Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/248

 286 FEDERAL RBPOBTEB. �own lien under a foreign statute, so as to defeat its payment altogether. The equity of the watchman against the master is, of course, also very strong, because the master was per- Bonally bound to pay the debt. The Selah, i Sawy. 40. Ses, also, The Wexford, ut supra. �The exceptions are therefore overruled, the report con- firmed, and the claim of Van Hoesen, as allowed by the com- missioner, will be first paid, with costs, and any residue mil be paid to the administrator of the master. ���CoAST Weeoking Co. and othei:s u, ;Ph«enix Ins. ,Co. �(District Court, E. D. Km Tm-k. April 22, 1881.) �1. Practice — MisJoiNDEB op Parties — AyEiiAGB Adjustmbnt of 'Salvagb Claims. �Misjoinder of parties libellant, when not objected to, will not pre- , j .vent a decree. . ., . , �Where the cargo of a stranded steamer was saved by wreckers, and ' 'by them transpotted in different lots and different ve'ssels to a place ' i of safety, and there stored; �,, ; f 'j^^d, ,that the service of the ■wreckers, was a continnous service, and all the property saved was liable to contribute towards the salvage, libtwithstanding it appeared that part of the service was pertormed ' after part of the cargo had been stored in a place of -safety. i Where a voyage was broken up by the stranding of the vessel, and the cargo was transferred by salvors to a port not the pprt of deliv- ery, and by an agreement there ruade between the parties interested ' in the cargo and S'.-oe H., average adjusters, the latter received the cargo, sold part that could not be identified, adjusted all claims as to the salvage except that of an Insurance company, to whom part of the the cargo was abandoned, and made a statement of expenses incurred for general and particular interest, upon which statement all parties made settlement except the Insurance company, who refused: �EM, that the service performed by the average adjusters was a service which, in the absence of the agreement with them, would have been necessarily performed by the ship-owners, and was mari- time in its character. �That the subject-matter of the agreement with J. & H. being mari- time, the contract was maritime, and an action upon the contract could be maintained in the admiralty by them against the Insurance company for its proportion. �Cutter V. Rne, 7 How. 729, oonsidered overruled by Ins. Oo.y. Dun- Min, 11 Wall. 1. ��� �