1'. Seamen — Contract for Service — Termination oe Voyage.

Libelants signed in San Francisco for a whaling voyage to the Arctic Ocean on stated lays; the voyage not to exceed 36 months. On the way north the vessel broke a shaft and was obliged to return to San Francisco for repairs, having been away but about a month. Held, that the voyage was not terminated on such return, and that the refusal of the master to permit libelants to there leave the-vessel, authorized by the shipping articles during the voyage, did not entitle them to treat the contract as rescinded and to recover on a quantum meruit for the remainder of their term of service.

2. Infants — Contract by Minor — Disaffirmance.

Seamen, who were minors when they signed shipping articles, may dis-affirm the contract and recover the reasonable value of the services rendered, regardless of the contract terms.

[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 27, Infants, §§ 149-160.]

3. Seamen — Mistreatment by Master.

Assaults made by a master upon seamen or their confinement by him in unnecessarily cruel positions are violations of their personal rights for which both the' master and vessel are liable in damages.

4. Same — Rights and Duties After Expiration of Term of Service — Icebound Vessel.

Where, at the time of the expiration of the contract term of service of seamen on a whaling voyage to the Arctic Ocean, the vessel was icebound without fault of the master or owners, they were not thereby released from the obligation to perform their ordinary duties as seamen until they could be taken or sent to the port of discharge, and the master was justified in placing them in irons on their refusal to perform such ordinary duties, but they could not be required to resume the business of whaling after the vessel was released, and the confinement in irons of one of them because of his refusal to do so entitled him to damages.

5. Estoppel — Release—Invalidity.

A release signed by a seaman on leaving the vessel while in the Arctic Ocean before her return to the port of discharge, where there was no settlement with him for .his services, did not estop him from maintaining an action therefor or from recovering damages for mistreatment by the master.