{"id":"01KF7FPSE0NAZVHCJY02C5EJBN","cid":"bafkreiakgnburs6ja5a3o2ngra27zuatjorkgsjmk5szt6j55bh63w3hhq","type":"chunk","properties":{"end_line":15490,"extracted_at":"2026-01-18T02:42:20.410Z","extracted_by":"structure-extraction-lambda","label":"Chunk 11","source_file":"01KESYVB66H8YEVTN88DWE9W8D","start_line":15430,"text":"themselves sometimes consist in hard words and harder knocks—the\r\nCoke-upon-Littleton of the fist. True, among the more upright and\r\nhonorable whalemen allowances are always made for peculiar cases, where\r\nit would be an outrageous moral injustice for one party to claim\r\npossession of a whale previously chased or killed by another party. But\r\nothers are by no means so scrupulous.\r\n\r\nSome fifty years ago there was a curious case of whale-trover litigated\r\nin England, wherein the plaintiffs set forth that after a hard chase of\r\na whale in the Northern seas; and when indeed they (the plaintiffs) had\r\nsucceeded in harpooning the fish; they were at last, through peril of\r\ntheir lives, obliged to forsake not only their lines, but their boat\r\nitself. Ultimately the defendants (the crew of another ship) came up\r\nwith the whale, struck, killed, seized, and finally appropriated it\r\nbefore the very eyes of the plaintiffs. And when those defendants were\r\nremonstrated with, their captain snapped his fingers in the plaintiffs’\r\nteeth, and assured them that by way of doxology to the deed he had\r\ndone, he would now retain their line, harpoons, and boat, which had\r\nremained attached to the whale at the time of the seizure. Wherefore\r\nthe plaintiffs now sued for the recovery of the value of their whale,\r\nline, harpoons, and boat.\r\n\r\nMr. Erskine was counsel for the defendants; Lord Ellenborough was the\r\njudge. In the course of the defence, the witty Erskine went on to\r\nillustrate his position, by alluding to a recent crim. con. case,\r\nwherein a gentleman, after in vain trying to bridle his wife’s\r\nviciousness, had at last abandoned her upon the seas of life; but in\r\nthe course of years, repenting of that step, he instituted an action to\r\nrecover possession of her. Erskine was on the other side; and he then\r\nsupported it by saying, that though the gentleman had originally\r\nharpooned the lady, and had once had her fast, and only by reason of\r\nthe great stress of her plunging viciousness, had at last abandoned\r\nher; yet abandon her he did, so that she became a loose-fish; and\r\ntherefore when a subsequent gentleman re-harpooned her, the lady then\r\nbecame that subsequent gentleman’s property, along with whatever\r\nharpoon might have been found sticking in her.\r\n\r\nNow in the present case Erskine contended that the examples of the\r\nwhale and the lady were reciprocally illustrative of each other.\r\n\r\nThese pleadings, and the counter pleadings, being duly heard, the very\r\nlearned judge in set terms decided, to wit,—That as for the boat, he\r\nawarded it to the plaintiffs, because they had merely abandoned it to\r\nsave their lives; but that with regard to the controverted whale,\r\nharpoons, and line, they belonged to the defendants; the whale, because\r\nit was a Loose-Fish at the time of the final capture; and the harpoons\r\nand line because when the fish made off with them, it (the fish)\r\nacquired a property in those articles; and hence anybody who afterwards\r\ntook the fish had a right to them. Now the defendants afterwards took\r\nthe fish; ergo, the aforesaid articles were theirs.\r\n\r\nA common man looking at this decision of the very learned Judge, might\r\npossibly object to it. But ploughed up to the primary rock of the\r\nmatter, the two great principles laid down in the twin whaling laws\r\npreviously quoted, and applied and elucidated by Lord Ellenborough in\r\nthe above cited case; these two laws touching Fast-Fish and Loose-Fish,\r\nI say, will, on reflection, be found the fundamentals of all human\r\njurisprudence; for notwithstanding its complicated tracery of\r\nsculpture, the Temple of the Law, like the Temple of the Philistines,\r\nhas but two props to stand on.\r\n\r","title":"Chunk 11"},"relationships":[{"peer":"01KF7FPMFSMJT6NVJR448ANF6Z","peer_label":"Fast-Fish and Loose-Fish","peer_type":"chapter","predicate":"in"},{"peer":"01KF7FPMFSMJT6NVJR448ANF6Z","peer_label":"Fast-Fish and Loose-Fish","peer_type":"chapter","predicate":"partOf"},{"peer":"01KF7FPKDT5SHSH1ZQV6ABHQCA","peer_label":"Moby Dick; Or, The Whale","peer_type":"book","predicate":"partOf"},{"peer":"01KESYJX0Z6XE0HWTS5N3SDG0B","peer_label":"The Classics","peer_type":"collection","predicate":"collection"},{"peer":"01KF7FPSD6NA6SE5TKBTVXDVDM","peer_label":"Chunk 12","peer_type":"chunk","predicate":"next"},{"peer":"01KF7FPSD0M611K12RJX8EEVG3","peer_label":"Chunk 10","peer_type":"chunk","predicate":"prev"}],"ver":2,"created_at":"2026-01-18T02:42:20.857Z","ts":"2026-01-18T02:42:29.001Z","edited_by":{"method":"manual","user_id":"01KF7FCDA7SCSJ6A30TDPDSJQV"}}