NOTES ON THE UNITED STATES REPORTS. XI WALLACE. 11 Wall. 1-36, 20 L. Ed. 90, NEW ENGLAND ETC. INS. CO. v. DUNHAM. Supreme Court has jurisdiction on certificate of division in Circuit Court as well where that court is composed of a supreme and circuit judge as where composed of supreme and district judges. Approved in The Paquete Habana, 175 U. S. 684, 44 L. Ed. 323, 20 Sup. Ct. 293, holding act 1891 changed rule and furnishes exclusive rule for appellate jurisdiction on appeal, writ of error or certificate; Boutton v. Moore, 11 Biss. 508, 14 Fed. 928, suggesting this mode of procedure to test question concerning seaman's wages; Industrial etc. Guaranty Co. v. Electrical Supply Co., 58 Fed. 737, 7 C. C. A. 471, district judge holding Circuit Court has all the authority of the latter; United States v. Rider, 163 U. S. 136, 41 L. Ed. 103, 16 Sup. Ct. 985, under act of March 3, 1891, remedy by certificate not available in criminal case. Jurisdiction in England was confined by common-law courts to the high seas, and was excluded from transactions arising on waters within body of a county and on land. Approved in Atkins v. Fiber Disintegrating Co., 18 Wall. 304, 21 L. Ed. 845, holding that in United States, attachment of goods in Court of Admiralty gave jurisdiction of the person. Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of United States is not limited by English statutes or decisions, but by a more enlarged view of its essential nature and objects. Approved in Erie etc. Transp. Co. v. Erie R. R. Co., 142 Fed. 12, 73 C. C. A. 195, upholding admiralty jurisdiction over suit to enforce contribution in favor of one of two colliding vessels against other for damages to cargo owner, paid by libelant; Campbell v. H. Hackfeld & Co., 125 Fed. 699, 62 C. C. A. 274, denying action by stevedore for personal (197) injuries, vessels, owners, officers or crew not charged with fault; In re Louisville Underwriters, 134 U. S. 490, 493, 33 L. Ed. 993, 994, 10 Sup. Ct. 588, 589, upholding jurisdiction over libel in admiralty in personam against corporation not an inhabitant of the district but represented by an agent; Haslett v. The Enterprise, 11 Fed. Cas. 784, upholding jurisdiction over libel filed against barge for repairs made in her home port; Cope v. Vallette Dry Dock, 10 Fed. 143, denying jurisdiction over libel for salvage of drydock; dissenting opinion in The Lottawanna, 21 Wall. 601, 22 L. Ed. 670, majority denying jurisdiction of libel in rem for supplies furnished ship in home port. Jurisdiction extends to the main sea and all navigable waters of United States or bordering on same, whether landlocked or open, salt or fresh, tide or no tide. Approved in Stewart v. Potomac Ferry Co., 5 Hughes, 382, 12 Fed. 304, holding State statute could not create a lien for a maritime cause of action; Malony v. Milwaukee, 1 Fed. 613, sustaining liable for damages caused by collision on navigable canal; Haslett v. The Enterprise, 11 Fed. Cas. 784, libel against barge engaged in transporting goods in New York harbor; Holmes v. Oregon etc. R. R. Co., 6 Sawy. 266, 5 Fed. 78, libel for tort committed on boat on Wallamet River; In re Long Island etc. Co., 5 Fed. 606, holding jurisdiction extended to settlement of claims arising from loss of ship navigating East River; The John C. Sweeney, 55 Fed. 544, holding admiralty had not jurisdiction of libel for damage to bridge caused by a vessel; People v. Kirsch, 67 Mich. 542, 35 N. W. 158, arguendo. Distinguished in Cope v. Vällette Dry Dock, 10 Fed. 143, holding drydock not subject of maritime jurisdiction for salvage. Territorial limit of the jurisdiction of the courts of admiralty. State jurisdiction in regard to vessels. Note, 62 Am. Dec. 235, 238. The true criterion in determining admiralty jurisdiction over contracts is the nature and subject matter of contract, having reference to maritime service or transactions; if it is maritime, jurisdiction is asserted. Approved in North German Fire Ins. Co. v. Adams, 142 Fed. 440, 73 C. C. A. 555, following rule; Atlantic Transport Co. v. Imbrobek, 234 U. S. 59, 62, 51 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1157, 58 L. Ed. 1211, 1213, 34 Sup. Ct. 733, allowing suit by stevedore against company for injury sustained while loading ship; A. M. Bright Grocery Co. v. Lindsey, 225 Fed. 260, holding lien on vessel for supplies furnished does not attach to insurance money arising out of fire; Berton v. Tietjen & Lang Dry Dock Co., 219 Fed. 769, refusing to remove cause arising out of injury to workman occurring while ship was in drydock; Eadie v. North Pac. S. S. Co., 217 Fed. 664, and Pacific Surety Co. v. Seatham & Smith etc. Wrecking Co., 151 Fed. 442, 80 C. C. A. 670, both holding bond holding surety answerable in damages only not maritime contract; California-Atlantic S. S. Co. v. Central Door etc. Co., 206 Fed. 8, 13, 124 C. C. A. 139, holding where contract is only partly maritime, suit in tort on contract must allege negligence in maritime portion to give admiralty jurisdiction; Reed v. Weule, 176 Fed. 662, 100 C. C. A. 212, holding sale of chronometer within admiralty jurisdiction, although made on land; Bouker Contracting Co. v. Proceeds of Sale of Dredging Mach., 168 Fed. 432, holding dredge, mounted on scow, unloading material on land, is not engaged in maritime services; St. Paul Fire etc. Ins. Co. v. Birrell, 164 Fed. 105, holding contract between