- Email: [email protected]
A note on the meaning of ‘wreck’
The hlternationalJournal of Nautical Archaeology(1999) 28.4:319-322 Article No. ijna.1999.0259
®
A note on the meaning of 'wreck'
Sarah Dromgoole Faculty of Law, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
The term 'wreck' has many different mean- meaning as it does in salvage law, in other ings. In common parlance the word words that the vessel has been physically 'wreck' is most often used to mean a vessel abandoned by the master and crew washed up on the coast, or a sunken without intention of returning, or hope of vessel, lq However, in law the term has a recovery, ts] The definition of wreck in the Merchant number of different meanings, depending on the jurisdiction concerned jand the con- Shipping Act is much wider than that at text. The first legal definitions arose in Admiralty law which defined the term to ancient English caselaw and commentaries. mean property cast ashore within the ebb The term was later redefined in U K mer- and flow of the tide after shipwreck, i.e. chant shipping legislation providing for the w r e c c u m marls, t6] In fact, the definition in establishment of a Receiver of Wreck the Act seems to have been intended to Service. Later again, statutes in other parts encompass under one term two different of the common law world which derived types of historical prerogative rights, those their provisions from the U K legislation pertaining to land, i.e. the right to w r e c c u m marls, t7] and those constituting droits of frequently adopted their own definitions. The relevant U K Act is now the admiralty, i.e. the right to adventurae Merchant Shipping Act 1995. The term marls, lS] I t appears to be well-accepted that the 'wreck' for the purposes of Part IX of this Act (which deals with wreck and salvage t2]) statutory definition of 'wreck' encompasses is defined to include 'jetsam, flotsam, lagan not only the hull of a vessel, 19] its fixtures and derelict found in or on the shores of and fittings, but also the cargo and stores the sea or any tidal water'. [31 The meaning that had been carried on board, t~°l and the of the curious and antiquated words personal effects of the passengers and jetsam, flotsam and lagan was examined in crew. t~q Any difficulty in determining the 19th-century case of the .Cargo e x whether or not a marine find falls within the definition of wreck is likely to arise, not Shiller, where it was held that: flotsam, is when a ship is sunk or otherwise in relation to whether the item is, say part of the ship or part of the cargo, but in perished, and the goods float on the sea. Jetsam, is when the ship is in danger of being sunk, and relation to the circumstances of its loss. to lighten the ship the goods are cast into the Here, strictly speaking, fine distinctions sea, and afterwards, notwithstanding, the ship need to be drawn. The material must have perish. Lagan . . . is when the goods which are so cast into the sea, and afterwards the ship been lost in circumstances which will lead perishes, and such goods are so heavy that they it to being classified as jetsam, flotsam, sink to the bottom ...t4] lagan or derelict. Since the meaning of The term 'derelict' for the purposes of Part these terms is derived from sometimes IX of the Act probably has the same ancient caselaw, it is often obscure and 1057-2414199/110319+04 $30.00/0
© 1999 The Nautical Archaeology Society
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 28.4
uncertain. Furthermore, when dealing with historic material found at sea, in many cases it will be impossible to establish the precise circumstances in which it was lost. This is particularly the case with isolated finds, where there is unlikely to be historical information on the circumstances of the loss. For example, it may not be possible to establish whether the object was deliberately thrown overboard to lighten a ship, or was accidentally dropped overboard, or--in some cases--even whether it originated from a ship at all. Having to undertake investigations into the circumstances of the loss in order to reach a conclusion about which legal regime should be applied to determine the disposal of a marine find would clearly cause unnecessary complications in deciding on the fate of what may be an important cultural artefact. Fortunately, the practice of the Receiver of Wreck is to take a pragmatic view, rather than to investigate the origins of a find too closely. Countries whose wreck law is derived from U K Merchant Shipping legislation, such as Australia, Ireland, New Zealand and South Africa, in many cases have redefined the term 'wreck', presumably to make its meaning clearer or simpler, t~21 For example, the South African Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1996 defines the word to include: (a) flotsam, jetsam and lagan; (b) any portion o f a ship lost. abandoned or stranded or o f the cargo, stores or equipment thereof or any other article thereon; . . .
(C) ...[13]
For the purposes of Part VII of the Australian Navigation Act of 1912: '[w]reck' includes jetsam, flotsam, lagan, and derelict found in or on the shores of the sea or any tidal water, and any articles or goods o f whatever kind which belonged to or came fro m any ship wrecked, stranded, or in distress, or any portion o f the hull, machinery or equipment o f any such ship. [14] 320
Unfortunately, these particular definitions continue to employ the words flotsam, jetsam and lagan, which inevitably carry with them their very specific historical meanings. By contrast, the New Zealand Shipping and Seamen Act of 1952 went a step further and abandoned these terms, defining 'wreck' to include: [a]ny ship or aircraft which is abandoned, stranded, or in distress at sea or in any river or lake or other inland water, or any equipments or cargo or other articles belonging to or separated from any such ship or aircraft which is lost at sea or in any river or lake or other inland water.[~51 The present text t161 of the U N E S C O Draft Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage uses the term 'wreck' in its definition of the 'underwater cultural heritage'. Specifically, Art. l(1)(a) states that: 'Underwater cultural heritage' means all traces of human existence underwater for at least 100 years, including: (i) sites, structures, buildings, artefacts and human remains, together with their archaeological and natural contexts; and (ii) wreck such as a vessel, aircraft, and other vehicle or any part thereof, its cargo or other contents, together with its archaeological and natural context, t~71 There is an argument for saying that an international convention of this kind should avoid a term such as 'wreck' altogether because of the historical 'baggage' which it inevitably carries. The danger is that the word could be interpreted in a way that would undermine the intentions of those who drafted the convention. However, in this case it is difficult to identify another word or phrase that would so easily encapsulate the material that Art. l(1)(a)(ii) is clearly intended to cover, tlSl Any possibility of unintended interpretations could be avoided if the convention included its own clear and simple definition of 'wreck'. Arguably, some of the definitions cited above try too hard to be allembracing and are in danger of creating
S. DROMGOOLE: A NOTE ON THE MEANING OF 'WRECK' u n i n t e n d e d loopholes. T h e simple w o r d i n g in Art. l(1)(a)(ii): ' a vessel, aircraft, other vehicle or a n y p a r t thereof, its c a r g o or other c o n t e n t s ' w o u l d seem to be sufficiently clear a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e b u t should be used in such a w a y t h a t it is clearly intended to be a definition o f ' w r e c k ' for the p u r p o s e s o f the C o n v e n t i o n . T h e author therefore suggests t h a t Art. l(1)(a)(ii) be r e w o r d e d to say 'wreck, together with its archaeological a n d n a t u r a l c o n t e x t ' a n d an e x t r a p a r a g r a p h inserted later in Art. 1 stating ' " W r e c k " includes a vessel, aircraft, o t h e r vehicle or a n y p a r t thereof, its c a r g o or o t h e r contents'. Since Art. 1 is h e a d e d 'Definitions' a n d c o m mences with the p h r a s e 'IF]or the p u r p o s e s
o f this C o n v e n t i o n ' , this should h a v e the desired effect a n d use o f the t e r m ' w r e c k ' should not then give rise to a n y p r o b l e m s .
Acknowledgements This n o t e has been a d a p t e d f r o m material first published by S. D r o m g o o l e a n d N. Gaskell, 1998, Interests in Wreck. In: N. P a l m e r & E. M c K e n d r i c k (Eds), Interests in Goods (2rid edn), 141-204 a n d r e p u b lished in 1997 in A r t Antiquity and Law, 103-136, 207-231. T h e a u t h o r w o u l d like to t h a n k Ole V a r m e r o f the U S N a t i o n a l Oceanic a n d A t m o s p h e r i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( N O A A ) for i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d on US law. A n y errors are the a u t h o r ' s responsibility alone.
Notes [1] 'A vessel broken ruined, or totally disabled by being driven on rocks, cast ashore, or stranded; a wrecked or helpless ship; the ruins or hulk of such': Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edn, 1989). [2] It is worth noting here that the International Convention on Salvage 1989, which has been incorporated into UK law by the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, uses the word 'property' to indicate what can be the subject of salvage. 'Property' has been defined widely in order to include a vessel, her cargo, equipment, stores and personal possessions: N. Gaskell, Merchant Shipping Act 1995. 1995 Current Law Annotated Statutes, 21/375. However, there has been considerable controversy over whether or not the term 'property', as defined by the convention, covers sunken vessels and cargoes. For further information on this, see Gaskell, 1995:21/376-377 and 21/432-433. [3] Merchant Shipping Act 1995, s. 255, deriving from the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 s. 510. The origin of this section was the Merchant Shipping Act 1854 s. 2. The earlier Wreck and Salvage Act 1846 had no definition of wreck. For the meaning of 'found in or on the shores of the sea or any tidal water', see Dromgoole & Gaskell, 1998, at 1.1, t'.n. 6. [4] [1877] 2 P.D. 145, citing Att. Gen. v. Sir Henry Constable [1601] 5 Co. Rep. 106. [5] The fact that a vessel is a derelict does not necessarily mean that the owner has abandoned ownership rights. But cf. the meaning of 'dereliction' under civil law: see Dromgoole & Gaskell, 1998, at 2.2, f.n. 185. [6] For example, see Att. Gen. v. Sir Henry Constable [1601] 5 Co. Rep. 106, 'if any [flotsam, lagan or jetsam] by the sea be put upon the land, then they shall be said wreck'. See also 1~ v. Forty-nine Casks of Brandy (1836) 3 Hagg Adm. 257 in which Sir John Nichoil cites Blackstone: 'It is to be observed.., that in order to constitute a legal wreck, the goods must come to land; if they continue at sea, the law distinguishes them by the uncouth appellations of jetsam, flotsam, and ligan. These three are, therefore, accounted so far a distinct thing from the former, that by the King's grant to a man of wrecks, things jetsam, flotsam, and ligan will not pass.' (B1 Com. vol. I: 290, 292). [7] For the background to this right, and other details, see Dromgoole & Gaskell, 1998, at 3.1.1. [8] That is, material still at sea. See Dromgoole & Gaskeil, 1998, at 3.1.1. for further details. It is interesting to note that US law continues to maintain the distinction between flotsam, jetsam and lagan remaining at sea, which does not fall within the definition of'wreck', and that cast ashore by the sea, which does: Lacaze v. State, Pa., 1 Add. 59, 64. There appears to be no statutory definition of wreck in US law. [9] It should be noted that the term 'wreck' for the purposes of Part IX of the Merchant Shipping Act encompasses not only ships but also aircraft and hovercraft: see Aircraft (Wrecks and Salvage) Order (1938), Art. 2(b) (S.R. & O. 1938, No. 136); Hovercraft (Application of Enactments) Order 1972 (S.I. 1972, No. 971), Art. 8(1). 321
NAUTICALARCHAEOLOGY, 28.4 [10] Indeed, the ancient caselaw defining flotsam, jetsam and lagan frequently related, and referred, to 'goods'--presumably cargo or stores. Obviously such goods were likely to be the most commercially valuable part of a shipwreck and therefore often the subject matter of litigation. The names of two such eases R. v. Forty-n#Te Casks of Brandy (3 Hagg. Adm. 257) and R. v. Two Casks of Tallow (3 Hagg. Adm. 294) indicate clearly the nature of the goods involved. [1 I] A leaflet for divers produced by the Receiver of Wreck entitled Where to Turn when you've Turned Something Up (MCA/005 printed 6198) explains that '[w]reck . . . includes a ship, aircraft, or hovercraft, parts of these, their cargo or equipment'. Interestingly, this explanation does not actually encompass personal possessions and ship's stores. Another leaflet produced by the Receiver entitled Notes on Wreck Law makes references to l~ersonal property which appear to be based on the assumption that such property falls within the definition of 'wreck'. [12] Although Ireland in fact has not done so. The definition in the Irish Salvage and Wreck Act 1993 is the same as that in the Merchant Shipping Act, except that it states that wreck material found in a harbour is included within the definition. [13] Section 112(1). Emphasis added. See H. Staniland, 'South Africa' in S. Dromgoole (Ed.), Legal Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage: National and International Perspectives (1999), 133-142 at p. 136. See also the definition employed in the South African Wreck and Salvage Act 94 of 1996 cited on p. 140. [14] Section 294. Emphasis added. [15] New Zealand Shipping and Seamen Act 1952, s. 348(2): P. Davies, 'Wrecks on the New Zealand Coast' [1983] NZLJ 202, 205. The 1952 Act has now been replaced by the Maritime Transport Act 1994. See the similar definition it employs in s. 105(2). [16] As at August 1999. [17] Emphasis added. [18] The US Abandoned Shipwrecks Act of 1987 uses the term 'shipwreck', which it defines to mean 'a vessel or wreck, its cargo and other contents' (see. 3(d)). However, Art. l(1)(a)(ii) is clearly intended to cover the remains of not just ships, but all sorts of vessels, aircraft and vehicles and therefore 'shipwreck' would not be an appropriate term to use. (It is interesting that the definition of shipwreck in the Abandoned Shipwrecks Act uses the work 'wreck' but does not go on to define it. Surprisingly, to date there has been no litigation on this point, but there is clearly potential for dispute.)
