New-York tribune., 1868-05-29
THE COURTS.
CIVIL.

CIVIL.
In the y. s; District Court gn Admiralty
The Propeller Nereus heard. The beants are ~
the Nereus Of the Neptune steamship Line o1 'aat
2Mth M OF November, 1865, on the East Riva, os
tonthe schooner being @ bound passage foT 70 Bo
Conn.-through carelessness, while attempting 10 gsa
distance, ran into the schooner carrying away her ho
spirit, mast and all her rigging Claimants deny cSrS..
ness and aver that the propeller was into by m,
denly came about aud ran ITS bowsprt the starsd
quarter OF the propeller. Decision reserved
In the u. 8. District Court. in Banlruntcv
southern Dlstret question az 70 sassfaetiOn ofud
Smith, 6ahkrupts. The Smiths were adjndicated nyol
untary bankrupts Prior 70 the fling Of the petition FOR
them TO be declared bankrupts, two Judgments hsd
been obtained against them, in good faith IN
the Supreme Court Of this State, and executions issued
under one OF which levy made on their personal
property and the other was held by the Sheriff Il was
nov eo1tended thSt the property Levied on was liable
these judgments liens the estate Of the bankrupt
as against the assignee In bankruptcy for the benst q
property levied to satisfy the ens tho assignee nus
pay the deficiency out OF the property Of the bankup
| IN his hands. ..
In the United States Circuit Court. Soutber,
District, yesterday Judge Nelson discharged the pete
jury until II O'Clock III. to-day On motion OF District
tOrney Dudley f. Phelps was admitted 20 practice i an
the degrees in both the United states Circuit District
Cook agt The Tribune Association Mr.. James T. Brady
of counsel for plaintiff desired TO have the Court set an
case should be tried reached the calendar
and that it important that after day set thers
should be no posponement as plaintiffs witnesses were
scattered in many distant states and it would great
hardship and expense 10 assemble them, and then not
have the trial proceed at the time the Court might lnd
cate. Mr Isaiah T. Williams. Of counsel for The Tribune
Association said the would be long one, and the
| his undertaking case OF more than a dayr
duration, while this would probably last ten days &
and while he did not desire delay he thought under hs
circumstances II would ouy be just to put case over
till Autumn, II 1t could consistently be done. Judge
Nelson thought possible the ease might not be reached
before ne ceased sitting, which he would do tho n
June and said 1t had better stand It at present. and
the time of trial Judge Nelson also heard argument In
the appeal in the cases Of the United States a the
steamships Manhattan, Baltic City Of Paris, America
and Atlantic Lbels were filed against these vessels
the Court below TO recover penalties from their masters
and owners for alleged violations by them OF the Amer-
Passenger act Of 1885, in not constructing berths
tho vessels of the capacity required D the proyons Of
@ act On e sronnSs that the act a not I'M
clude steam vessels, and, after argument, the
libels The Government now, representea Dy Dstrlct
Attorney Courtney and Assistant District Attorney
| Sim0ns appeal the cases to the Circuit Court OH the
ground that proper construction OF the act would make
tincude steam vessels There Is no question Dut that
the 9sIns were OF less capacity than Te9usc & @ " Is
steam vessels lt would be great hardship 70 rnulct
them heavy penalties. tho berths were In many
spects better constructed and ventilated than the act
Qured and simply lacked about an inch In width OF the
size prescribed. The turn upon the legal consrue
ton TO be given to the wording OF the act the tue Of
which names steam vessels, but In the sections imposing
penalties, steam vessels not Delng named IN terms
| IL is a question whether they or arr
not included by implication. The Government
| contends that steam vessels are clearly intended
TO come within the provisions Of the act notwithstanding
the able and elaborate opinion TO the contrary, given IN
the Court below by Judge Blatchford-%hlch was pub
lshed at the time cOumLsand IN which the Judge
carefully analyzed the construction and meaning OF The
disputed sections The ground gone over py eousei On
both substantially the same as that hitherto akea
! by them in the argument IN the Court below Az tas
! conclusion Of the argument the Court VIII take the
papers, with exception OF the printed briefs OF VI,
Government, which not ready, aud VIII reserve W
| decision.