insurance company and broker not maritime contract; St. Paul F. & M. Ins. Co. v. Pacific Cold Storage Co., 157 Fed. 630, 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1161, 87 C. C. A. 14, holding money paid out to avert loss is subject of suit on marine policy; Bowers Hyd. Dredging Co. v. Federal Cont. Co., 148 Fed. 293, upholding admiralty jurisdiction over suit for hire of dredge generally used for maritime purposes, though temporarily used for land transaction in dredging stream; The Conveyor, 147 Fed. 590, where proceeds of insurance money paid to custodian to pay for raising boat, repairs and supply liens, and pay remainder to mortgagee, and boat raised but not repaired, and sold by his claimants, contract was maritime; United States Shipping Co. v. United States, 146 Fed. 919, upholding admiralty jurisdiction over suit against United States under Comp. Stats. 1901, p. 752, based on maritime contract of affreightment; City of Detroit v. Grummond, 121 Fed. 971, 58 C. C. A. 301, holding contract insuring vessel while lying moored and used as hospital not maritime; The Underwriter, 119 Fed. 734, holding tendency of admiralty law is to hold vessel liable for repairs whether made in domestic or foreign port; Patterson v. Baltimore Steam Packet Co., 106 Fed. 959, entertaining action in personam for breach of contract to furnish cargo space for cotton furnished by libelant; Skinner v. Harris, 98 Fed. 443, denying jurisdiction to enforce agreement to divide freight moneys, libelant not to contest claim; Ex parte McNiel, 13 Wall. 242, 20 L. Ed. 626, holding contract relating to pilotage within jurisdiction; Maury v. Culliford, 4 Woods, 123, 125, 10 Fed. 391, 392, maintaining jurisdiction of libel for breach of charter-party; Holmes v. Oregon etc. R. R. Co., 6 Sawy. 266, 5 Fed. 78, taking jurisdiction of libel for marine tort committed on ferry-boat on Wallamet River; The Canada, 7 Sawy. 178, 7 Fed. 123, holding contract of stevedore a maritime one; The City of Carlisle, 14 Sawy. 189, 5 L. R. A. 59, 39 Fed. 814, holding articles of indenture introduced in suit for marine tort to be a maritime contract; The Selt, 3 Biss. 347, Fed. Cas. 12,649, holding libel in rem maintainable on contract for supplies and repairs; The Williams, 1 Brown, 215, 225, Fed. Cas. 17,710, holding contract for salvage of admiralty cognizance; Roberts v. The Windermere, 2 Fed. 725, 728, holding similarly as to contract for removing ballast from ship to make room for cargo; Endner v. Greco, 3 Fed. 413, sustaining libel in personam for repairs upon four scows; Haslett v. The Enterprise, 11 Fed. Cas. 784, holding libel for repairs to barge made in her home port within jurisdiction; Coast Wrecking Co. v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 7 Fed. 242, allowing action in admiralty to recover for services provided for in average bond. The following cases also sustain the jurisdiction: The Vidal Sala, 12 Fed. 211, libel in rem for use of drydock; San Fernando v. Jackson, 12 Fed. 341, 342, libel in personam to recover share of general average; The Hattie M. Bain, 20 Fed. 390, Florey v. The Scotia, 35 Fed. 917, and The Main, 51 Fed. 956, 957, 2 C. C. A. 569, libels for stevedore's services; The Alberto, 24 Fed. 381, liable for damages for nonexecution of charterparty; The Maggie P., 32 Fed. 301, demand for services as watchman while steamer was lying at port; The Hiram R. Dixon, 33 Fed. 299, liable for price of nets to be used on fishing voyage; The Gilbert Knapp, 37 Fed. 210, 211, 212, 213, holding that stevedore's services are maritime although lien does not always exist; The Madrid, 40 Fed. 678, claims of materialmen for supplies furnished; National Board of Underwriters v. Melchers, 45 Fed. 646, libel in personam to recover general average expenses; The Roanoke, 50 Fed. 577, libel for salvage fixed absolutely by contract; Haller v. Fox, 51 Fed. 299, 300, action upon bond given by charterer to owner as security; The Richard Winslow, 71 Fed. 428, 18 C. C. A. 344, applying rule as to contract for marine transportation, but not as to contract for storage at end of voyage; Boutin v. Rudd, 82 Fed. 686, 687, 27 C. C. A. 526, granting jurisdiction in action for breach of executory contract to assist a schooner in distress; Keyser v. Blue Star S. S. Co., 91 Fed. 271, 33 C. C. A. 496, libel for breach of stipulation in charter-party, though stipulation by itself was not of maritime character; The New York, 93 Fed. 500; libel for injury to cargo resulting from unseaworthiness of barge; Baird v. Daly, 57 N. Y. 246, 15 Am. Rep. 491, holding further that State court had concurrent jurisdiction of action for damages caused by tug on St. Lawrence River; Manchester v. Massachusetts, 139 U. S. 263, 35 L. Ed. 166, 11 Sup. Ct. 564 (affirming 152 Mass. 246, 23 Am. St. Rep. 834, 9 L. R. A. 243, 25 N. E. 118), holding State court had jurisdiction of crime committed by fishing in Buzzard's Bay; The General Cass, 1 Brown, 341, Fed. Cas. 5307, granting maritime lien for towage, though in home port; dissenting opinion in Atlantic Works v. Tug Glide, 157 Mass. 532, 34 Am. St. Rep. 309, 33 N. E. 165, majority holding that State court had jurisdiction to enforce lien for labor furnished in repairing tugboat in her home port; The Paola R., 32 Fed. 175, holding contract for compressing cotton before shipment not maritime; Doolittle v. Knobeloch, 39 Fed. 40, dismissing libel in per ROSES |