The court of original admiralty jurisdiction in the United States Is the United States District Court. From this court causes could formerly be removed, in certain cases, to the Circuit and ultimately to the Supreme Court.
So much of the foregoing as relates to appeals from Circuit and District Courts of the United States to the Supreme Court was changed by chap. 517, 1 Sup. Rev. Stets., so that appeals may be taken direct from those courts to the Supreme Court from the final sentences and decrees in prize causes; in ether admiralty cases appeals will now lie from the District Court to the Circuit Court of Appeals, the decision of the latter court being final. In cer tain cases, however, the decisions of the Circuit Courts of Appeals may be reviewed by the Supreme Court, for which see UNITES STATES CoURTS.
It extends to the navigable rivers of the United States, whether tidal or not, the lakes, and the waters connecting them ; The Propeller Genesee Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 How. (U. S.) 443, 13 L. Ed. 1058; The Moses Taylor, 4 Wall. (U. S.) 411, 18 L. Ed. 397; The Eagle, 8 Wall. (U. S.) 15, 19 L. Ed. 365; The Belfast, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 624, 19 L. Ed. 266; Garcia y Leon v. Galceran, 11 Wall. (1J. S.) 185, 20 L. Ed. 74; Ameri can Steamboat Co. v. Chace, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 522, 21 L. Ed. 369; Assante v. Bridge Co., 40 Fed. 765; to rivers which either alone or with others are highways for commerce with other states or foreign countries; The Dan iel Ball, 10 Wall. (U. S.) 557, 19 L. Ed. 999; U. S. v. Ferry Co., 21 Fed. 332; to a stream tributary to the lakes, but lying entirely within one state; The General Cass, 1 Brown, Adm. 334, Fed. Cas. No. 5,307; to a ferry boat plying between opposite sides of the Mississippi River; The Gate City, 5 Biss. 200, Fed. Cas. No. 5,267; to a steam ferry boat to carry railway cars across the Missis sippi ; The St. Louis, 48 Fed. 312; to the Illinois and Lake Michigan Canal; The Oler, 2 Hughes 12, Fed. Cas. No, 10,485; Ex parte Boyer, 109 U. S. 629, 3 Sup. Ct. 434, 27 L. Ed. 1056; to the Welland Canal ; The Avon, 1 Brown, Adm. 170, Fed. Cas. No. 680 ; Scott v. The Young America, Newb. 101, Fed. Cas. No. 12,549; to the Erie Canal; The E. M. McChesney, 8 Ben. 150, Fed. Cas. No. 4,463 ; The Robert W. Parsons, 191 U. S. 17, 24 Sup. Ct. 8, 48 L. Ed. 73; to the Detroit Riv er, out of the jurisdiction of any particular state and within the territorial limits of Canada ; U. S. v. Rodgers, 150 U. S. 249, 14 Sup. Ct. 109, 37 L. Ed. 1071. But it does not extend to a creek which, though acces sible from the sea, has no public wharf or terminus for travel; Manigault v. S. M. Ward & Co., 123 Fed. 707; nor to a river which is not of itself a highway for inter state or foreign commerce; The Montello, 11 Wall. 411, 20 L. Ed. 191. For specific enumeration of certain navigable waters see notes, 48 L. Ed. 74; 22 id. 391, and 42 L. R. A. 305. The Judiciary Act of 1789 (H. S. § 563), while conferring admiralty jurisdiction upon the Federal courts, saves to suitors their common-law remedy, which has always existed for damages for collision at sea ; Schoonmaker v. Gilmore, 102 U. S. 118, 26
L. Ed. 95 ; where a vessel is outside of the territorial limitation of the civil process of a court, jurisdiction by stipulation or consent of the master cannot be obtained for the purpose of a libel in rem; The Hungaria, 41 Fed. 109.
Admiralty has jurisdiction of a libel by mariners for wages against a vessel plying on navigable waters, even though lying en • tirely within one state ; The Sarah Jane, 2 L. Rev. 455, Fed. Cas. No. 12,349 ; but seg The Scotia, 3 Am. L. Rev. 610, Fed. Cas. No. 12,513, where the then cases on admiral ty jurisdiction by reason of locality are fully treated. Also for services as engineer on a tug-boat ; The W. F. Brown, 46 Fed. 290.
Its civil jurisdiction extends to cases of salvage ; Mason v. The Blaireau, 2 Cr. (U. S.) 240, 2 L. Ed. 266 ; American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Pet. (U. S.) 511, 7 L. Ed. 242; U. S. v. Coombs, 12 Pet. (U. S.) 72, 9 L. Ed. 1004; The Louisa Jane, 2 Low. 302, Fed. Cas. No. 8,532 ; The Roanoke, 50 Fed. 574 ; McMullin v. Blackburn, 59 Fed. 177 ; De Le on v. Leitch, 65 Fed. 1002 ; bonds of bottom ry, respondentia, or hypothecation of ship and cargo ; The Ann C. Pratt, 1 Curt. C. C. 340, Fed. Cas. No. 409 ; The Fortitude, • 3 Sumn. 228, Fed. Cas. No. 4,653 ; The 'Aurora, 1 Wheat. (U. S.) 96, 4 L. Ed. 45; Blaine v. The Charles Carter, 4 Cr. (U. S.) 328, 2 L. Ed. 636 ; The Virgin v. Vyfhius, 8 Pet. (U. S.) 538, 8 L. Ed. 1036; Carrington v. The Ann C. Pratt, 18 How. (U. S.) 63, 15 L. Ed. 267; seamen's wages ; The Sarah Jane, 1 Low. 203, Fed. Cas. No. 12,349 ; 2 Pars. Mar. Law 509 ; The Karoo, 49 Fed. 651; Sheppard v. Taylor, 5 Pet. (U. S.) 675, 8 L. Ed. 269 ; The Thomas Jefferson, 10 Wheat (U. S.) 428, 6 L. Ed. 358; seizures under the laws of impost, navigation, or trade ; 1 U. S. Stat. at Large, 76 ; The Lewellen, 4 Biss. 156, Fed. Cas. No. 8,307 ; U. S. v. The Queen, 11 Blatchf. 416, Fed. Cas. No. 16,108 ; Two Hundred and Fifty Barrels of Molasses v. U. S., Chase, Dec. 503, Fed. Cas. No. 14,293 ; The North Cape, 6 Biss. 505, Fed. Cas. No. 10,316 ; cases of prize or ransom; Glass v. The Sloop • Betsey, 3 Dall. (Pa.) 6, 1 L. Ed. 485; charter-parties ; The Volunteer, 1 Sumn. 551, Fed. Cas. No. 16,991 ; Certain Logs of Mahogany, 2 Sumn. 589, Fed. Cas. No. 2,559 ; Arthur v. The Cassius, 2 Sto. 81, Fed. Cas. No. 564; Drinkwater v. The Spartan, 1 Ware 149, Fed. Cas. No. 4,085 ; contracts of af freightment between different states or for eign ports ; The Maggie Hammond, 9 Wall. (U. S.) 449, 19 L. Ed. 772 ; The Queen of the Pacific, 61 Fed. 213; Church v. Shelton, 2 Curt. C. C. 271, Fed. Cas. No. 2,714 ; Oakes v. Richardson, 2 Low. 173, Fed. Cas. No. 10, 390 ; The Reeside, 2 Sumn. 567, Fed. Cas. No. 11,657; The Rebecca, 1 Ware 188, Tex. Cas. No 11,619; The Phebe, 1 Ware 263, Fed. Cas. No. 11,064; The Paragon, 1 Ware 322, Fed. Cas. No. 10,708 ; New Jersey Steam Nay. Co. v. Bank, 6 How. (U. S.) 344, 12 L. Ed. 465; and upon a canal-boat without powers of propulsion, upon an artificial canal; The E.