sion of Rouen, made it necessary to bring the proposed change in this regard very distinctly to Mr. Barker's mind. Although the offer accepted, Mr: Barker was justified in regarding Mr. had not Gardeicke's subsequent proposition as a renewal of it, in the absence of specific information to the contrary; and this information I am satisfied Mr. Barker did not receive, however much Mr. Gardeicke may have intended and sought to convey it. This view of the facts renders an examination of other questions discussed unnecessary. There was no contract; and the fact that the writing signed by libellant remained for soine time in respondents' possession, under the circunistances shown, is unimportant. The libellant was fully informed, from the outset, that it would not be signed, and knew it wasa£ nis disposal. A decree must be entered pismissing the libel, with,' costs 'to respondents.
(lJircuit OouH, E. D. Pennlylvania. April 29,1882.)
1, PILOTAGE-ACT 01' CONGREss-COTERMINOUS STATES.
The act of congress of March 2, 1837, authorizing the master of a vessel bound to or from a port situate on waters which are the boundary between two states, to employ a pilot licensed by the laws of either state, applies to the pilotage laws of coterminous states situated upon a navigable river which i, not a separating boundary between them. 2. SAME-OONFLICT OF LA.WS. A pilot licensed by the state of Delaware may recover forservfces in piloting a vessel up the Delaware bay and river to Philadelphia, notWithstanding a statute of Pennsylvania prohibiting anyone from acting as such pilot without a Pennsylvania license.
Appeal from 8 decree of the district court sustaining a libel filed by a Delaware pilot against 8 steam-ship for piloting the latter to Philadelphia, the defence being that the libellant held only a Delaware license, and that there was a Pennsylvania statute prohibiting anyone from acting as such pilot without a Pennsylvania license. The facts and the opinion of the district court are fully reported in 9 FED. REP. 164. Henry G. Ward, Morton P. Henry, and Richard C. McMurtrie, for a.ppellant. Curti, Tilton, Henry Flanders, and Hon. Thomas F. Bayard, for appellee.
""Reported by Frank P. Prichard, Esq" of the Philadelphia bar.
UNITED STATES V. TOBEY.
McKENNAN, C. J. The question upon which the decision of this ease turns is said to be one of great commercial importance, but I do not think it is difficult of solution. It involves the applicability of the act of congress of March 2, 1837, to the pilotage laws of coterminous states situated upon the same navigable waters, but which are not the separating boundary between them. If such states are within its purview, it is admitted that the libel must be sustained. That the act of congress is operative upon the la.wsof states so situated I have no doubt. Such a construction is clearly within the reason of the act, and such was held to be its effect by the supreme court of Pennsylvania in Flanigen v. Ins. Co. 7 Po.. St. 306, in reference to the law of that state, which is in question here. But I do not propose to do more than state the conclusion which I have reached. The opinion of the lea,rned judge of the district court, in deciding this esse, is so satisfactory that I adopt it ItS showing the reasons for the jndgment of this court. There must, then, be a decree in favor of the libellant for the amount / of his claim, viz., $97.50, and costs.
UNITED STATES '0. TOBEy.1Il
(Di8trict Oourt, E. D. Penn8yZfJania.
DEATH OF SEAMAN SALE OJ' HIS EFFEOTS -
February 27, 1882.)
RIGHT OJ' MAsTER TO DEDUCT
AMOUNT DUE SHIP.
Where the master of a vessel sells at the mast the effects of a deceased seaman, and accounts to a shipping commissioner for the proceeds, in accordance with section 4538, Rev. St., he cannot deduct from such proceeds the amount due the ship by the sailor for wages advanced but not earned.
Motion for judgment non obstante veredicto. This was a suit by the United States against the master of a vessel to recover the proeeedsof a seaman's effects. On the trial it appeared that Petel; Rouel, a seaman on the ship Santa Clara, died during a voyage from San Francisco to Queenstown. He had at the time of his shipment at San Francisco received $75 advance wages. After his death his effects were sold by the master according to law, at the mast, under section 4:538, Rev. St. At this sale his effects, including a $20 gold
.Reported by Frank P. Prichard, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar.