manner of the ship's employment; (4) marine torts, and perils peculiar to navigation; and (5) the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty.

§ 304. Title to a Ship, and Modes of Transfer. - First, concerning the title to a ship and modes of transfer. Of partowners we have spoken elsewhere; and it remains to notice how one or more persons may acquire their interests in a ship. This is usually by building or purchase; while at the same time, by the death of an owner, his interest will devolve upon his executors or administrators, as in the case of other personal chattels. The common law makes a conveyance necessary to the sale of real estate, while mere delivery without any writing suffices to pass any chattel. And hence a ship, by some method of symbolical delivery, might be transferred from one owner to another, though no formal written instrument accompanied the act of delivery. Such, at least, is the logic of the rule; but government long ago interposed with its registration and navigation policy, and so universal has become the custom of giving bills of sale of a peculiar sort, that no one in our day would care to risk his title to a vessel of considerable size and value on a mere parol transfer and delivery.2

§ 305. The Same Subject; Registration, Bill of Sale, etc. The registration and navigation acts are said to have originated in their present form some two and a half centuries ago, through the desire of Spain to preserve the commerce of her American colonies; in England the policy dates from the time of Charles II.; and in this country a national registration system was established soon after the adoption of our present constitution, with the act of December 31, 1792, modified since by various statutes, among which the act of 1850 is conspicuous. Certain privileges attach to a ship which has been duly registered, and thereby acquires a national character; and in England an exact and rigid system of registration

1 Supra, §§ 205-214.

2 See Abb. Shipping, 23; The Sisters, 5 Rob. Ad. 155; 1 Pars. Shipping, 55-58.

8 Reeves, Law of Shipping, 35; 1 Pars. Shipping, 25-27; Abb. Shipping, part 1, c. 2.

was continued in force until the middle of this century, so as to secure a rich monopoly of the carrying trade to vessels of that country; the requirement being that every alteration in the property of a ship or vessel should be indorsed on the certificate of registry before witnesses, and should itself be registered, while every bill of sale thereof was made "null and void" unless it contained a recital of the registry certificate at length.1 The United States statutes, on the other hand, did not declare any informal transfer null and void, at least down to a recent period; they simply denied to ships transferred without the formality of a written instrument, which recited at length the certificate of registry, the privileges of ships of the United States. But in 1850 —or at about the same time that Great Britain relaxed her old policy so as to favor somewhat foreign-built vessels and "free trade

the registry system of the United States tightened its grasp upon American vessels by declaring that no bill of sale, mortgage, hypothecation, or conveyance of a vessel of the United States, in whole or in part, should be valid against any other than the grantor or mortgagor, his heirs and devisees, and persons having actual notice, unless the instrument was recorded at the office of the collector of customs.3 This

1 See 1 Pars. 50; Weston v. Penniman, 1 Mas. 317; 2 De G. F. & J. 502. The English act of 1854 (17 Vict. c. 5) admitted foreign ships to the coasting trade. In 1854, too (17 & 18 Vict. cs. 104, 120), a new statute amended and consolidated the previous laws relating to merchant shipping. Various other enactments from 1854 to 1880, relative to this subject, are to be found in Vol. II., Maude and Pollock Shipping, 4th ed. (1881).

The transfer of a British ship is now governed by the express provisions of the Merchant Shipping Acts (1854 and acts subsequent), which make a clear distinction between the legal estate and mere beneficial interests therein. Chasteauneuf v. Caperyon, 7 App. Cas. 127. See Act 12 & 13 Vict. c. 29 (1850). A written

agreement for sale need not be registered under the English act of 1854; nor need the special description of the ship be inserted therein. Batthyany v. Bouch, 29 W. R.665. New provisions in favor of equitable mortgages not registered are found in subsequent English acts. 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104; 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63.

21 Pars. 50; Abb. Shipping, 5896; Hozey v. Buchanan, 16 Pet. 215.

89 U. S. Stats. 440, c. 27; Brightly Fed. Dig. 780. The constitutionality of this act has been sometimes doubted. See 1 Pars. Shipping, 26, 53, 60. For the latest phraseology of the United States registry acts, see U. S. Rev. Stats. §§ 4131–4196. Barges, &c., are not subject to registration in certain cases. 21 Stat. Large, 44 (Act June 30, 1879). A

accords with the long-settled registry policy of our several States in sales and mortgages of real estate, and whenever, in fact, written instruments of title must be relied upon, rather than a visible possession, to establish ownership or security.

A bill of sale becomes, then, customary, if not indispensable, for transferring the ship absolutely from one owner to another. In England the first bill of sale, by which the property passes from the builder to the first purchaser or owner, is distinguished from bills making subsequent transfers as the "grand bill of sale." We have no such distinction in this country. In questions of registry and of actual and constructive notice, the same principles probably would apply in the case of a bill of sale or mortgage of a vessel, as under the long-established registry acts of our States relating to real estate; while it may be readily supposed that the United States statute of 1850 controls the State statutes relating to mortgages of personal property, so far as to make compliance with its own formalities of registry essential.2 Hence, the recording of a mortgage in the office of the collector of the home port of a vessel will suffice to give this mortgage priority over subsequent purchasers or mortgagees, irrespective of formalities which may be required by State laws.3

mortgage of a vessel of the United States is not, as against the parties and such persons as have actual notice thereof, rendered invalid by the failure to record it under U. S. Rev. St. §§ 4192, 4193. Moore v. Simonds, 100 U. S. Supr. 145. For late decisions on various points connected with our registry acts, see 5 Sawyer C. C. 83; 6 Sawyer C. C. 106; 8 Ben. 109, 429. Following the usual rule of chattel mortgages, the mortgagee's claim upon the vessel may be subordinated to liens in rem necessarily created for repairs and supplies. Rumbell, The, 148 U. S. 1. See c. 4, post.

