1. Though a Court of Admiralty is 8. not bound to take jurisdiction of controversies growing out of con- tracts between foreigners having a domicile in this country, it may lawfully exercise it, and ought to do so, where justice re- quires it. The Sailor's Bride, 68
2. It has jurisdiction in a case of salvage rendered by an American tug to a British vessel in Canadi- an waters. ibid.
3. Admiralty has jurisdiction of a suit to recover for services of a tug in hauling off a vessel aground, though the same do not amount to a salvage service. The Clar- ion,
While a natural thoroughfare, although wholly within the do- minion of a government, may be passed by commercial ships of right, yet the nation which con- structs an artificial channel may annex such conditions to its use as it pleases. ibid.
10. When it may be inferred that the maritime law sought to be applied is excluded by the lex loci, the remedy in rem should be denied. If from the circumstances a contrary presumption arises, the principle of the maritime law in- volved should be enforced. ibid.
therefore the authorities which | 20. A hull completed at the place
sustain admiralty jurisdiction over torts and contracts, in foreign waters, do not extend the maritime law over it. Ad- miralty Courts have taken juris- diction wholly irrespective of the fact of a tide. ibid.
13. Inapplicability of the lex loci contractus, the lex rei cita, and the lex loci delicti, where obliga- tions growing out of international commerce are to be adjudicated with reference to the maritime law, considered. ibid.
of launching received a small cargo of flour as ballast, was towed with her spars on deck to another port, where her masts were stepped, and the vessel put in condition for navigation:
Held, that the work was done in building the vessel, and that admiralty had no jurisdiction. The Iosco,
See TOWAGE, 2.
CRIMINAL LAW, 1. LIEN, 14, 15, 16, 17.
14. Saginaw river, though wholly within the State of Michigan, is a public navigable stream, and within the admiralty jurisdiction. 1. Unless given by statute, there is
no right in admiralty to a trial by jury. Gillet v. Pierce,
The Act of 1845 was passed upon the assumption that, by the Con- stitution and Judiciary Act of 1789, admiralty jurisdiction was limited to tide waters; that cases arising upon the lakes were cog- nizable only in the common law courts, and were consequently triable by jury under the Consti- tution; and that Congress could not transfer the jurisdiction in such cases to Courts of Admiral- ty, without "saving to the parties the right of trial by jury." Con- gress did not intend by this clause to grant a new right, but to save one already supposed to exist. ibid.
3. The assumption upon which the Act was passed having been de- clared to have had no existence, the entire Act, including the saving clause of a right to a trial by jury, became inoperative. ibid.
19. Wharves are but improvements or extensions of the shore, and injuries done to them, no matter by what agency, are injuries done 4. on land, and do not constitute maritime torts for which an ac- tion in the admiralty can be maintained.
By the Revised Statutes, how- ever, the law is changed, and the right to a trial by jury is express- ly given in the class of cases specified in the Act of 1845. ibid.
5. The party demanding a jury | 7. The general maritime law uni-
must bring himself by his plead- ings within the provisions of the Act.
versally recognized by civilized nations gives a lien for a marine tort upon the offending vessel, and this lien travels with the ship into whosesoever hands she may go. The proceeding in rem, to enforce such a lien, is not process. In no sense is it remedy only, or a part of the lex fori, but is the enforcement of a proprietary in- terest. The Avon,
ibid. 12. The nature of maritime liens
discussed, and the authorities 20. Such lien exists for necessaries reviewed.
furnished upon request of the owner wherever it is shown affirm- atively they were furnished on ibid. the credit of the vessel.
Where money was advanced by one who held the legal title to the vessel under a bill of sale given to him as security for the indorsement of a note which had been paid by the maker and the bill of sale thereby extinguished:
Held, the lien was not thereby defeated. ibid. 22. Where, however, libellant was jointly interested with the equita- ble owner in the profits of one trip:
15. Whether such lien existed with respect to foreign vessels, or whether the Court of Admiralty had jurisdiction to enforce it, seems never to have been settled prior to the passage of the Act of 3 and 4 Vict. This statute was, however, simply declaratory 23. of the maritime law with respect to the existence of the lien as it was prior to its passage, and vested jurisdiction to enforce it in the Admiralty Courts. ibid.
19. A maritime licn exists for mon- eys advanced to purchase or pay for necessaries supplied to a ship
Held, he could not recover for advances made during that trip. ibid.
Parties may stipulate for a lien for necessaries, notwithstanding that no such lien is implied by the law of the place where such necessaries are furnished.
24. By the general maritime law a lien exists for necessaries furnish- ed a domestic vessel, even though by the law of the place there may be no jurisdiction to enforce it.
STALE CLAIM, 1. MARSHALING OF LIENS, 1, 2. MATERIAL-MEN, 2, 3.
See JURISDICTION, 15, 16, 17.
wherever it would exist for the LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. necessaries themselves. The Union Express,
537 1. Libellant's agent, who was in-
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan » |