Court Opinion

ID: 9305436
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-12-02 17:16:33.749956+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:13:52.892297
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam.
For the information of proctors and parties we give the following explanation of the decree handed down in this cáse: The funds in court are not sufficient to pay the conceded maritime liens in the case. For the purposes of determining priority, we have considered *561that the last voyage was from the port of Providence, R. I., via New York, to the port of Mobile. Whether the trip from Portland, Me., to South America, and thence back to Providence, R. I., should be considered one or two voyages is immaterial. We think that the liens upon this last voyage are entitled to be paid in preference to those incurred on prior voyages. Martin, Taylor & Co., in Mobile, had knowledge of the liens which existed to a large amount against the Kobbo. There is evidence, which we think admissible, to show that Martin, Taylor & Co. agreed to advance the necessary sums to pay off or postpone those liens, so that the ship could make the voyage as contracted with Martin, Taylor & Co. Whether this contract was made or not we deem immaterial, because, with the knowledge Martin, Taylor & Co. had, they had no right to make a charter which, if the vessel should be seized, would further incumber her with large damages, growing out of the failure to comply with the charter-party. We think that Martin, Taylor & Co. should be allowed only the amounts advanced by them to the Kobbe for the necessities of the ship, and that any claim they may have for damages growing out of the breaking up of the voyage and the failure to comply with the charter-party should be postponed until valid liens are paid. As to the claim of Joseph R. Edwards, we allow him the amounts advanced by him for the necessities of the ship in the port of Mobile. The debt to L. P. Wright & Co., which was paid by the said Edwards at the request of the master, imported a lien upon the ship, for which a seizure could have been made, and was threatened. We think that for such advance Mr. Edwards is entitled to the regular maritime lien for necessary supplies furnished a ship in foreign ports. The copper furnished by the Revere Copper Company for the Kobbe was furnished in the port of New York, and to a vessel registered in Searsport, Me., and holding out Searsport, Me., as her home port, although then lying in the waters of New Jersey, and belonging to a party then living in New Jersey. We consider the copper as furnished in the, port of New York on the credit of the ship. The bill of William Gokey & Son is for supplies and repairs furnished in Jersey City to a vessel registered in Sears-port, Me., having painted on her stern, as required by the act of congress, “Augustine Kobbo, Searsport, Maine.” She was thus held out by her owner as of Searsport, Me. Gokey & Son were not apprised, as the evidence clearly shows, of the fact that the residence of the owner was in New Jersey. The owner; therefore, is estopped from claiming other than Searsport, Me., as the home port, and we think, and so decide, that Searsport, Me., was, in the particular circumstances of this case as to him and the other parties interested, the home port of the vessel; that the credit for these supplies and repairs was given exclusively to the ship, and without any reference to the credit of the owner, and, therefore, that the claim imports a maritime lien upon the ship.