FREIGHT (a word having the same origin as " fare"), the hire of a ship, or part of a ship, for the transport of merchandise; also the merchandise so transported. The agreement for the service is termed a charter-party (q.v.).
If a merchant freight a whole ship, but neglect to fill it, the captain in not at liberty to complete the cargo from other sources, without accounting to the merchant for any moneys received for such additional load. On the other hand, if the merchant cove nant to freight a certain portion of a ship, he is bound to pay the sum agreed on for that portion, notwithstanding that his goods may fail to occupy so much space. If, in the charter-party, a day be appointed for sailing, and either the merchant fail to have his goods ready for embarkation by the time fixed, or the vessel be unprepared to start— wind and Nveat her permitting—the agreement may be declared void by the aggrieved party, who can also recover at law for any detriment caused to his property in conse quence of the delay. The use of charter-parties has been traced back as far as the reign of Henry III.
This contract, which in England, and generally in the commercial language of. this country, is called F., is more commonly spoken of by the legal writers of Scotland as affrightment, from the French affratement (Bell's Com., i. p. 414), but there is no essen tial difference in the laws of the two countries with regard to it. Throughout the whole commercial world, indeed, in so far as its provisions are not made the subjects of posi tive stipulation either by charter-party or bill of lading (q.v.), they will be held to be in accordance with the usage of trade, and of that particular branch of trade to which the hiring has reference.
It was formerly held that the payment of the wages of the crew was contingent on the earning of F. by the ship, in accordance with the maxim of lord Stowell, that "freight is the mother of wages." But this rule, which was already subject to many exceptions, has been abrogated by the merchant shipping act (17 and 18 Vict c. 104), and wages may now be recovered either by seamen or apprentices, even though no F. has been earned by the vessel. The seaman has a right to cling to the last plank in satisfaction of his wages; but in cases of shipwreck, his claim for wages will he barred if it be proved that he did not exert himself to the utmost to save the ship, cargo. and stores. The provision was first introduced by 7 and 8 Vict. c. 112, a. 17, which enacted that, in order to enable him to recover his wages, the seaman should be bound to pro duce a certificate from the master, or chief surviving officer of the ship, to the effect that he had so exerted himself. By s. 183 of 17 and 18 Vict. c. 104, the onus of proof is very properly laid on those who impugn the conduct of the seaman. The old rule is still adhered to in America, but it is not applied to the master, and it does not hold with reference to seamen, if the F. has been lost by the fault either of the master or owner; e.g., if the ship has been seized for debt, or for having contraband goods on hoard. See Kent's Coin., iii. pp. 266, 267.