The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-06-14
SUPREME couRT-GeHenAl TERM.

Important Decision Regarding Liens ON YES
seIs-Where IL n Debt Contracted
Before judges Leonard, Clerke and welles
Michael Asliin, Appellant Edscard Hincker, e al,
Respondents plaintiff sued TO $S7l due him
for services stevedore loading the ship Julia in
May 1864 The vessel was attached under the act Of
1862 providing for the collection OF claims against ships
and vessels The defendants gave bond upon the dis
charge Of the vessel and this action brought upon
tina. bond The defendants contend that although the
agreement for the work was made In New York, the
labor was partially performed at New Jersey dock, and
that there s therefore lien upon the vessel. The
issue was tired before referee Who reported that the
plaintiff entitled 70 the amount claimed but that he
had no lien upon the ship: because the debt not
that the written contract, under Which the work
was performed, was dated and executed In
Ss o.s int. sd .n, ss' outside ns II on tho
State. and the vessel at that time within the State
debt is contracted when and where the agreement s
made where the parties reside where the payment to
made and where subject of the contract is
ated at the time OF making the contract all Of which
places were in the present instance in the State OF New
York. II is necessary that the loading be actually
performed in this State There would be lien IL the
defendants theory correct, were the work per-
formed anywhere the Hudson river Of the line
between New York and New Jersey, fixed in 1884;
Srn aud s No s Ths
o. section Of the statute shows II to have been the
tenton OF the Legislature that the services might be
speaks Of the vessels leaving the port at which the debt
contracted and the port Of New York refers the
whole haroor. The State Of New York has jurisdiction
all the surface OF the waters for purposes,
and the Judgment, being in fur,herance Of justice,
should be affirmed
The respondent holds that the statute gives lien for
debt contracted 'within this State among other
things ION account Of loading unfolding The
ment 10 load this vessel was made in New York. The
work performed In Hoboken. There debt
until the work performed or goods furnished The
work claimed for in this action was performed in the
State OF New Jersey. The vessel was fastened 10 the
dock at Hobokcn, the state OF New Jersey, and
lying the of that State, and lien could at
tach by reason Of tho statute of this State. The
agreement or convention between the States OF
New York and New Jersey, entered into in 1888. and
confirmed in 1884, makes the centre Of the Hudson
the boundary between the two States. That
veniion also provided that New Jersey should have
the exclusive right Of property TO land under water
lying Of the middle of the river, and exclusive
jurisdiction over the wharves docks and improvements
be made the shore OF that state, and
all vessels aground on said snorc or fastened to any
such wharf dock, except a. respects quarantine,
health and emgrnnt laws The Of 1862, providing
for the collection Of demands ships and vessels
N Unconstitutional and VOID.
Case argued. Decision reserved
For the appellant, W. W. Gooderch; for the
spondent, X ". Andrews