THE GEORGIA.1 HOWARD
'V. THE GEORGIA.
(District Court, E. D. New York. June 10, 1891.)
SEAMAN'S WAGES-PURCHASE OF CLAIM BY OWNER-DISCHARGE OF LIEN.
A purchase of a seaman's claim for wages against a vessel by the owner of the vessel is, in legal effect, a payment of the seaman's claim, and discharges the vessel of the lien for wages.
In Admiralty. Suit for seaman's wages. Goodrich, Deady &:- Goodrich, for libelants. R. D. Benedict, for bottomry holder.
lReported by Edward G. Benedict, Esq., of the New York bar.
v. THE DALE.
(D!strict Court,E:D:'New York. JUne
WErG1IT 011' EVIDENCE-DISPUTE OP'FACT-.NulIfllER OF WITNESSES.
In.a dispute of fact, when all the witnesses are equally positive and equally credible, and one story IS as plausible as the other, the party presenting two witnesBes must prevail over the party presenting but one.
Hyland &; Zabriskie, for Edwin G. Davis, for clllimant.
'.. B)jjNEDICT,J. The question in this case is whether the canal-boat James Nelson, while navigating the Erie canal, lost her rudder-blade by strikillg it on the berrne bank through her own negligence, or whether the rudder-blade was knocked out by the steam canal-boat Dale, while passing the James Nelson, Upon t'his question of fact the testimony stands two witnesses in favor of the libelant's story to bne witness for the claimant 111 opposition. All the witnesses are equally positive and ilquallycredible, and one story is as probable as the other. If there be any difference in probability, it is in favor of the libelant. In such a case the party presenting two witnesses must prevail over the party presenting but one. Ltt a decree be entered in favor of libelant, with an order of telerellce to ascertain the damage.
v. NINETy-FrVE TOKS OF COAL.
(District Court, E. D. New
June 10, 1891.}
SIUPPING-LIEN FOR FREIGHT-WAIVER OF LIEN-WHAT CONSTITUTES-INTENT.
A delivery of cargo subject to a lien for freight, made to a person liable to pay the freight, will not be held tu be a waiver of the lien for freight unless facts appear from which it can be found that the act of delivering the cargo was accompanied with an intention to waive the lien for freight. Custello v. Laths, 44 Fed. Rep.
SAME-EVIDENCE OF INTENT.
When a master began to deliver cargo, but demanded his freight before the unloading of the cargo was completed, and when the freight was not paid stopped the delivery, and then, continuing, made special delivery of the remainder subject to the lien for freight, held, that this was not sufficient to show an intent to abandon the lien.