New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-06-02
THE COURTs.
United States District COurt-In Admiralty
Important DecisiOn-SelIing a Mort
gagged Steamboat.

Important DISTINGUISHING a Mort
gagged Steamboat.
James r. Barremore, Jibelant, VS.
the steamer Pioneer. Opinion by Durell,
District Judge.-This suit is brought by
BarremOre against the Pioneer for the sun
of $205, being for wages due him as clerk OF
the Pioneer, a small boat, and according to
the record in this suit returned from the
State court. He claims not only a judg.
ment for this amount against his brother,
who acted as captain, and also against the
boat which was registered at the Custom,
house. Al the time those services were
rendered the boat belonged to BarremOre's
mother, it having been purchased by her
for the sum of $3.50, she assuming all the
liens thereon, amounting probably to over
the value of One-half the boat.
The boat made one trip of fifteen days
duration, and then suit was brought
against BarremOre the elder by Swarbrick
g. Co, a house which furnished supplies to
the boat, and they obtained judgment
against him in the State court. The boat
had been Professionally seized, and then
sold at Sherif's sale for $500, the purchaser
paying off the claimsOf the material andmen,
leaving a surplus, in the hands of the regis
ter, of $3.50, to be held for such persons for
whose benefit it might inure.
After the sale of the boat J.. r. Barre
more libeled the boat for his wages, which
were earned prior to the provisional seiz-
ure in the State court. In this latter suit
he is met by the intervenOrs, jerome Han
ley claiming to have a mortgage upon the
boat, and William H. Seymour also claim
ing under the same, and then a third inter
venor, P. Gallagher, purchaser under the
Sherif7s sale.
Now it is clear to my mind that the lien
of j. II. BarremOre is a maratime lien, and
could not be Invested by the State court;
therefore I allow him, he only attending to
the shipping of a load of lumber, and the
boat having made one voyage of fifteen
days, $50 for the whole. With regard to
those who claim as mortgages given under
the State law, as there will be a remainder
in the hands of the registry after paying
BerremOre, and as the United States courts
have already held that a mortgage of such
a character is not a maratime lien, yet they
may come in Ind have their Intervention
and sbtain that remainder, If the BOAT had
not been properly sold, and they come to
this court instead of going to the State
court, / shall permit them so to do.
1t is perfectly clear that although a cap
tain of a ship is responsible for supplies fur
nished,sye a judgment for the same against
the captain alone can not be executed
against the ship. 1t may be executed
against him, and he, in turn, looks to the
owners. But a Judgment against the cap
tain, followed by a seizure and sale of the
ship, is no seizure and sale at all, because it
is the selling of property belonging to third
parties. This fact comes out by the evidence
adduced by the intervenOr, 2. Gallagher,
who claims to be the owner of the boat by
purchase under Sherif7s sale. Therefore
let there be Judgment in favor of the Oldest
mortgage; the remainder, after satisfying
his claim, to go to the next oldest.
The Intervention of P. Gallagher, claim
ing under the Sherif7s title is dismissed.
Supreme COurt-HOw the Strauss Case
Stands.
On the seventeenth of Nav, 1872, an ap-
peal was taken, on behalf of the State, by
the Attorney General, from the Judgment
in the Strauss case, rendered and signed on
the thirteenth Of said month OF May by
Judge Emerson, acting in the place Of
Judge Dibble, of the Eighth District Court,
Reused. This appeal was made returnable
on the third Monday in May, which was
the twentieth of that month.
The usual period for making an appeal
returnable when taken this month May
is the first Monday in November. Messrs.
Semmcs q Mott, special counsel for the
State, took an appeal from the same judy
ment, returnable the first Monday i'll No
vember next.
lHC AIIOEuGg OFuCAdA 4uAAC'A " III hAo
transcript of appeal within the return day
in bis appeal.
Messrs. HOrnOr g. Benedict, Strauss at
t~Orneys, obtained a certificate from the
clerk of the Supreme Court of the nOn-fling
Of the Attorney Generals appeal. The pro
ductiOn of this certificate in the lower court
entities a party to the execution Of his Judg-
ment.
The motion made yesterday in the Su-
preme Court by Semmes & Mott, on their
appeal, was intended to destroy the effect
Of the certificate taken out in consequence
OF the nOn-iling of the Attorney Generals
appeal.
The Supreme Court has ordered that the
clerk Of this tribunal do issue a certificate
to be filed in the Eighth District Court in
tue Strauss case, in which he shall certify
that the ~suspensive appeal taken in this
case on the eighteenth May, 1872. at the in
stance OF the special counsel for the State
is still pending and undetermined.
This, for the present. prevents the pay
ment of Wicklitfe's forged warrants.