The William & Emmeline
District Court, S.D. New York
In admiralty. The brig William and Em-meline. belonging to the port of New-Y’ork, put into the port of Charleston, in the state of South Carolina, disabled and needing repairs: and. while she was there, on the ISth of August. 1S27, her master, in consideration of Soil 48, advanced by the libellants, T. & T. Street & Co., drew upon the claimant, the owner of the brig, a bill of exchange for the amount, payable to the libellants, and, to secure the payment of the bill,…
Read the full summary
In admiralty. The brig William and Em-meline. belonging to the port of New-Y’ork, put into the port of Charleston, in the state of South Carolina, disabled and needing repairs: and. while she was there, on the ISth of August. 1S27, her master, in consideration of Soil 48, advanced by the libellants, T. & T. Street & Co., drew upon the claimant, the owner of the brig, a bill of exchange for the amount, payable to the libellants, and, to secure the payment of the bill, executed what the libel alleged to be a bottomry bond upon the body of the vessel. The libel further alleged. that the money…
1Opinion of the Court
BETTS, District Judge.
It is essential to the validity of a bottomry transaction, that the money lent should run the hazard of the voyage. The Nelson, 1 Hagg. Adm. 169; Abb. Shipp. (Ed. 1830) 117 et seq.; 2 Marsh. Ins. 632; 2 Bl. Comm. 458; Poth. Pret a la Grosse, art. 2, § 3. It is such risk that supports the marine interest which is always a constituent of a bottomry bond. The Augusta, 1 Dod. 283; Abb. Shipp. (Ed. 1830) 117 et seq.; Rucher v. Conyngham [Case No. 12,106]; The Mary [Id. 9,187]. In the instrument of hypothecation in this case, neither marine risk nor marine interest is provided…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Miller v. HackleyNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Ingersoll v. Van BokkelinNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- King v. ParksNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Jennings v. InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1811
- Overseers of the Poor of the town of Chatham v. Overseers of the Poor of the town of MiddlefieldNew York Supreme Court · 1821
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.