2e2 FEDEBAIi BEPOBTEB. �ihat the owners would not allow a larger interest for sailing ; that Weeks sailed the vessel on "quarter shares," but in fact another one-quarter interest was also paid to another of the libellants, Nieholas Clayton, a brother of John B. Clayton, who thus received from the earnings of the vessel, during the time she bas been sailed and managed by the said Weeks, a sum of about $1,800, without the knowledge of the other own- ers, who were informed by the said John B. Clayton that "Weeks was sailing on "balf shares." The testimony shows that the libellant John B. Clayton was the master of the schooner from the time she was built, in 1861, until he sold ont bis interest to the present master, Weeks ; that he was the owner of three thirty -seconds, and transferred at the same time two thirty-seconds to Weeks, and one thirty-second to Nieholas Clayton ; that Weeks was then, and had been for some years before, the mate on board the said vessel, and that Clayton was allow'ed more than the real value of the shares on the agreement and promise that he should succeed to the position of master. �The proctor for the libellants claims that the owners of a majority of shares have the legal right to control the sailing and navigation of the vessel, and that there is no such thing known in law as a sailing or master's interest which is capable of being transferred from one person to another. I think the correctness of the propositions must be admitted, whatever the prevailing opinion or practice among owners may be to the contrary. It seems now to be generally understood that the minority must submit to the will of the majority in the management and control of the vessel; that it may employ or dismiss the master and crew at pleasure, and that no con- tract can be made between two part owners having minority interests, in reference to the employment of the master, which will bind other owners not parties to it. The New Draper, 1 G. Eob. 235 ; Ward v. Ruckman, 36 N. Y. 26; The W. Bagaley, 5 Wall. 377-e06. But this ia not quite the question -which this case presents. If the libellants represented a majority of the shares of the vessel, without including John ����
