case day against Serle if there be a contract by deed with unusual covenant  between master and mariner respect wage they can be sue for in the admiralty  SC stram SC Cun S c barn Mr draper move for a prohibition to the court of  admiralty to stay a suit there for mariner wage upon a suggestion that the  contract between the mariner and the master modern be by write under hand and  seal and affidavit make of the execution thereof by one of the subscribe  witness Mr marsh show cause against the rule and cite the case of coke v  Cretchet lev a in contradiction to the case of Opie v child salk b he insist  that prohibition be entire in the discretion of the court salk c that the  statute of the Geo c S require all contract between master and mariner to be  in write it will be modern er p very hard if any imposition by the master upon  the mariner in prevail upon they to set their seal shall deprive they of that  remedy which they will otherwise have of recover their wage in the admiralty  court Mr draper the case of coke v Cretchet say only charter party which  possible may be between the master and owner and therefore it be not  applicable to the present case this contract appear to be under the hand and  seal of the master and mariner and they have accept of he as their paymaster  they can have recourse to the owner as the suit below be but the master only  be Chargeable in garnham v Bennet Michaelmas term Geo bar king b SC stram d  upon a motion for a new trial the case be the master of the ship bespeak good  for the ship and give his note for the payment of the money and it be hold  that the merchant by accept the master as their payer by the note give bad  disable themselves from recover against the owner see rich v go Cowp farmer v  Davies term Rep e the statute Geo c be not material that require the contract  to be in write only and not under hand and seal Lord Hardwicke chief justice  it seem clear that the contract enter into between the master and the mariner  will not deprive they of any remedy which they will otherwise have in the  admiralty court the statute Geo c require such contract to be enter into  between c and any right which they have of recover before be save by that Act  I always think that wherever there be any contract by deed or there be any  covenant other than the usual one the court of admiralty have no jurisdiction  and in the present case here be covenant for payment of the wage which be not  usual as a covenant on the part of the mariner that if they be not capable of  perform the voyage and do the business of the ship they will deduct so much of  their wage as two of the officer of the ship shall think reasonable that if  they carry good of their own without the privity and consent of the master or  if they leave their own ship and go aboard any of the king ship in his service  a privilege express allow by the Geo c that they shall forfeit their wage and  the contract be also by deed modern the other judge be of the same opinion the  rule for a prohibition be make absolute see how v Napier burr Bew v Parry ld  ray Menetone v Gibbons term Rep a