Polynesian., 1853-12-17

process known in the United Ststes as 1Wafrant
to arrest the person Of the defenu2nt with clause.
if he cannot be found, to attach his goods and
chattels" &c. (vide Conkling's Admiralty Jurisdic-
10 Wheaton's Rep. 473). Il il considered most
salutary proceeding in the United States, and one
of great utility to commerce. Our admiralty prac-
tice has not been prescribed BY our statutes, ex-
cept to limited extent in very few instances,
and where it is not prescribed our courts are left
free to adopt SO much Of that Of England, France.
the United States and other maritime countries AZ
they may think wise, Just; and best adapted to the
circumstances Of this country. The only question
to my mind is. is it wise is il just, s it safe to
adopt the practice Of the United States in this in
stance? 1 think it is. But, say the learned coun-
sci, there can be no lien on the Nile" for supplies
furnished the "Walter Claxtop," though she has
the same captain and owners, and viii you then
hold the Nile responsible for those supplies Very
true, there is no lien the Nile" for thoee sup
plies, and Spencer could not hold plank of her
on any such ground but no such lien is contehded
for and none sought to be enforced in the present
suit But what is claimed is this. if party sends
ship here for Supplies, which are furnished herr
then refuses to pay for those supplies; and teefs
himself and ship out Of the jurisdicton OF this
kingdom, the party furnishing such supplies, pro-
vided they are necessary, may obtain process IKE
the one issued in this case, to compel the appear
ance ofthe owner of the ship and, In case heee!aot
be found, to seize any other ship or properly oe-
longing to the same owner, within the Jurisdiction
of this court and hold the same until bis debt shall
be satisfied, or the payment thereof secured, IN
case it shall be found Just. This process IS legal
and equitable, and cann6t be otherwise than safe
to the ship owner especially where, as IN this M
stance, good and ample security is given by the
plaintiff to pay all damages in case he fails TO
make good his demand. The learned counsel
seem to misapprehend the nature OF this proceed
ing altogether, and treat it as a process IN rem
against the Nile" while in fact it is no such
thing, but process in personam against the own
ers Of the .Water Claxton," under which the
Nile is taken Just likc any other property, IN the
absence of the OWNERS, and held as security for
the plaintiffs debt 1t is no hardship upon the de-
PENDANTS, for if they wish I'd release their property
all they have to do is to give bond or stipulation
with sufficient sureties to pay the amount tn:t
may be found Justly due to the plaintiff under his
maritime contract
But there is third and last ground on which It
is claimed this suit should be dismissed, namely,
for irforiality Of service. 1t is said the service
has not been in accordance with section 8, p. 4O,
2 VOL Stat. Laws, which requires that in case the
defendant cannot be found; copy OF the petition,
process, and other papers should be LETT with
some agent or person transactng the business Oh
the defendant" &C. To this it was answered that
ant, and that, in any event. the appearance OF the
defendants by theif counsel cures any informalify
of service and it is now too late to raise any obec
ton to that service. But it is unnecessary Tor me
to discuss the question whether the service has
been in accordance With the statute referred 10,
and whether, if not, it has been cured by the aP-
pearance oe defendants counsel; for the process
and service contemplated i that statute are not at
all applicable to this case, and consequently can
have no bearing upon it. Neither is this process
named and its service prescribed in section 70, p
a. of the act to organize the Judiciary, vol. Stat
Laws, which the learned counsel for defendant
contend requires that copy Of the petition should
be left on the Nile. 1t is not prbcess issued in
any sucF case'' as is defined in said section OF the
statute. The "Niles is not attached for any
maritime lien or liability attaching to that par
tiealar vesss but is seized like any otLer proper
ty Of the defendants, under process IN Per:onon'
In my opinion, the Marshal having published IN
the Polynesian newspaper the substance OF the IL
BEL the process issued, and the return thereon,
with notice to all persons interested. 70 snow
cause if any they have why the prayer OF the lioei
liant should not be granted, and having also afnxed
copy of the same to the TainfIiast OF the snip,
agreeably with the order OF the Court the serslce
has been complete, good, and fair to all parties:
The great and paramount object In Courts OF
Admiralty, as it should be in all courts, Is prompt,
speedy and substantial justice to all parties IN ev
cry case, without regard to nice technicatles, and
see no reason, thus far, why the plaintiffs SUR
should be dismissed.
a. B. BirEs. Esq, Proctor for Complainant, e
J. d. BLAiR and c. c. HARMS, Esq's, Procton
for Defendants.