322
®
A note on the meaning of 'wreck'
Sarah Dromgoole Faculty of Law, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
The term 'wreck' has many different mean- meaning as it does in salvage law, in other ings. In common parlance the word words that the vessel has been physically 'wreck' is most often used to mean a vessel abandoned by the master and crew washed up on the coast, or a sunken without intention of returning, or hope of vessel, lq However, in law the term has a recovery, ts] The definition of wreck in the Merchant number of different meanings, depending on the jurisdiction concerned jand the con- Shipping Act is much wider than that at text. The first legal definitions arose in Admiralty law which defined the term to ancient English caselaw and commentaries. mean property cast ashore within the ebb The term was later redefined in U K mer- and flow of the tide after shipwreck, i.e. chant shipping legislation providing for the w r e c c u m marls, t6] In fact, the definition in establishment of a Receiver of Wreck the Act seems to have been intended to Service. Later again, statutes in other parts encompass under one term two different of the common law world which derived types of historical prerogative rights, those their provisions from the U K legislation pertaining to land, i.e. the right to w r e c c u m marls, t7] and those constituting droits of frequently adopted their own definitions. The relevant U K Act is now the admiralty, i.e. the right to adventurae Merchant Shipping Act 1995. The term marls, lS] I t appears to be well-accepted that the 'wreck' for the purposes of Part IX of this Act (which deals with wreck and salvage t2]) statutory definition of 'wreck' encompasses is defined to include 'jetsam, flotsam, lagan not only the hull of a vessel, 19] its fixtures and derelict found in or on the shores of and fittings, but also the cargo and stores the sea or any tidal water'. [31 The meaning that had been carried on board, t~°l and the of the curious and antiquated words personal effects of the passengers and jetsam, flotsam and lagan was examined in crew. t~q Any difficulty in determining the 19th-century case of the .Cargo e x whether or not a marine find falls within the definition of wreck is likely to arise, not Shiller, where it was held that: flotsam, is when a ship is sunk or otherwise in relation to whether the item is, say part of the ship or part of the cargo, but in perished, and the goods float on the sea. Jetsam, is when the ship is in danger of being sunk, and relation to the circumstances of its loss. to lighten the ship the goods are cast into the Here, strictly speaking, fine distinctions sea, and afterwards, notwithstanding, the ship need to be drawn. The material must have perish. Lagan . . . is when the goods which are so cast into the sea, and afterwards the ship been lost in circumstances which will lead perishes, and such goods are so heavy that they it to being classified as jetsam, flotsam, sink to the bottom ...t4] lagan or derelict. Since the meaning of The term 'derelict' for the purposes of Part these terms is derived from sometimes IX of the Act probably has the same ancient caselaw, it is often obscure and 1057-2414199/110319+04 $30.00/0
© 1999 The Nautical Archaeology Society
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 28.4
uncertain. Furthermore, when dealing with historic material found at sea, in many cases it will be impossible to establish the precise circumstances in which it was lost. This is particularly the case with isolated finds, where there is unlikely to be historical information on the circumstances of the loss. For example, it may not be possible to establish whether the object was deliberately thrown overboard to lighten a ship, or was accidentally dropped overboard, or--in some cases--even whether it originated from a ship at all. Having to undertake investigations into the circumstances of the loss in order to reach a conclusion about which legal regime should be applied to determine the disposal of a marine find would clearly cause unnecessary complications in deciding on the fate of what may be an important cultural artefact. Fortunately, the practice of the Receiver of Wreck is to take a pragmatic view, rather than to investigate the origins of a find too closely. Countries whose wreck law is derived from U K Merchant Shipping legislation, such as Australia, Ireland, New Zealand and South Africa, in many cases have redefined the term 'wreck', presumably to make its meaning clearer or simpler, t~21 For example, the South African Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1996 defines the word to include: (a) flotsam, jetsam and lagan; (b) any portion o f a ship lost. abandoned or stranded or o f the cargo, stores or equipment thereof or any other article thereon; . . .
(C) ...[13]
For the purposes of Part VII of the Australian Navigation Act of 1912: '[w]reck' includes jetsam, flotsam, lagan, and derelict found in or on the shores of the sea or any tidal water, and any articles or goods o f whatever kind which belonged to or came fro m any ship wrecked, stranded, or in distress, or any portion o f the hull, machinery or equipment o f any such ship. [14] 320
Unfortunately, these particular definitions continue to employ the words flotsam, jetsam and lagan, which inevitably carry with them their very specific historical meanings. By contrast, the New Zealand Shipping and Seamen Act of 1952 went a step further and abandoned these terms, defining 'wreck' to include: [a]ny ship or aircraft which is abandoned, stranded, or in distress at sea or in any river or lake or other inland water, or any equipments or cargo or other articles belonging to or separated from any such ship or aircraft which is lost at sea or in any river or lake or other inland water.[~51 The present text t161 of the U N E S C O Draft Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage uses the term 'wreck' in its definition of the 'underwater cultural heritage'. Specifically, Art. l(1)(a) states that: 'Underwater cultural heritage' means all traces of human existence underwater for at least 100 years, including: (i) sites, structures, buildings, artefacts and human remains, together with their archaeological and natural contexts; and (ii) wreck such as a vessel, aircraft, and other vehicle or any part thereof, its cargo or other contents, together with its archaeological and natural context, t~71 There is an argument for saying that an international convention of this kind should avoid a term such as 'wreck' altogether because of the historical 'baggage' which it inevitably carries. The danger is that the word could be interpreted in a way that would undermine the intentions of those who drafted the convention. However, in this case it is difficult to identify another word or phrase that would so easily encapsulate the material that Art. l(1)(a)(ii) is clearly intended to cover, tlSl Any possibility of unintended interpretations could be avoided if the convention included its own clear and simple definition of 'wreck'. Arguably, some of the definitions cited above try too hard to be allembracing and are in danger of creating
S. DROMGOOLE: A NOTE ON THE MEANING OF 'WRECK' u n i n t e n d e d loopholes. T h e simple w o r d i n g in Art. l(1)(a)(ii): ' a vessel, aircraft, other vehicle or a n y p a r t thereof, its c a r g o or other c o n t e n t s ' w o u l d seem to be sufficiently clear a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e b u t should be used in such a w a y t h a t it is clearly intended to be a definition o f ' w r e c k ' for the p u r p o s e s o f the C o n v e n t i o n . T h e author therefore suggests t h a t Art. l(1)(a)(ii) be r e w o r d e d to say 'wreck, together with its archaeological a n d n a t u r a l c o n t e x t ' a n d an e x t r a p a r a g r a p h inserted later in Art. 1 stating ' " W r e c k " includes a vessel, aircraft, o t h e r vehicle or a n y p a r t thereof, its c a r g o or o t h e r contents'. Since Art. 1 is h e a d e d 'Definitions' a n d c o m mences with the p h r a s e 'IF]or the p u r p o s e s
o f this C o n v e n t i o n ' , this should h a v e the desired effect a n d use o f the t e r m ' w r e c k ' should not then give rise to a n y p r o b l e m s .
Acknowledgements This n o t e has been a d a p t e d f r o m material first published by S. D r o m g o o l e a n d N. Gaskell, 1998, Interests in Wreck. In: N. P a l m e r & E. M c K e n d r i c k (Eds), Interests in Goods (2rid edn), 141-204 a n d r e p u b lished in 1997 in A r t Antiquity and Law, 103-136, 207-231. T h e a u t h o r w o u l d like to t h a n k Ole V a r m e r o f the U S N a t i o n a l Oceanic a n d A t m o s p h e r i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( N O A A ) for i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d on US law. A n y errors are the a u t h o r ' s responsibility alone.
Notes [1] 'A vessel broken ruined, or totally disabled by being driven on rocks, cast ashore, or stranded; a wrecked or helpless ship; the ruins or hulk of such': Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edn, 1989). [2] It is worth noting here that the International Convention on Salvage 1989, which has been incorporated into UK law by the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, uses the word 'property' to indicate what can be the subject of salvage. 'Property' has been defined widely in order to include a vessel, her cargo, equipment, stores and personal possessions: N. Gaskell, Merchant Shipping Act 1995. 1995 Current Law Annotated Statutes, 21/375. However, there has been considerable controversy over whether or not the term 'property', as defined by the convention, covers sunken vessels and cargoes. For further information on this, see Gaskell, 1995:21/376-377 and 21/432-433. [3] Merchant Shipping Act 1995, s. 255, deriving from the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 s. 510. The origin of this section was the Merchant Shipping Act 1854 s. 2. The earlier Wreck and Salvage Act 1846 had no definition of wreck. For the meaning of 'found in or on the shores of the sea or any tidal water', see Dromgoole & Gaskell, 1998, at 1.1, t'.n. 6. [4] [1877] 2 P.D. 145, citing Att. Gen. v. Sir Henry Constable [1601] 5 Co. Rep. 106. [5] The fact that a vessel is a derelict does not necessarily mean that the owner has abandoned ownership rights. But cf. the meaning of 'dereliction' under civil law: see Dromgoole & Gaskell, 1998, at 2.2, f.n. 185. [6] For example, see Att. Gen. v. Sir Henry Constable [1601] 5 Co. Rep. 106, 'if any [flotsam, lagan or jetsam] by the sea be put upon the land, then they shall be said wreck'. See also 1~ v. Forty-nine Casks of Brandy (1836) 3 Hagg Adm. 257 in which Sir John Nichoil cites Blackstone: 'It is to be observed.., that in order to constitute a legal wreck, the goods must come to land; if they continue at sea, the law distinguishes them by the uncouth appellations of jetsam, flotsam, and ligan. These three are, therefore, accounted so far a distinct thing from the former, that by the King's grant to a man of wrecks, things jetsam, flotsam, and ligan will not pass.' (B1 Com. vol. I: 290, 292). [7] For the background to this right, and other details, see Dromgoole & Gaskell, 1998, at 3.1.1. [8] That is, material still at sea. See Dromgoole & Gaskeil, 1998, at 3.1.1. for further details. It is interesting to note that US law continues to maintain the distinction between flotsam, jetsam and lagan remaining at sea, which does not fall within the definition of'wreck', and that cast ashore by the sea, which does: Lacaze v. State, Pa., 1 Add. 59, 64. There appears to be no statutory definition of wreck in US law. [9] It should be noted that the term 'wreck' for the purposes of Part IX of the Merchant Shipping Act encompasses not only ships but also aircraft and hovercraft: see Aircraft (Wrecks and Salvage) Order (1938), Art. 2(b) (S.R. & O. 1938, No. 136); Hovercraft (Application of Enactments) Order 1972 (S.I. 1972, No. 971), Art. 8(1). 321
NAUTICALARCHAEOLOGY, 28.4 [10] Indeed, the ancient caselaw defining flotsam, jetsam and lagan frequently related, and referred, to 'goods'--presumably cargo or stores. Obviously such goods were likely to be the most commercially valuable part of a shipwreck and therefore often the subject matter of litigation. The names of two such eases R. v. Forty-n#Te Casks of Brandy (3 Hagg. Adm. 257) and R. v. Two Casks of Tallow (3 Hagg. Adm. 294) indicate clearly the nature of the goods involved. [1 I] A leaflet for divers produced by the Receiver of Wreck entitled Where to Turn when you've Turned Something Up (MCA/005 printed 6198) explains that '[w]reck . . . includes a ship, aircraft, or hovercraft, parts of these, their cargo or equipment'. Interestingly, this explanation does not actually encompass personal possessions and ship's stores. Another leaflet produced by the Receiver entitled Notes on Wreck Law makes references to l~ersonal property which appear to be based on the assumption that such property falls within the definition of 'wreck'. [12] Although Ireland in fact has not done so. The definition in the Irish Salvage and Wreck Act 1993 is the same as that in the Merchant Shipping Act, except that it states that wreck material found in a harbour is included within the definition. [13] Section 112(1). Emphasis added. See H. Staniland, 'South Africa' in S. Dromgoole (Ed.), Legal Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage: National and International Perspectives (1999), 133-142 at p. 136. See also the definition employed in the South African Wreck and Salvage Act 94 of 1996 cited on p. 140. [14] Section 294. Emphasis added. [15] New Zealand Shipping and Seamen Act 1952, s. 348(2): P. Davies, 'Wrecks on the New Zealand Coast' [1983] NZLJ 202, 205. The 1952 Act has now been replaced by the Maritime Transport Act 1994. See the similar definition it employs in s. 105(2). [16] As at August 1999. [17] Emphasis added. [18] The US Abandoned Shipwrecks Act of 1987 uses the term 'shipwreck', which it defines to mean 'a vessel or wreck, its cargo and other contents' (see. 3(d)). However, Art. l(1)(a)(ii) is clearly intended to cover the remains of not just ships, but all sorts of vessels, aircraft and vehicles and therefore 'shipwreck' would not be an appropriate term to use. (It is interesting that the definition of shipwreck in the Abandoned Shipwrecks Act uses the work 'wreck' but does not go on to define it. Surprisingly, to date there has been no litigation on this point, but there is clearly potential for dispute.)
322