« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
The sloop Mary.
security; and this principle is sanctioned by Mr. Justice Story in the case of the Jerusalem, who lays it dowu as an established rule, that a second bottomry bond, although posterior in time, has priority of claim.
The present case, however, does not require the adoption of so broad a principle. The adversary claim here is not founded upon a bottomry bond, but upon a bill of sale in the nature of a mortgage, and which would not create any valid lien as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser or incumbrancer, without notice. William H. Young was permitted to remain in possession, and to act as the absolute owner of the sloop; the register, and all her papers, standing in his name, and without any endorsement, showing any incumbrance upon the vessel : Daniel Young is therefore chargeable with negligence, in permitting William to appear as absolute owner, and thereby putting it in his power to impose upon a foreign creditor, who should advance money upon the security of the vessel. Upon the principles of the common law, as well as of equity, the claim of Daniel Young must be postponed to that of the libellant.
The decree of the District Court must accordingly be reversed, and a decree entered, that the proceeds of the vessel be paid over to the libellant towards satisfaction of his claim.
S. P. STAPLES and I. J. Hitchcock for the libellants.
g 2 Gal. 350.
Vide BOTTOMRY. JURISDICTION,
1. 10. 23, 24. Ships, 128,
Vide PRINCIPAL and Agent.
). Whether an individual who
has rights under a judgment of
v. Thomas Morris, 209
of a principal, on a written
Vide EJECTMENT, 1. 13
AMENDMENTS AND SEO. 9. A judgment was entered in
the District Court of the Nor-
thern District of New York,
from the District Courts, have ers, in January, 1824, the re-
cord filed and execution issu-
January following, the District
486 declaration the averments of
tend to defects in substance. ib. of the property in dispute,
amended in the District Court, diction : Held, that the amend.
the English Courts. ib. them after the original record
state practice in such cases. ib.
lue of the property in dispute 1. The duties and powers of a
ib. States are regulated by law,
were for trivial errors, and mine. United States v. Wil.
ib. army:" Held, that these
in the English cases arising appropriation out of which
to be disbursed to regular BANKRUPT LAWS.
ib. Vide INSOLVENT Laws. JURIS-
BILLS OF EXCHANGE.
1. Where the endorsee of a bill
of exchange, whether as agent
or owner, returns it after pro-
latter may sue upon it in his
own name, and at the trial
strike out the last endorse-
States, 1--16. Ships, 12 And prior blank endorsements
may be filled up at the trial so
as to correspond with the de-
claration. And where both
these were omitted to be done,
the Court op error refused to
reverse the judgment, consi-
dering it an objection of form,
and cured by the 32d section
of the judiciary act. Jacob
Barker v. United States, 156
2. Time of presentment for ac-
ceptance between New York
lapse of three months before
presentment not evidence of
209 ges can be recovered in an ac-
tion for the non-acceptance,
but not the non-payment of a
5. But where the action was
commenced on the non-accep-
non-payment, but before no-