Stair it was: held that there' was'no mal1itime lien;: but as the, statute of
O'hitfga-vea:lien"and thecontra;ef itself'had been held to be nU\'ritime in. its by the supreme court in' Insurance Co. v. ]):wMaltnj: 11 Wall. ,1, the admiralty would enforce it, and in that case it was diirected to be 'Ptit'with the claims for foreign and domestic supplies, and to share withth'efuin the proceeds. It is: not clear to my m.ind that the relative t:llaim was considered by the court in the case of, The Gu;iding Star. Hit werecleal' that it waseonsidered, I should,of course, follow it; but the"case of The Dolph:;"" had been decided, and the V'olume of Repoi'tsootitaining it published several years before. That, decision, which'(loritairied afuU discussion of tb,e subject, was not referred to, nor wdni:nyother authority referred to, and the matter was not discussed. The fact that the statutes in that' state and in this give a Hen for this claim does not at all determine itsrelative merit, nor confound the ciples'which prevail fin admiralty. If it did it would put such, a claim on a footihg with seamen's wages and' other favoredclaima. ' This court wilhi()t 'admit the statute ora state to accomplish such:results in its cedlire. The claim fOl'insurance, though admitted,must stand on its own merits; and considering that the contract is one simply of indemnity to the owner, in no way helps the ship, and is collateral to its ment,l shall,with a little misgiving ohny right to this opinion, in view of what'wasdone in theoase of The Guiding Star, hold that this claim should be subordinated to the claims fOrBupplies and the like, and given the next In holding this, no stress is laid upon the question whether the lien is maritime '6rstatutory, consideration being given solely to its merits asa lien upon the ship; having in mind the principle and purpose'for which the court as a court of admiralty must. regard such liens as attaching. 'It has been the practice in this district in such cases to adjust the costs,so that the costs on the original claim should be paid first, and after that so that those incurred in respect of each class of claims should precede in payment the class to which such claims spectively belong, Bnd 'Boon down through the list. Thatpracticewill be followed in the present case. An order for distribution will be entered in accordance with the f()regoingopinion.
LA.VERTY (mstriet Court,
et al. 11. CLA.USEN.'
York. November 1IG, 1889.)
s. D. New
SinPPINQ-LnnTATIoN 011' LIABILITY ACTS-CONTRACT TO INsUB-a-:AoT JUNB 26, 1884. , " Where a earrier contracts to insure cargo, and: rails to do B(l, and tbe cargo is lllst
bytbe sinking of the veS\lel, thl;l carrier cannot limit bisliabilityto the value of ,the vessel. The limitation of'liabiUty acts do not affect the li,abilltY of vessel owners upon their direct personal oontracts outside of the Qrdi.nIU'Y Pl1siness of the vessel.
In Admiralty." , " . Action for the valueofa cargo of tin)ost on respondent's lighter.
Reported by Edward G.Benedict. Esq., of ,the New York bar;
UNxWD [STATES tI. THE RESOLUTE.
Hyland' & Zabris7Cie, for E. G. Dam, for respondent.
BROWN, ,J. Taking' aU ,the testimony together, respondent's as well as libelant's, I am satisfied that the nnderstanding upOn which the tin was shlpP\3<l upon the respc;mdent's lighter was that it should be insured by the rellPondent. common carrier or not, ,he 'is here praein the same situation. For the injury and loss of the tin by the subsequent sinking of the lighter the respondent is therefore answerable. The amended answer claims a limitation of his liability to the valua oftha vessel, under the acts of 1851, (Rev. St. § 4283,) and of June 26, 1884, (23 St. at Large,p.57 ,§ 18.) In previous cases I have expressed the opinion that the act of 1884 does not limit the liability of the owners of vessels upon their direct personal contracts outside of the ordinary business oithe vessel, but only the liability cast upon them by law, by reason of their ownership of tIle vessel, through tbe contracts or torts of the master Or others engage!! jn her navigation. The Amos D. (hrver, 35 Force v. IrtBMTa'Y!ce Oo.,ld. 778; M'I11er v. O'Brien, Id. 783. The contract in the present case was the personal contract of tbe respondent; and, following the view previously expressed, I must bold him not to the limitation of liability as claimed, and order judgment for ilie libelant for, 82,100, the amount proved, with interest and
UNITED STATES 'V. THE RESOLUTE.
(DIstrict Cowrt, D. Rhode IBtand. November 9, 1889.)
L l(Bt1TR4LIT1' LAWs---ll'ORII'EITURllS. Rev. St. U. B.5 5288, provides for the forfeiture of vessels violating neutralltI laws, "one-half to the use of the informer, and the other half to the use of the Unitea Btates. ", HeW, that where a vessel is forfeited and sold under this provision, and one-half of the proceeds is paid to the United Btates. the other half remaining in the custodycof;the court, latter half will npt be paid to the United States, even after the laJ!se of many years, where it does not appear that it will not be needed to satisfy a"J,Ud.gment forsorne Ola.imli,n.t &8. informer, and it is im,material that ..' v. S.to U. S. 'S 8689, provides for,refunding moneIs and oovered into the 'Ilry; betoretlie payment of legal and just oharges against the same. It I. BAIIB. . . . " . Even if no otherclaimant ev:er appears, such :(wid is not the property of the United States, under the statute.
In Admiralty. treasu . .·, :
Petition for payment of moneys into the United States
Gardner, U. S. Atty., for the petitioner.
CARPENTER, J. The schooner Resolute was libeled and condemned for violation of the neutl'ality laws, (3 St. at Large, c. 88, § 3, p. 447; Rev. St. §.52S3,) and ,the proceeds of sale were paid into in tbe year 1874.,Olle-half of tboseproceeds was paid to the United, States, and the other one-half, amQunting to $2,322.42, remains.in the registry of the court. A claim was filed by David Ritchie, alleging that he WlUl entitled dto i this' as, informer, and hill .claim heard ,and" dismissed by the court. This petition is now"filed on behalf of the Unite;d