THE WILLIAM M. HOAG. THE THREE SISTERS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court affirmed lower court decrees in maritime lien cases involving masters of steamships who claimed they were entitled to a lien on vessels for unpaid wages, even though the vessels' earnings were collected and managed by a purser or agent rather than passing through the masters' hands as under older maritime practices. The Court upheld the ancient admiralty doctrine established in The Orleans that masters have no lien on vessels for wages, rejecting the argument that this rule had become obsolete due to changes in modern shipping operations where agents rather than masters handle freight collection and vessel expenses.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Brown delivered the opinion of the court.
These cases differ from those already disposed of ante, 437, only in the fact that the libels contain claims by the masters of those vessels,with an averment that during the time they ivere employed there was an officer known as the purser; that the agents of the receiver and the purser collected and received, all the earnings from the vessels from both passengers and freight, and paid over such earnings in the ordinary course of business to the receiver; that none of the earnings of the vessels passed through the hands of the masters, and that their sole duties consisted in navigating the steamers upon routes selected by the receiver within the State of Oregon, and that all the supplies and materials were purchased by the said receiver through other agents and servants. This allegation is evidently designed to raise the question whether the ancient doctrine enforced upon the court of admiralty by prohibition from Westminster Hall, that the master has no lien for his wages, and which was declared to be the law by this court in the case of The Orleans, 11 Pet. 175, has any application to modern methods, where a purser or other, agent is employed by the owner to collect the freights and pay the bills of the vessel, the practice formerly being for the master to receive all the freight, pay the crew and buy the supplies. The denial of the lien of the master was based upon the theory that he had a lien upon the freight for his wages, and having the freight in his own hands was presumed to pay himself. The argument is made that, the reason for the rule having ceased to exist, the rule itself, which denied the master a lien upon the vessel, has become obsolete.
A lien was also claimed and admitted on behalf of the masters under a local statute of Oregon; but it was also insisted in defence thereto that the masters had not proceeded within the time allowed by law for the enforcement.of such claim.
The latter question, at least, if not the former, did not affect the jurisdiction of the court, but went to the merits alone.
The decrees of the court below in these cases are also, in respect to jurisdiction,
' Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (23 total)
-
Union Fish Co. v. Erickson, 248 U.S. 308 (U.S. 1919)…ms is not to be performed within a year from the making thereof.” The contract of the master was of a maritime character. This does not seem to be controverted by the petitioner. (See The Boston, 3 Fed. Cas. 921, Cas. No. 1669; The William H. Hoag, 168 U. S. 443.) We have, then, a maritime contract for services to be performed principally upon the sea, and the question is can such engagement be nullified by the local laws of a State, where the contract happens to be entered into, so as to prevent its enforc…
-
Middleton v. Luckenbach S. S. Co., Inc., 70 F.2d 326 (2d Cir. 1934)…ntal death by wrongful act recovers, not by right of succession, but by statutory provision. Michigan Central Ry. v. Vreeland, 227 U. S. 59, 33 S. Ct. 192, 57 L. Ed. 417, Ann. Cas. 1914C, 176; Stewart v. B. & O. R. R., 168 U. S. 445, 18 S. Ct. 105, 42 L. Ed. 537. Spokane & Inland Empire R. R. v. Whitley, 237 U. S. 487, 35 S. Ct. 655, 59 L. Ed. 1060, L. R. A. 1916F, 736, dealt with a full faith and credit question regarding recovery for death under a statute of Idaho. The deceased was a resident of Tennesse…
-
Spokane & Inland Empire R.R. Co. v. Whitley, 237 U.S. 487 (U.S. 1915)
Previewing 3 of 23 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The Steamboat Orleans v. Thomas Phœbus, 11 Pet. 175 (U.S. 1837)