Registration is not necessary to make the sale of a steamboat in Ten

nessee valid. 7 Lea, 294. License to engage in the coasting trade is not to be construed as impairing the State powers. 7 Sawyer C. C. 127. By act July 5, 1884, c. 221, a bureau of navigation is established under the immediate charge of a commissioner.

1 Abb. Shipping, 3; Gordon v. East India Co., 7 T. R. 228, 234; 3 Kent Com. 133; 1 Pars. Shipping, 60; Wheeler v. Sumner, 4 Mas. 183.

21 Pars. ib. and cases cited; Horton v. Davis, 26 N. Y. 495.

3 White's Bank v. Smith, 7 Wall. 646. A chattel mortgage on a vessel, if recorded pursuant to the United States registry acts, is valid, although the State law of registry be not complied with. 16 Hun, 512.

Nor can the mortgage of a vessel, duly recorded, be defeated by a subsequent attachment under a State law. But it is held that the statute of 1850 applies only to vessels which are registered, licensed, or enrolled, and that a mortgage of vessels not answering to this description follows the registry acts of the State, and need not be recorded at the customhouse. Nor does the act itself apply to charter-parties; nor to the lien of material-men for supplies.3

§ 306. The Same Subject; Policy of Registration, License, and Enrolment. As to registration, license, and enrolment, it may be said that the policy of the United States, following the example of Great Britain, is both to confer peculiar privileges upon vessels bearing the national flag, and to exercise likewise a judicious control of the merchant service. Various classes of vessels are enumerated by the act of 1792 and subsequent statutes as entitled to registry, including those built within or without the United States, which belong to citizens thereof; and likewise any vessel that has been enrolled, on the enrolment and license being given up for the purpose of obtaining the registry. Before the certificate of registry is given, the vessel must be surveyed by a customs officer, and security given for a proper use of the certificate. The name of a registered vessel cannot be changed except in special cases. Vessels enrolled and licensed, or licensed only, if under twenty tons, are entitled to the privileges of vessels employed in the coasting trade or fisheries; and the same general qualifications are required as in case of registered vessels. Such being the system of registration, license, and enrolment, all other vessels are subjected by statute to large tonnage duties, in addition to the tax on imported articles. These must be paid at the time of making entry, and before permit can be granted for unlading the goods. Discriminating tonnage duties are not exacted from the vessels of such nations as abolish similar duties in favor of the United States; and the rate

1 Aldrich v. Etna Co., 8 Wall. 491. 2 Veazie v. Somerby, 5 Allen, 280.

31 Pars. Shipping, 62; Mott v. Ruckman, 3 Bl. C. C. 71.

of the tax has varied since the adoption of the Constitution, being considerably increased during the late rebellion.1

The certificate of registration of a vessel and proof as to the flag carried by her are competent and convenient evidence, to whatever distant point the vessel may go, for showing her nationality and ownership.2

§ 307. The Same Subject; Sale and Transfer of Title. When a ship is built, the builder is deemed the first owner, and to the first purchaser he transfers by a bill of sale, — or, as the English writers state it, "the grand bill of sale," taking care to give his certificate to the owner, that the formalities of registration may be complied with.3 One might suppose that parties would sometimes wish to contract with a person to build the ship for them, he doing the work and they being owners from the outset; but such is not the practice, though a conveyance of the keel after it has been laid vests the property thereof in the vendee, and draws after it all subsequent additions. There is much confusion in the authorities concerning the legal title to the vessel and its transfer, where the purchase-money is paid in instalments during the progress of the work; but the question would seem to be one of intent to be gathered from all the circumstances. Whether paid for in this manner or not, and not

1 See Brightly U. S. Dig. "Ships and Shipping; " 1 Pars. Shipping, 25-49, and cases cited.

"The purpose of a register is to declare the nationality of a vessel engaged in trade with foreign nations, and to enable her to assert that nationality wherever found. The purpose of an enrolment is to evidence the national character of a vessel engaged in the coasting trade, or home traffic, and to enable such vessel to procure a coasting license." Mr. Justice Miller in Mohawk, The, 3 Wall. 566, 571. A vessel owned by a citizen of the United States, and not registered or enrolled as the statute provides, is American property, with all the general incidents of any property of an American; although

it has been stated that such vessels are of no more value, as American vessels, than the wood and iron out of which they are constructed." White's Bank v. Smith, 7 Wall. 655, 656. The statute provisions for enrolment are similar to those for registering, but not identical with them.

2 St. Clair v. United States, 154 U. S. 134.

81 Pars. Shipping, 63-67; Abb. Shipping, 3-7.

4 Ib.; Woods v. Russell, 5 B. & Ald. 942; Moody v. Brown, 34 Me. 107; Andrews v. Durant, 1 Kern. 36; Wood v. Bell, 6 Ell. & B. 355; Haney v. Schooner Rosabelle, 20 Wis. 247; Scudder v. Calais Steamboat Co., 1 Cliff. 370; Sandford v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 27 Ind. 522; Butterworth v.