arayo v. Currei, 1 La. 528, 20 Am. Dec. 280, and Pope v. Nickerson,. 3 Sto. 405, Fed, Cas. No. 11,274, adding that “neither of these decisions is binding on us, but we have derived very great assistance from them.” As to the last of these cases there follows this comment: “The very learned judgment of Mr. Justice Story just referred to affords a complete answer to a plausible argument in which was suggested that the general maritime law clothed the master with power to bind his owners absolutely, and that the municipal law of the owner’s country was analogous to secret restrictions In the ostensible authority of a partner or other agent clothed with general power.” In the Exchequer Chamber, where the judgment was aflirmed, Willes, J., said: “The general rule, that where the contract of affreightment does not provide otherwise, there, as between the parties to such contract, in respect of sea damage and its incidents, the law of the ship should govern, seems to be not only In accordance with the probable intention of the parties, but also most consistent and intelligible, and therefore most convenient to those engaged in commerce.” The same doctrine was applied by the English Court of Appeal to the master’s control over the cargo as well as the ship, by Brett, L. J., in L. II. 7 P. D, 137; by Dr. Lushlngton in Br. & L. 38, and in a later case by Sir J. Hannen, who sustained a sale of part of a damaged cargo, where it was shown hy the result to have been unnecessary, such sale being authorized by the law of the flag; [1891] Prob. 328. But see Malpica v. Mc Kown, 1 La. 249, 20' Am. Dec. 279; Arayo v. Currei, 1 La. 528, 20 Am. Dec. 286, where the lex loci contractus was held to prevail. In Pope V. Nickerson, 3 Sto. 465, Fed. Cas, No, 11,274, although the law of the flag was. In fac^ enforced, the decision cannot be said to have followed the rule laid down by Mac- Lachlin, as In that case the particular point decided was as to liability of the owner to the freighter, when the former was a citizen of a state the laws of which did not recognize such liabilities, while by the law of the state in which the freighter resided and also of the foreign port where the cargo was shipped, such a liability existed, and the lex domicilii of the ship-owners was held to govern the contract See also The Virgin v. Vyfhlus, 8 Pet (U. S.) 8 L. Ed. 1036; Bot-

A national standard on which are certain emblems; an ensign; a banner. It is carried by soldiers, ships, etc., and commonly displayed at forts and many other suitable places.

— Flag, duty of the. This was aD ancient ceremony in acknowledgment of British sovereignty over the British seas, by which a foreign vessel struck her flag and lowered her top-sail on meeting the British flag.

— Flag of the United States. By the act entitled "An act to establish the flag of the United States," (Rev. St. §§ 1791, 1792 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1225],) it is provided "that, from and after the fourth day of July next, the flag of the United States be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white ; that the union be twenty stars, white in a blue field; that, on the admission of every new state into the Union, one star be added to the union of the flag; and that such addition shall take effect on the fourth day of July then next succeeding such admission."

— Law of the flag. See Law.

A national standard on which are certain emblems; an ensign; a banner. It is carried by soldiers, ships, etc., and com. monly displayed at forts and many other suitable places.

Duty of the. The ceremony of striking the flag and lowering the topsail of a vessel to the British flag, formerly practised as a solemn acknowledgment of British sovereignty over the British seas. Molloy de Jar. Mar. 80, 82. Called in an old record, "striking and veiling the bonnet." Id. 80, in maxg.