Daily Republican., 1886-05-15

An important decision was rendered
by Judge Wales on Friday In the
United Ssates Court in the case OF John
3. Rowland vs, the British steamship
South Cambria, on o libel to recover
for pilot services, which had been Of.
fered and refused. Rowland IA one OF
the pilots licensed under the laws OF
this State, and his claim was based on
the ground that his services had been
refused, and PennsylvAnia pilot en-
iployed, which he oontented was O
violation OF the pilotage laws of Della
ware. The libelIant was represented
by Flanders q Pugh, Of Philadelphia,
and Levi O. Bird, Esq., of this city..
and the respondent BY Morton b. Henry.
Esq, of Philadelphia, and Benjamin
Nields, Esq, of this city.
| The opinion Of Judge Wales was as
follows:
The libellant sues for pilotage service
rendered to the master Of the British
steamship South Cambria on the 22d OF
October last, In the Delaware bay, on
her voyage from Cuba to Philadelphia.
The libellant was the first pilot who
boarded the steamship and offered his
Service, which was refused by the cap
tain, who had instruction from hts
owners not TO employ Delaware pilot,
and afterwards on the same day en-
Iployed Pennsylvania pilot. The
reason assigned by the captain for his
refusal to employ lbellant, was that he
desired to avail himself OF the lower
rates charged by the Pennsylvan Ia
pilots, the differences in this instance
being $26 06. The court decided:
That the act Of the General Assembly,
Of Delaware, ofApril 9th, 1881, regulati
ing pilotage and pilots In the Della ware
bay and river, which provides: "That
the pilot who shall first offer himself to
any in ward-bound ships or vessels shall
be entitled to take charge thereof" is ir
conflict with the act of Congress Of
March I'd, 1887, which enacts that 'the
master Of any vessel coming into or
going ont of any ports situate upon
waters which are the boundary between
two States, may employ any pilot duly
licensed or authorized by the laws Of
either of the States bounded on such
waters to pilot the vessel to or from
such port
That 1t may be considered as settled
that the States have concurrent power
with Congress to pass pilotage laws
until Congress shall take exclusive con-
troll of the subject by the enactment of
general and uniform law, and, in the
meanwhile, that such acts as Congress
may make shall be of paramount
authority, and all State laws which are
in direct and manifest collision with
them must yield.
That the act of 1887 applied to the
piiotage laws OF coterminous States situ-
l ated upon the same navi gable waters
but which are not the separating boun.
dary between them, such q constr uction
being clearly within the meaning Of the
act.
That the act of 1887 was evidently in.
tended to prevent or settle controversies
springing up between rival pilots COM
petipg for employment on navigable
waters common to two or more States,
and no better plan short of q general
and uniform system for avoiding or
deciding such controversies could have
been desired than the one contemplated
by the act, namely, by comforting on
the master OF any vessel requiring q
pilot the right of electing who shall
serve him In that capacity. This was
the object aimed at.
The mischief to be suppressed was
apparent, and the remedy was equally
apparent. Such being the meaning OF
the act under fair Interpretation of
Its terms, and this construction being
justified by the adjudications of State
/ and Federal courts whioh have con.
sidered the subject, 1t ID ordered that
the libel be dismissed and decree be
entered for the respondent for his
costs.
The sum for which suit was brought
was S1l5.50, the amount the libellant
would have received had his services
been accepted and performed. The
Pennsylyania pilot took the vessel to
Philadelphia for $50 "A, being a differ
ence of $26. .06 In his favor.