Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/623

 IN EE LONG rSLAND, ETC., TBANBPOSTATION 00. 611 �Ihe general maritime law, the court say, (p. 127 :) " We do not hesitate to express our decided convictions that the rule of the maritime law on this subject, so far aa relates to torts, was intended to be adopted by the act of 1851/' (and see the careful discussion of this question on authority, pp. 116 to 122.) It may be assumed, for the purpose of considering this question, that prior to the act of 1851 this principle or rule of liability of the general maritime law had not been adopted as part of the maritime law of the United ' States. For if, before that act, it was part of the maritime law of the United States, there would be no question to discuss; becftuse, if it were already part of the maritime law of the United States, unquestionably it must be applied by the admiralty courts of the United States in ail cases of marine torts committed on the navigable waters of the United States, or on the high seas. On this subject, and as the resuit of a most exhaustive discussion of the subject, commended by the supreme court in Norwich Co. v. Wright, Judge Ware, in the case of The Rebecca, 1 Ware, 207, says: "The general sense of the com- mercial world seems to be satisfied with holding the owners of vessels responsible to the extent of their interest in the ship, and by abandoning the ship and freight to the creditors they are discharged. This bas for a long period, if I am not mis- taken, been the law of ail the maritime nations of the conti- nent of Europe, with respect to damages arising from the wrongful and illegal acts of the master. It however bas never been acknowledged in England, or this country, as cus- tomary law, though it seems that the sense of the commercial eommunity is in f avor of this limitation of the owner's respon- sibility for the tortious acts of the master. And, accordingly, on the petition of merchants and ship-owners, it has iu a number of partieulars been established in England by acte of parliament. We have in this country no act of the general government on the subject, but a similar limitation of the responsibility of the owners has been established by legislative authority in the states of Massachusets and Maine." �The constitution provides that "the judicial power of the United States shall extend * * * to ail cases of adrai- ����