The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-02-12
UNITED STATES COURT.
IMPORTANT CISE HEdRD fAVOLJs
IAGNEU HiEYLiND PILOr Law.
One Of the First Cases to Come Up Under
the Law-Judgc simonton's Opinion
AfIirmeG-Otber Cases,

and Rravlev presiding-case No. l02 was
taken 10 first The case. which Involves
the construction OF the new plat laws OF
MARYLAND. Is docketed Is follows:
Fred l.. clayton, agent bark Edmund
Phinney. appellant. vs.. John 5. Hehb' APP
peuee cause was argued by Mr.. Robert
II. Smith. Of Baltimore, for appellant
and by Messrs. Stewart Brown and Ar
thur George Brown, Of Baltimore, Tor
appellee. and submitted.
The case is one In admiralty.
THE STATEMENT.
The appellec. John $. Hobb. O. duly H.
cen-ed Chesapeake Bay pilot on the 18Th
day OF July. 1856. filed his libel In this
case against Fred. J.. Clayton, appellant.
as agent and conscience of The American
bark. Edmund phnuey. % recover Mot
axe on said bark. Tho vessel was char
tered from Baltimore 90 Rosario. Arecn-
tine Republic, and when She was loaded
and ready 90 sail. Hebb applied 20 The
captain. ofiefng him his services, but
the captain told him DE would not take
pilot.
Tho vessel ala take on board twenty
five tons Of Cumberland cs0l, mined IN
the Uutod States which was shipped 20
Ike manner as the rest Of her cargo.
No bin for pliotage was presented 10
t1ie appellant. and no claim was made
upon him Tor piiotage until this suit vas
brought
The coal was not put I'm as nart Of
the ballast. She had about l.l tons OF
gravel ballast. The object in shipping
tho coal was 20 develop possible market
for coal On Rosario where handsome
profit might be realized.
Tho District Court ot Mary and from
which the case was appealed dooroed iltl
the anpore was entitled 20 recover. hold
,ro tbaf tho vessel was not entitled 20
the exemption provided in Tho statute
because o. tons Of coal were mot % sud-
stantial part Of her c9rgo
BRIEF FOR APPELLEES.
Tha brief for the appellee states.
"Thls was intended 10 be test case
10 measure the extent OF the exemption
from pilotaee. under the amended Pilot
Law OF Maryland. 1906 chapter GID. or
vessel laden in whole or in part with
coke or coal. mined I'm the United states.
when such vessel carried hut "a small
amount OF coal. OF incOnsidorahle COM
merclal value. and with the intent 20
evade the payment OF p'loiase.
THE NEW LAW.
by an act OF the Legislature OF Mary
land. passed IN 1896 the Pilotage Law was
so modified as 20 exempt from plotage
charges vessels employed in ana licen-
sed Tor the cOastlug trade ana American
vessels laden either in whole or I'm part
with coke or coal mined in Che United
States
Tho language Of the act Of 1896 is as
follows:
Section lG. All masters of foreign Fe3-
sells from Il foreign port. aud all vessels
sailing under register bound TO and from
Baltimore city. except vessels employed
I'm and licensed for the cOasting trade aud
American vessels laden either in whole
or I'm part with coke or coal mined in
the United States shall take lccn-ei
pilot, or in case of refusal 10 take such
pilot shall themselves. their owners OF
consignees pay the said pilotaee ass II one
had been employed. and such piotase
shall be- paid 20 the pilot first speaking
or Offering his services as pilot 10 sucn
vessel before Cape Henry bears solth ii
inward bound .....,.,.
EXEMPTION FROM PlLOrAGE.
Vessels employed On and licensed Tor
the COastlug trade shall he exempt liui"
the duty OF employing n plot auu ln'
vessels. as well o5 their masters. owner.
agents or consigneos shall be exempt
pllotagc. or any penalty whdlsoeFrI J."
case OF their neglect or refusal 10 90 500
any American vessel laden either ID Whoie
or IN part with coke or coal mined lh lnc
United States shall be exempt from Wy
duty % taking a pilot, ana the vessel
as well as her master. owner agent OF
cOnsignee. shall be exempt from tho duiy
paying pilOtage or half piiotaee OF any
penalty whatsoever IN case OF ms heBle'l
or refusal so 20 DO. But coastwlse yes
a. ID .fN.
In whole or in part with coke or cohi
mined as aforesaid, voluntarily taxing
"a pilot shall pay the same fee Tor plot
age as prescribed In the case OF vessel
bound 10 or from IA foreign port
I'm conclusion the brief SAYS.
There was no danger Of loss IN the
venture. as tho price paid for the coal
was less than the bin Tor pilotage
80. ls9 j. Kemp Bartlett. appellant. VS.
e. Ambrose et al. appellees. Appeal from
the Circuit Court Of West virginia. Opin-
ion by Judge Sim0ntOn. Affirmed with
costs. without prejudice 20 the right of
the appellant 10 bring such action at law
as he may Doe advised.
A RAILROAD CASE.
No 20J T.. j kimhall and Henry
Fink. receivers. Norfolk and Western
Railroad Company. plaintiffs I'm error
IS. w. II. Palmer, defendant in error Tn
error 10 the Circuit Court. Western Dis
trict OF Virginia Cause argued hy i. IT,
Page and A. Fulkerson for plaintiffs In
error and by j. W. Read and A. Fulker-
son. for the defendant in error, and SUBJ
mittcl.
STATEMENT OF FACTS.
This Is a writ Of error 10 Judgment
OF the Circuit Court OF the United states
for the Western District az Virginia. az
Abingdon. in an action OF trespass on
the case. wherein a judgment was render
"a I'm favor ~ the plaintiff defendant IN
error hero, for tho sum OF 5000.
The first count of the declaration. which
contained two counts, alleged that the
plaintiff, q citizen OF the State OF Ten
nessee. was a passenger on the cahoose
Of certain freight train OF the deien-
dants from Bristol Va, 10 Shenandoah
Junction. W. Va: that before the arrival
Of said train at Shenandoah Junction, and
while the caboose was I'm motion. The
defendants required plaintiff 20 leave the
said caboose and ordered him 10 go for
ward to the car OF poultry which plain
tiff was accompanying and that while
attempting 20 60 forward "a directed the
defendants. without notice or warninf
suddenly. violently and with great force
checked the moving train. and by means
a.. ,f.frtfff MA caught between