Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/633

 618 FEDERAL REPORTER. �steam-boat liable. I may be mistaken in my views, but if so I am glad to know that it ia a case which can be appealed to the circuit court, where any errors of mine may be corrected, Decree for the libellant. ���PbNNSYLVANIA EaILEOAD Co. V. GlLHOOLBY.* {District Court, E, D. Pennsylvania. November 11, 1881.) �1. JUBIBDICTION — EnFOT! CEMENT OB' DbCEKE OF FOKBION CollRT. �A court of admiralty may, at the instance of a party and without letters of request, enforce a decree in personam for the payment of costs rendered by an admiralty court in anoiher district. �In Admiralty. �Libel by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company against William Gilliooley, setting forth that in December, 1876, respondent had flled his libel in the TJnited States district court for the southern district of New York, against the present libellant, to recover damages for injuries to his canal-boat ; that the said district court entered a decree in his favor ; that this decree was after- wards, npon appeal, reversed by the circuit court for said district, and a decree ■was therein entered diamissing the libel, with costs, which were taxed at $2,352.05. A copy of this decree was annexed to the libel. The libel further set forth that the said last-mentioned decree remained in full force and unsat- isfled; that neither the present respondent nor any of his property could be found within the jurisdiction of the circuit court for the southern district of New York, but that such property could be found within this district. Libel- lant prayed for a decree against respondent for the' amount of the decree entered in the circuit court for the southern district of New York. Respond- ent flled exceptions to the libel on the grounds (1) that the court had no juris- diction ; and (2) that the record of the suit in the courts of the southern district of New York was not attached to the libel. At the hearing it was agreed that , these exceptions should stand as an answer. �George P. Rick, for exceptions. �A court of admiralty will lend its aid to enforce the decree of a foreign admiralty court only upon receipt of letters rogatory or missive, and uot at the instance of a party. 6 Yiner, Abr. 512, pi. 12 ; Jurodo v. Bregbry, ILevinz, 267 ; S. C. 1 Ventris, 82; Godb. 260; 2 Bro. Civ. & Ad. Law, 120; 2 Sir Leoline Jen- kins, 714,' 754, 762,' 788 ; La Madonna delia Lettera, 2 Haggard, 289. The only reason that courts of admiralty interfere to execute each other's decrees is to prevent a failure of justice ; but this reason is inapplicable to the present case, because an action of debt could be brought upon the judgment at common law. The cases in which admiralty courts have exeeuted foreign decrees are either �•Reported by Frank p. Prlohard, Eaq., of the Pillailelphia bar. ��� �