Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 22.pdf/50

 Latest Important Cases Admiralty. Vessel Burned in a Dry Dock is I‘Within Admiralty jurisdiction of United States—Right to Recover for Salvage Services. U. S. In Simmons v. Steamship jefferson, de cided Nov. 29, the United States Supreme

Court decided that claim for salvage may be within the admiralty jurisdiction where a vessel in drydock was rescued from perils of ﬁre by a tug. (158 Fed. Rep. 255 reversed; reported in N. Y. Law jour. Dec. 13.) The Court, per White, _I., said:— “In the nature of things it is manifest, and indeed it is settled, that because of the broad

scope of the admiralty jurisdiction in this country, the perils out of which a salvage service may arise are all of such perils as may encompass a vessel when upon waters which are within the admiralty jurisdiction of the United States, from which it follows, in view

state to license automobiles not according to true value but according to horse power, and that of the imposition of a double tax,

as the ﬁrst tax was levied by the assessors of taxes. Banking. Honest Taker Who Obtains Money Embezzled by Bank Teller Acquires Good Title, Though Teller Does not Receive Check on Bank's Funds from such Taker. La. A decision of somewhat astonishing char acter, which has called forth much adverse criticism, was rendered by the Supreme Court of Louisiana some time ago. In First Na tional Bank v. Gibert (reported in 49 So. Rep. 593, discussed in Chicago Legal News Oct. 16, Central Law journal Nov. 5, Columbia Law Review Dec., Canada Law

journal Nov. 15) it was held that when money transferred to an honest taker has been obtained through a felony by the one

transferring it, the honest taker, who receives of the broad scope of the admiralty jurisdiction in this country, that the right to recover it without knowledge of the felony and in due for salvage services is not limited to services course of business, acquires a good title to it concerning a peril occurring on the high seas as against the one from whom it was stolen. or within the ebb and ﬂow of the tide. And Bad faith will alone defeat the right of the although in deﬁning salvage the expression taker. Mere ground of suspicion, or defect ‘peril of the sea’ has sometimes been used as I of title, or knowledge of circumstances which equivalent to peril on the sea, it is settled that would create suspicion in the mind of a pru the distress or danger from which a. vessel has dent man, or gross negligence on the part of been saved need not, in order to justify a the taker, will not defeat the title. Bad recovery of salvage compensation, have arisen faith alone will defeat the right of the taker solely by reason of a peril of the sea in the without knowledge. The test is honesty and good faith, not diligence. strict legal acceptation of those words." Nichol1s,j., delivered the judgment. “The Automobiles. New jersey Licensing Stat bank,” he said, “itself placed Chisholm in ute Upheld—Power of State to Tax Those the position which enabled him to abstract Carrying Interstate Goods Sustained. N. J. the moneys and furnished him with the op The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in a portunity for doing so. Its own negligence decision rendered Nov. 16 by Reed, 1., up was the direct cause of after consequences. held the constitutionality of the Freling Plaintiff lays great stress upon Chisholm's huysen automobile law in the test case brought paying the margins which were needed for by the White Steamer Company. carrying out the cotton contract over the One of the questions raised was that of the counter of the paying teller to Hayes, the constitutionality of a law compelling the cashier of the Birmingham branch of defend license of an auto carrying interstate goods. ant’s ﬁrm; but if Chisholm was acting, as he The Court held such licenses a legitimate represented himself to be, as the agent of a exercise of the police power, and that even if depositor in the bank, there was every reason their object was to impose a tax for revenue for Sims and Hayes to believe, if their atten they would not be unconstitutional. The tion had .been drawn at all to that fact, that statute was upheld on all the points raised the paying teller had at that time in his pos n the case, including that of the right of the session a. check of that depositor on the bank