nishing the victuals and men, and is the sole person responsible for the mode in which the business is conducted. I am not ready to believe that congress intended to punish the guilty by a penalty of $20, and the innocent one of $200. Of course, they might do so by a blunder; but that is not to be lightly imputed, and I find that a perfectly reasonable and not unnatural construction of section 4515 refers to the forsgoing parts of the title. If this construction is wrong, the sections are repugnant, because section 4521 purports to impose the penalties, and all the penalties, for a violation of section 4520, and the particular provision for coasting voyages must prevail over the one for voyages in general. I am, therefore, of opinion: (1) That the offence of receiving on board ship a seaman who has been engaged contrary to title 53 is an impossible one, because there is nothing in that title that requires an engagement to be made before the seamen are received on board; (2) if that section has any application, it has none to coasting voyages; and, as a corollary; that no penalty was incurred by the Thomas W. Haven, when the master, being about to proceed from Boston to South Amboy, received seamen on board without having made a written contract with them. Libel dismissed.
.·.AlroN e. anING.
(Oircuit Oourt, D. Kan8lU. July 30, 1880.,
MASTER AND SERVANT-NEGLIGENClll.-A master is liable for negligence
in the use of defective machinery, whereby his servant was injured, although the negligence of a fellow servant contributed to the injury. 2. BAME-RECElIVER-CoXP. LAWS OJ' KANsAS, (1879,) C. 84, § 29-Qumr" whether a receiver" engaged in the operation of a railroad, is a .. railroad company" within the meaning of Ilection 29, c. 84, of the Compiled Lawll of Kansas, (1879,) which provides that" every railroad company, organized or doing bUlliness in this state, shall be liable for all damages done to any emplClye of such company inconsequence of any negligence of its agents, or by any mismanagement of the engineer or other employe, to any person sustaining such damage."
Motion for New Trial. Gage ti: Ladd, for plaintiff. Pratt, Burmback it Ferrey and S. O. Thatcher, for defendant. MCCRARY, C. J. The plaintiff sued defendant, as receiver of the Lawrence, Leavenworth & Ga.lveston Railroad Company, to recover damages for personal injuries received while in defendant's employ. The defendant was, at the time of the accident, engaged in operating said railroad under an appointment from this court as receiver thereof. The plain.. tiff sought to reoover upon two grounds-First, that his coemploye, one Bowles, who, at the time of the acoident, was acting as yard master, was guilty of negligenoe in running certain cars, to be ooapled together, at a great and dangerous speed, causing the injury to plaintiff, who was engaged in coupling; and, second, that defendant was guilty of negligenoe in .using cars dangerous and defeotive in their construotion, whereby plaintiff wall injured. It was alleged that the coupling pin was old and bent, and that the bumpers were improperly constructed and located, and were thereby rendered exceedingly and unnecessarily' dangerous. Issue was joined upon these allegations, the cause was tried before a jury, and there was So special finding by the jury as follows: The jury was directed to answer the following questions: "If the jury find the defendant guilty of negligence, which . , v.3,no.7-23