New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-06-07
CIVIL COURTS.
SUPREME COURT-GENERAL TERM-JUSK 6.-Befort
Justices LEONARD, BARNARD. aud CLERKB.

tine Antonio Mathe against marine risks, IN the usual
4 loImi the brig being valued az $4,000.
Inc orig left Belize, Honduras for New-York, Win
cargo or ogwood &ci ran ON reef; was got on 700
went back 70 Behze unloaded surveyed was found
TO be SO much injured that was impossible perma
neny to repair her at Belief forY arded her cargo by
another vessel temporarily repaired at Belize for
the purpose only of enabling her to TO the port OF
After the survey. the master wrote TO the plaintiffs,
from Belize stating tho condition Of AFFAIRS and asking
for instructions His letter was communicated 20
defendants, who requested the plaintiff TO instruct him
Ihey dd So stating their wish 10 be to make only such
repairs would he considered perfectly safe 10 bring the
brig TO NewYork directing the master to consult with
adding that whatever the master and MIR. Mshe should
decide about the brig was approved before hand
the defendants before il was sent and they IN writing
at the foot concurred therein On the receipt o. this
| letter, the temporary repairs were made, at the
expense OF a. The vessel then came to NewYork
and was then thoroughly repaired at cost deductDs
In getting the brig back from the reef 70 Belize. I'M
loading and surveying her there &c. &c. expenses
of general average character were incurred. the
sePs proportion OF which was S5sl Is.
The plaintiffs claim TO recover Sll ,l1s 81.
The defendants have paid $1,000 the amount named In
the policy but object TO paying the balance. sls o.
stances, company be compelled to pay more
than the face OF their policy for the aggregate of
i've losses hut they claim that they must be recovered
either expenses losses that considered expenses
no authority was conferred to expend more than the
II considered losses then the amount OF loss limited
| as In Of total loss.
Decision reserved.
Mr. Carter for PLAINTIFF MT Fessenden Tor cefendants
| THE BUTLER ESTATE.
In re. the estate of Andrew j. Butler This action
is entitled the papers Benjamin i. Butler, executor
&c agt Gideon j. II cker but the court on the hearng
order of the Surrogate directing the filing OF inven
tory Mr. Butl"r when he died. being resident OF inns
city his will W. proved by his brother b. T. butler De
fore the Surro Of this'cOunty. Subsequently, when
required 10 file inventory, he filed one containing
list Of his property within this State amounting accord
ing TO the appraisers valuation 20 T6,Sg o. Ihls the
Surrogate did not regard sufficient, but directed
further inventory the assets belonging the estate Of
the deceased in Massachusetts louisiana ana Saioi-
MIA From this order Gen Butler has appealed claiming
that the powerof the Surrogate does not extend 10 re-
quire inventory of personal estate situate in another
Jurisdiction NAV never come into the custody of the
executor could not be exhibited" 20 the appraisers nor
sisted by the appraisers and subject 20 the claims of
creditors residing within the jurisdiction where they are
ing to Ter loci rel s and have to be accounted
\ the places where they
Decision reserved
Mr.. Trull for appellant Mr.. VIM B. Atkins for respOn
CHAMBERs-JuNE s.-Before Judge BARNARD
LIMITATIONS OF TIE POWERS or THE STATES OVER
| VESSELS IN THEIR HARBoRs-THE LAW or lSC6 AS
| TO LIENS ON VESSELS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
In the Matter Of the Attachment gt The Steamboat Josephine her
On account Of the Importance of this case we give
BARNARD This Is a motion to set aside attach
vdes for the collection Of demands against ships and
vessels The claim npon which tho attachment was rs
sued is for supplies furnished to the steamboat In the
year 1906 she being at the time domestic vessel en-
rolled at The port Of aHd s TIVE ErosHd
OF the motion h want Of Jurisdiction, II being claimed by
the owners Of the steamboat that State Courts or qces
within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction OF the
United states Courts Section two OF the third article OF
Constitution OF the United States extends the judicial
power Of the United States to all OF admiralty and
maritime Jurisdiction Sec OF the Judiciary act OF 1859
Gst stat az Inrge 49, provides thar the District
OF the United States shall have exclusively OF the courts
OF the several States" cogzance Of certain enumerated
crimes and shall also exclusive cOgnzance Of all
civil causes Of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction
saving suitOrs In all cases the right OF common law
| where the law IL competent 10 give IT,
In the late case OF the Moses Taylor and the s later
supreme Court OF the United states at the December
term 1906 that decided that by the Constitution
and tho act Of Congress Of 1882 all civil causes of adj
mraty and maritime Jurisdiction were within the eT-
elusive cognzance OF the United States courts and that
the State courts State Legislatures had no power 10 act
upon such cases except by means OF q common law
remedy. That attachments against vessels by name. as
authorized by the lien laws OF the several states WERE
not common law remedies, but were In the nature OF
Admiralty proceedings and that, therefore, such laws
Chains which within the jurisdiction OF the Adm
| TO the slngularty OF the fact that, although the
lien laws have been acted upon for many years in the
should only have been presented at this late period and
that 10 should come before the Court al the
parts OF the Union remote from each other The opinions
Of the Supreme Court Of the United States In these two
fully establish the proposition that claim which
is within the jurisdiction Of the Admiralty Courts
authority and that the States can only enforce such
| claims by remedies known 20 the common law; that a'
though the State Courts enforce such claims against
the debtor by action and in such actlpn Act the
party upon hs lnter IN hpesse yet they cannot pro-
eeea against vessel itself as the party defendant The
which this attachment was issued is within the iuris.
forced by them, The claim for supplies furnished to
the steamboat while In the port OF New York she being
the states OF Sow.York and New7Jersey. That such
tom of the Admiralty is too We'll settled by authority to
admit OF discussion. Kents Com, SD. Kents Com,
| I6s Steamer St Lawrence l Bleck 52i Rule of su.
| rYep tpD offrt g In ne
counsel for the attaching creditor on this branch Of the
case rests mainly upon the ground hat the United states
vessels for supplies furnished In the home port This argu
men however does not reach the point The United states
Courts do issue Admiralty process f pcysoadD
and expressly authorized so by the Rue or
II they had not Jurisdiction they could not issue
process whatever But from 1874 1883 they did also
issue process ~ IN these cases where the State laws
gave lien he ldea hat tue character OF description
OF process which the Court will grant has any hearing
upon the question Of It's Jurisdiction, is expressly and
emphgucaly refuted IA the case above cltea OF the
steamer Lawrence. Black, PIP 624, 626 and 629; the
Justice story IN delivering the opinion OF the Court
which denied process an rem for ohandlery and stores
furnished TO vessel in home port expressly states no
doubt Is entertained by the Court that the Admiralty pos
general jurisdiction in cases Of material men,
there would not have been any hesitation IN
sustaining the Jurisdiction OF the District Court"
therefore within the admiralty jurisdiction OF the United
States courts and would be enforced by those courts by
process Prior to the adoption OF the rule OF
1885, and wnie the rule OF ls4 was In force, 1t would
have been by hs United t states courts 0 BY
preme Court ofthe United States 10 restore the rule OF
is44 and enforce such claims by process IN The
United States courts therefore, having jurisdiction OF
the claim OF action, that jurisdiction IL eXclu
sve with the single reservation 10 the State Courts OF
common law remedies. The warrant against the vessel
not being law remedy, must, on the authority
OF the cases OF the Moses Taylor and Adelaide Hines, be
set aside. - ]
ney & Sphinx for attaching creditor.
Before Justice INGRAHAM
DECISIONS.
Edward Mccormack agt. Leo. Lange.-hotion de
In re the petition OF A. NJ Cozzens trustee, tc-order
granted. -, 49,.
'Newburg agt Strelftz-MOtion denied with $40 costs.
Woods &c aet Marchant, &c.-MOton granted.
,r1a 90 Mann aulu fan