Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/583

 576 FEDERAL BBPORTEB. �gàted shall be liable," does not seem to impose a penalty for taking an excessive number of passengers, under section 4465, but for a violation of those provisions of the title impos- ing conditions concerning the equipment, etc., of the vessel prior to its entering on its proposed navigation. Section 4499 is a re-enactment of the Statutes of 1871, c. 100, § 1 ; and a similar section in the prior aot of 1852, (chapter 106, § 1,) was thus construed. The Science, 2 Pittsb. 446. I think, there- fore, that section 4499 does not afïect the present question. �4. The further exceptions, that the libel does not allege that the libellant is the informer, or that he sues as informer, or that the passengers taken on board are not named, have no merit. �5. The exception taken that the libel claims more than one penalty is not well taken, because the statute olearly gives a separate penalty for every violation of the act ; nor is there any force in the suggestion that the only penalty given for ail the passengers illegally taken on board is a single sum of $10, and the passage money of the extra pas- sengers. This is in plain contradiction of the language used which measures the penalty by the number of extra passen- gers, making it equal to a sum of $10 for each one, and the passage money. The cases cited to support this exception are cases under statutes having no such terms as this ia framed in. �6. The point made that this court has no jurisdiction as to the second claim made, because the passengers are aUeged to have been taken on board at or near Sandy Hook, in the state of New Jersey, is not well taken, because, as the stat- ute gives a lien enforceable in the admiralty, and is not, in its terms, restrictive as to the court that may entertain juris- diction, any court within whose territorial jurisdiction the vessel may be at the time of the commencement of the suit, and the attachment of the vessel by the marshal, has juris- diction of the cause. �The other grounds of exception are not well taken. They do not appear to require special comment. Exceptions overruled, with leave to answer within one week. ����