Court Opinion

ID: 9416966
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 19:59:22.704404+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:58.236431
License: Public Domain

Mr.-Justice CLIFFORD:
I dissent from the opinion of the court in this case because it is repugnant to the repeated decisions of this court, to the eighty-ninth section of the Collection Act, and to the twenty-ninth admiralty rule of this court, which was adopted as the rule of decision more than thirty years ago: and because it is opposed to the whole current of the decisions of the admiralty courts and to the rules laid down by the most approved writers upon admiralty law.*
Apart from that, I also adhere upon the merits to the dissenting opinion .in the case of Miller v. United States.†

 The Vengeance, 3 Dallas, 297; The Sarah, 8 Wheaton, 394; 1 Stat. at Large, 696; Admiralty Rules, No. 29; The David Pratt, Ware, 495; Clerke’s Praxis, art. 35; The Schooner Lyon, 1 Sprague, 400; 2 Conklin’s Admiralty, 2d ed. 178; Benedict’s Admiralty, §§ 449, 452; 2 Browne’s Civil and Admiralty Law, 401; Dunlap’s Practice, 206; 2 Parsons on Shipping arid Admiralty, 400.

 11 Wallace, 314.