A claim for a sum advanced by the charterers after a vessel bas been seized, and while in the custody of the court, cannot be allowed as a lien on the ves; sel.where the:advancements are not necessary for the due care .and preservation of the vessel"and the charterers have actual notice of the seizure. The charterers are, however, subrogated to the' rights of the stevedore, to to whom they paid the money. and thus have a statutory lien therefor, to be satisfied out of the remnants, if any.

SAME-SUBROGATION.

In Admiralty. On claim for damages for breach of charter-party.. The damages allowed .bythe court after amendment of the libel were calculated on the difference in freight rates between the violated charter and the one made after-the filing of the libel, but under which the cargo had actually to be shipped lOlt an advance. For main case, and full statement of facts, see same case, ante, 696. Pillams, Torrey &: Hanaw, for charterers Martin. Taylor & Co. HamiltonB &: Gaillard and others for sundry creditors, contra. TOULMIN,J. A plaintiff cannot recover as principal a sum larger than he demands by his declaration, but interest may be added if the ad damnum be sufficient to cover it. I have disallowed as damages under the breach of the Kobbe charter the item of $343, advanced by libelants as charterers, and claimed as a part of such damages, because the same was advanced after the seizure of the vessel. From the evidence it appears that this claim arose while the vessel was in the custody of the court, and, as it was not necessary for the due care and preservation of the vessel, it cannot be recognized as a lien. The Yotmg America, 30 Fed. Rep. 790. After the seizure the contemplated voyage was broken up and abandoned. There was then a breach of the charter-party. After such breach Martin, Taylor & Co. had no right to increase.their damages; and ought not to have increased them, (as a matter of.justice,) by making further advances, and I do not think their doing so can be recognized as a lien on the vessel. I think the principle laid down in the case of The Young America, 30 Fed. Rep. 790, and of the Esteban de Antunano, 31 Fed. Rep. 921, is a just one, and should be applied in this case to the item of $343, claimed as a part of the damages sued for. That principle, as applied here. is that when the marshal seized and took into his possession, under process from this eourt, the vessel, she went into. the custody of the law, and her contemplated voyage was broken up aud abandoned, and thereby the authority of her owners and of their agent, .the master, to thereafter affe·ct the ship by any contract or conduct to

. WHITJi1 tI. THll: EMMA.

708

result in a lien On the ship, was ended. By the seizure all persons were notified· of the change of control and possession. The proof shows that Martin, Taylor & Ceo were actually notified. While the vessel was in the custody of the law it is doubtful whether on any account or for any service (except,perhaps, salvage or collision) any lien could arise on the vessel. I think, however, that Martin, Taylor & Co. are subrogated to the rights of the stevedore to whom they paid the money, and that they have a statutory lien therefor to be satisfied out of the remnantes, if any.

WHITE

THE

EMMA.

Oo'Url,E. D. Lo'UiBiana. January. 1889.) . . MARITIME' LmNs-SERVICES. . " Libelililt was employed by the owner of a boat to run 'It. for her. tIe did Dot act'in any particular capacity, but performed all kinds of services, some· times hunting up business for the owner, and doing work not connected with the management of the boat. There was no contract as to how much he should be paid for, his ,services, Held, that he did not have a lien on the boat for luch services, as it W811 evident that he relied upon the of for his pay., .

In Agm,iralty.On appeal from district court. T. M. Gill, for libelant. Miller F'i,n'M!l, for claimants.

tIe river. Dllar the mouth of Black river, to recover tile steam-tug Emma. I was to go .and get it, overhaul it, repair it, and run it for her. I went up to make arrangements to bUy her, and that night, when I was there, and made arrangements to buy her, she thawed out, her water-pipe burst, and she sank, -that was after I had made arrangements to bUy herst a certain price, she sank,-and we bad to haul hel' up on the bank. Idid it with what assistance I could get there. After raising her, I found the rudder was broken. After gettinK up steam and repairing her, I had to overhaul her machinery. I did it with the assistance of a blacksmith. I then brought her over here at Freetown, in the port of New Orleans, just across the river. There we hauled her on the ways, and I helped to overhaul the engines. The painting I did all myself. After getting through with that, I took her to Bayou Sara, and I done very well. I was there one week, and I cleared sixty-fi ve dollars, or something in that neighborhood. On the Sunday night after that she took iire, after I had been there a week; and through some of my friends. four or .five of them, <it was late at night,) and myself, we saved the hull. The Dext

PARDEE, J. Libel in rem for services as pilot and general mariner on board the tug Emma from on or about December 25, 1886, to on or about Noven;J.ber 15, 1887. The steam-tug Emma iaa vessel of three and three-quarter tOllS. The. libelant's testimony is, substantially as follows: "I 8ma and carpenter. On the 25th'of .December,1886,lwas employed by MissTheresa Mooneyto go to the mouth of Lit-

37 F. 702 -

37 F1d 702