Connelly v. The Steamboat Bee

Supreme Court of Missouri

Connelly v. The Steamboat Bee

40 Mo. 263

DecidedMarch 15, 1867

StatusPublished

This text of 40 Mo. 263 (Connelly v. The Steamboat Bee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Connelly v. The Steamboat Bee, 40 Mo. 263 (Mo. 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

Holmes, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit for wages under the statute concerning Boats and Vessels. It appears from the evidence that the boat belonged to the port of Pittsburg, and was employed in making voyages from that port to Cairo, New Orleans and St. Louis'; that the plaintiff was hired as a deck hand at Cairo, and that on a second voyage from that place to Louisville, after a service of about ten days, he voluntarily, and without any good cause, quit the boat in the midst of her trip, at some distance below Louisville. He now sues the boat in the port of St. Louis for his wages during the time he served.

The boat was a vessel belonging to another port. The contract was made and the cause of action arose on the river beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this State. It is a maritime contract within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Admiralty—2 Pars. on Mar. Law, 509; 3 Black. Com. 106; 2 Brown’s Civ. & Adm. Law, 72-80; St. Bt. Swallow, Olcott, 4; Curtis on Merchant Seamen, 345-50. We think it is very clear that this proceeding in rent against the boat in this port under the statute, in a case of this kind, falls within the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the St. Bt. Ad. Hine v. Trevor (Dec. T. 1866), and cannot be sustained—De Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gall. 453; Ramsey v. Allegre, 12 Wheat. 611.

Judgment reversed and the petition dismissed.

The other judges concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Holmes, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit for wages under the statute concerning Boats and Vessels. It appears from the evidence that the boat belonged to the port of Pittsburg, and was employed in making voyages from that port to Cairo, New Orleans and St. Louis'; that the plaintiff was hired as a deck hand at Cairo, and that on a second voyage from that place to Louisville, after a service of about ten days, he voluntarily, and without any good cause, quit the boat in the midst of her trip, at some distance below Louisville. He now sues the boat in the port of St. Louis for his wages during the time he served.

The boat was a vessel belonging to another port. The contract was made and the cause of action arose on the river beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this State. It is a maritime contract within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Admiralty—2 Pars. on Mar. Law, 509; 3 Black. Com. 106; 2 Brown’s Civ. & Adm. Law, 72-80; St. Bt. Swallow, Olcott, 4; Curtis on Merchant Seamen, 345-50. We think it is very clear that this proceeding in rent against the boat in this port under the statute, in a case of this kind, falls within the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the St. Bt. Ad. Hine v. Trevor (Dec. T. 1866), and cannot be sustained—De Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gall. 453; Ramsey v. Allegre, 12 Wheat. 611.

Judgment reversed and the petition dismissed.

The other judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 Mo. 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connelly-v-the-steamboat-bee-mo-1867.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack