You are on page 1of 8

1 of 8

PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html


email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
Are all courts Court of Admiralty? You deicide.
NOTICE [EMPHASIS MINE]
DISTRICT. - "It may be construed to mean territory; Com. v. Dumbauld, 97 Pa. 305; and in the
in the revenue laws the words "district" and "port" district, are often used in the same sense.
Ayer v. Thacher, 3 Mas. 153, Fed. Cas. No. 684" BOUVIER'S LAW DICTIONARY
UNABRIDGED, Vol 1, Pg. 896.
PORT. - In the revenue laws it is synonymous with district, when the limits of the port and
district are the same. Ayer v. Thacher, 3 Mas. 153, Fed. Cas. No. 684. BOUVIER'S LAW
DICTIONARY UNABRIDGED, Vol 3, Pg. 2632
REVENUE: The gross receipts of a business, individual, government, or other reporting entity.
The receipts are usually the results of product sales, services rendered, interest earned, etc.
Black Law Dict. 6
th
Ed. Pg. 1319.

REVENUE: Return from property Bates v. Porter, 74 Cal 224, 239, 15 P 732. The income of
the government, state or national, arising from taxation, duties, fees, and the like. 42 Am J 1st
Pub F 2. Precisely, the total income of the government, state or national, derived from all
sources, subject to be applied to public purposes. Fergus v. Brady, 277 Ill 272, 115 NE 393.
BALLENTINES LAW DICT. 3
rd.
Ed., Pg. 1113.

I did a search revenue district in Title 26 of United States Code and found the following.
Remember District and Port are the same

26 USC 6103. Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return infor
26 USC 6091. Place for filing returns or other documents
26 USC 7804. Other personnel
26 USC 7801. Authority of Department of the Treasury
26 USC 7503. Time for performance of acts where last day falls on
26 USC 7325. Personal property valued at $100,000 or less
26 USC 7851. Applicability of revenue laws
26 USC 6335. Sale of seized property
26 USC 6151. Time and place for paying tax shown on returns
26 USC 7601. Canvass of districts for taxable persons and objects
26 USC 6021. Listing by Secretary of taxable objects owned by nonreside
26 USC 5802. Registration of importers, manufacturers, and dealers
26 USC 4662. Definitions and special rules
26 USC 6340. Records of sale
26 USC 5733. Provisions relating to liability for occupational taxes
26 USC 5065. Territorial extent of law
26 USC 4905. Liability in case of death or change of location
26 USC 4903. Liability in case of business in more than one location
26 USC 4412. Registration

The Huntress, 12 Fed. Case 984 @ 992 & 989, (Case No. 6,914)(D.Me. 1840):
In this country revenue causes has so long been the subject of Admiralty cognizance,
that congress considered them as CIVIL CAUSES OF ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME
J URISDICTION, and to preclude any doubt that might arise, congress considered these
words to the used in the sense they bore in this country and not in that which they had in
England. The Act gives exclusive admiralty maritime jurisdiction to the district court. As
2 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
a court of the law of nations, . . .But in cases where the courts of common law have
always exercised concurrent jurisdiction, the jurisdiction is not, and was never intended
by the constitution to be, exclusive, though the subject matter be maritime . . . The
common law, and of course the sense in which the technical words of that law are used,
WAS NEVER IN FORCE IN THIS COUNTRY, any further than as it was adopted by
common consent, or the legislature. BEYOND THIS, IT WAS AS MUCH A FOREIGN
LAW AS THAT OF FRANCE OR HOLLAND.
The HUNTRESS case goes on to explain and makes the following comments, very foretelling I
might add:
Revenue causes were never within the admiralty jurisdiction in England, but always
belonged exclusively to the Exchequer. But i n t hi s c ount r y, for more than a century,
these causes had been hear d and dec i ded by Cour t s of Vi c e
Admi r al t y.
But is well known that the admiralty jurisdiction is two-fold, a prize jurisdiction
exercised jure belli, extending to all captures in war, as prize, w het her on sea or
on l and ; and a civil jurisdiction over causes civil and maritime, springing from a
consideration purely maritime.
The best evidence of the rightful jurisdiction of the Court undoubtedly is, the
commission of the judge.
Although, presumably for purposes of obtaining jurisdiction, action for forfeiture under
Internal Revenue Laws is commenced as PROCEEDING IN ADMIRALTY, after
jurisdiction is obtained proceeding takes on character of civil action at law, and at least as
such stage of proceedings, Rules of Civil Procedures control. United States v. $3976.62
In Currency, 37 F.R.D. 564 (S.D.N.Y. 1965)
OUT OF THE BOOK BENEDICT ON ADMIRALTY WE FIND:
327. They have no separate commission or constitution, as Courts of Admiralty. When sitting
to try an Admiralty cause, the court is an Admiralty Court, and when sitting to try a
criminal, it is a Criminal Court, and the court passes from the trial of an Admiralty cause
to a common law cause, and vice versa, and becomes alternately, at the same sitting,
according to the nature of the cause on trial, an Admiralty Court, an Equity Court, and a
Common Law Court of civil or criminal jurisdiction, without any change of style or form,
or officers or records, except that each case is conducted according to the established
course of proceedings appropriate to its class. It is thus' always the same court, whether acting
in one class of causes or another. I t i s onl y as Admi r al t y Cour t s t hat t hey ar e
her e t o be c onsi der ed.
3 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
328. All these courts have power to issue all writs which may be necessary for the exercise of
their respective jurisdiction, and agreeable to the principles and usage of law. They have also
power to impose and administer all necessary oaths or affirmations, and to punish, by fine or
imprisonment, at the discretion of the court, all contempts of authority in any causes or hearing
before the court. Also to make and establish all necessary rules for the orderly conducting
business in said courts. provided such rules are not repugnant to the laws of the United States.
[See J udicial Act of 1789, 14. Ibid, 17. 7 Cr.32.]
329. In the exercise of its appropriate jurisdiction, the Court of Admiralty exercises equitable
as well as legal jurisdiction. If the subject of a maritime nature, and so within the power of the
court, and be of such a nature, that the relief must be in the nature of equitable relief, the court is
entirely competent to give the equitable as well as the legal relief. It has a capacity of a court of
law, and, in certain respects, the capacity of a court of equity. In its decisions upon the ultimate
rights of parties, from considerations of conscience, justice and humanity, it some time mitigates
the severity of contracts, their moderates exorbitant demands. [See Edw. Ad. J ur.31.; Sup. 358.;
11 Pet. 175.; 1 Sum. 388.; 2 id. 433.; 9 Cran. 125.; 1 Wheat. 440.; 2 Dod. 58. 1 Hag. 347.; 2 id.
377.; Bee. 106.] The nature of maritime controversies, obviously, however, necessarily excludes
from Courts of Admiralty, large classes of cases, such as specific performance-trusts, etc., which
are of frequent occurrence in courts of equity. And the Court of Admiralty is not a court of
general equity, nor has it the character powers of the Court of Equity, but it is bound, by its
nature and constitution, to determine the cases submitted to its cognizance, upon equitable
principles, and according to the rules of natural justice. It cannot, in a technical sense, be called
a court of equity. It is rather A Court of J ustice.[ See 1 W. Rob. 182.; 4 Rob. 250.; 2 Dod.; 6
Rob. 277.] THE AMERICAN ADMIRALTY, ITS JURISDICTION AND PRACTICE. By
ERASTUS C. BENEDICT. (1850)
In another book found brings some light on the subject of admiralty, titled:
THE ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION IN AMERICA
The admiralty jurisdiction naturally connects itself on the one hand with our
diplomatic relations and duties to foreign powers and their subjects, and on the
other hand with the great interests of navigation and c ommer c e, f or ei gn and
domes t i c . There is then a peculiar wisdom in giving to the national government a
4 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
jurisdiction of this sort which cannot be wielded except for the public good, and
which multiplies the securities for the public peace abroad, and gives to commerce
and navigation its most encouraging support at home.
1

But whether this jurisdiction is by the Constitution exclusive of State authority or not,
is a question by the way which the Supreme Court rather went out of their road to avoid
passing on. There can be no question that it can in any event be made exclusive by Act
of Congress; this, therefore, the judiciary act accomplished.
By the terms of that act original jurisdiction in causes of admiralty and maritime
jurisdiction was vested in the District Court and in that court exclusively, which thus
became the only court, State or National, in which admiralty process or admiralty
remedies were permissible.
2

The peculiar course pursued by the Supreme Court in regard to contracts between
inhabitants of the same State, and more especially with regard to material men led the States
generally to extend the jurisdiction of their own courts ; special acts were passed
authorizing proceedings in rem to be maintained therein, and giving a quasi admiralty
jurisdiction to State courts. This was manifestly opposed to the act of 1789, and was
by the Supreme Court so declared; these acts in consequence are unconstitutional and
void.
3

THE SAVI NG OF A COMMON L AW REMEDY .
Appended to the grant of jurisdiction conferred by the act of 1789, as well as by the
now obsolete grant of 1845, is the following clause : " Saving to suitors in all cases
the rights of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it."
This clause has been productive of much controversy ; it was doubtless
superadded by the framers of the act out of excessive caution, and was designed to
guard against any latent doubts, which the antecedent words might perchance

1
Story on Constitution, p. 1751.
2
Excepting on appeal.
3
The Moses Taylor, 4 Wallace, 411 ; The Hine, 4 Wallace, 555; The Belfast, 7 Wallace, 624. It may sometimes be
hard to decide whether a lien is more analogous to a maritime lien or to an attachment at common law. See Leon v.
Galceran, 11 Wallace, 189. So that a State statute merely giving a proceeding in rem in a State court where there is
no such proceeding in the admiralty, and not assuming to create a maritime lien, may perhaps take effect ; such
unquestionably would be the case in a contract not maritime, as in a contract to build a ship. Scull, 25 P. F. Smith,
297; Richard Busteed, 100 Mass. 409; Donnel v. Starlight, 103 Mass. 227.
5 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
occasion.
Its intent, though, perhaps, at the first glance the words are calculated to mislead, is
on inspection clear and definite; it is designed to make apparent beyond the
possibility of a doubt, that, though admiralty process and admiralty remedies are to be
sought only in the District Court, the right is nevertheless preserved to suitors to avail
themselves of any co-existing common law remedies, notwithstanding the subject
matter in cases of contract or the locality in cases of tort be maritime.
That which is saved is not a remedy in the common law courts but a common law
remedy. That which is preserved is not for the benefit of courts but for suitors. The
el ec t i on i s i n ef f ec t made by t he pl ai nt i f f , and it is a choice which the
defendant must abide. The ultimate settlement of the jurisdiction, if there be exception
taken, is a question for the court, independent of any infringement of the Constitutional
rights of the defendant ; suits at common law are a class as distinct from suits in
admiralty as they are from suits in equity. To suitors there is preserved the right in all
cases where a concurrent remedy exists, to elect between that afforded by the admiralty
or by the common law, and in case the latter be deemed preferable to pursue it in the
appropriate court wherein that jurisprudence prevails either State or national,
according to their residence. To illustrate, take the every day case of a suit for sailors'
wages; if the mariner desires to look to the vessel or to the vessel and cargo, his
remedy is in rem [against a thing (such as property) rather than a person] and can
only be found in that forum wherein that jurisprudence prevails; he must go into the
District Court in admiralty; but if, on the other hand, he desires to look to the owners,
he has the same rights preserved to him as the employee not afloat, and may avail
himself of his common law remedy in either the appropriate State court or in the
Circuit Court of the United States, if the parties be such as to give the latter
jurisdiction.
;
If the suitor has elected to proceed in admiralty there is yet remaining another
problem to be solved, Shall he file his libel in personam [An act or proceeding in
reference to a specific person] or in rem?[An act or proceeding instituted against
the thing]
A mere personal suit in the admiralty does not, as has been previously said,
6 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
materially differ from a suit at common law. It may happen, however, that the cause
may be within the jurisdiction of the admiralty in personam and not in rem, it is not
every maritime contract that gives a maritime lien. I t is, however, because of the
maritime lien, which is enforcible only by a proceeding in rem, that admiralty
process is in general so peculiarly beneficial. Let us consider then some of the
characteristics of the maritime lien.
THE MARITIME LIEN.
The maritime lien is the tacit hypothecation of the civil law; it is a secret interest
[SECRETE LINE AS IN NOTICE OF FEDERAL TAX LIEN] in a res, which
may be enforced against it corporaliter,[uncommon in respect of material things;
carnally; corporally, bodily] the res [res is plural of rem the thing]
obligate[obligate] being the defendant, and not its owners.
4
The latter, in fact, not
only need not, but do not in general, appear in the proceedings, unless it be that they
too have an interest in the thing, in which event they appear, not as defendants, but as
persons likewise claiming a privilege or property in the res.
5

The lien differs essentially from that afforded by the common law ; not only
does it in general exist independent of possession, but the lien creditor does not, by
right of his lien, recover possession, but is excluded therefrom, unless possession be
obtained by means of a judicial decree.
The sailor to whom the maritime law gives a lien for wages, may not proceed to
take possession of the res ipsa, whether ship or freight, or both ; but he may, though,
out of possession, claim that his debt be paid out of the res specifically ; that it may be
proceeded against corporaliter, sold, and his payment made out of the specific funds
arising therefrom. Whilst the decree is pending, his lien attaches ; it follows the
purchase money paid into court ; it follows the ship and its proceeds into whose hands
soever they may come, by title or purchase, from the owner.
6

There is no fixed period of time by the marine law within which he must proceed

4
Coates' Ad. Practice, 16, 17, 18.
5
9 A. L. Rev. P., 638.
6
3 Kent's Corn., 196, 197.
7 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com
to enforce his lien ; and although the lien may be lost to the seaman, or to other
privileged creditors, by unreasonable delay, it is in general, because he has suffered
the res to pass into the hands of a bona fide purchaser, ignorant of his claim.
7
I t is an
insurable interest
8
, and is not arrested by the death or insolvency of the owner; but it
is not in general an assignable interest ; and, though the holder of the privilege
transfer the debt, the lien does not accompany it.

9

Whenever a lien comes within the purview of our laws, it arises and takes effect
by virtue of the act done, whether that act be a tort, as a collision ; a service
rendered without contract, as salvage; or a service arising by express contract, as a
claim for wages.
10
I n any event, if this occurs, the application of the lien to the res
is universal; it is not limited to any part of the res, but covers the whole of it, one
part as well as another; and repairs made by the owner subsequent to the lien are by
law included in the res, and are equally liable.
11

The lien exists by virtue of law, and will follow the ship wherever she goes ; want of
jurisdiction in a particular to enforce it is, therefore; not necessarily fatal.
12

Such may be said to be the general characteristics of the maritime lien.
The limits and purposes of this essay forbid our following it more in detail ; but it is
important to remember that whenever a sailor has a maritime lien, he has a standing in
the admiralty, and may, if he so elect, waive his lien and proceed in personam
13

The maritime law gives mariners a lien for their wages, but they are not restricted

7
3 Kent's Com., 196. Possession is necessary in cases of freight, and also in cargo called upon for contribution in
general average ; and, although possessory, it is regarded as a maritime lien. See Bags of Linseed, I Black, 108 ;
Cutler v. Rae, 7 Howard, 729; S. P., 3 Wallace, 37.
In the cases of sea-going vessels, it has been thought that the lien should not he enforced against innocent
purchasers for a period exceeding the next voyage. On the great lakes, it has been considered reasonable to limit
liens to seasons of navigation, and therefore not to extend them beyond a year. See The Lottie Mills, 1 Sprague, 309;
Boston, Blatch. & How., 309; The Buckeye State, Newberry, 101. But where no third person has acquired a right to
the vessel, a much longer period will in general he allowed, unless the owner has been injured by the delay. Fisher v.
Galloway C. Morris, 27 L. I., 204; The Canton, 1 Sprague, 437.
8
Ins. Co. v. Baring, 20 Wallace, 159.
9
The Patchin, 12 L. R., 21; S. P., Newberry R., 449. Bottomry and bills of lading are, however, excepted ; the
former because, by its express hypothecation, the res is hound to lender or assigns ; the latter because made
negotiable for benefit of trade.
10
9 A. L. R. P., 638.
11
Neptune, I Hagg, 238. When, however, repairs are made at the expense of a third person, in ignorance of the
circumstance, and who has advanced the money expressly therefor on bottomry, the equity of the court will protect
him. 1W. Robinson, 119.
12
Maggie Hammond, 9 Wallace, 435.
13
Belfast, 7 Wallace, 624.
8 of 8
PROVEN, DOCUMENTED & MEASURABLE. http://www.abcliveit.com/site/ABC_Primetime_Report.html
email me for more information: americanlibeties@cfl.rr.com

to their in rem proceeding, which it is just possible might, because of some reason, be
the less advantageous remedy, but may pursue their suit, if they so elect, in
personam
14
. Maritime law is, however, only so far a part of the law of any country as
it has been adopted by that country ; and though the maritime lien and maritime law
in general may be said to go hand in hand, yet there is in America a border line of
cases which present a divergence that still mars the harmony of our system, and
which, though of admiralty jurisdiction, are not subject to the general maritime lien,
but are controlled by the municipal law.

CL AI MS OF MATERI AL MEN.
In all countries whose jurisprudence is that of the civil law, a lien upon the ship is
given without any express contract to those who repair the vessel or furnish her with
necessaries, irrespective of the circumstance of her being at her home port or abroad
when the repairs were made or supplies furnished.
15

The lien of course might be waived or lost by the act of the parties, but it had its
origin in services rendered to the ship, whether she be foreign or domestic, whether at
her home port or abroad. The only material difference was that in regard to a
domestic ship. The necessity and the fact that supplies were furnished on the credit of
the ship must be proven, whilst with regard to a foreign ship it was so assumed.
16

Nor was there in England, until a comparatively recent date, any distinction
between the home port or foreign port of a vessel, and that which now exists is a
distinction based on principle and arose thus.
As a result of the controversy between the admiralty and common law courts, the
former were prohibited from exercising jurisdiction in cases of repairs made on
shipboard, when within the ebb and flood of the tide, or infra corpus comitatus, or, in
short, within an English port.
THIS IS THE BEGINNING YOU HAVE SEEN NOTHING YET!!!!!!!!


14
But the master, having no lien by the maritime law, is restricted to his remedy in personam in the admiralty, or to
his common law remedy.
15
3 Kent's Corn, 169.
16
The Union Express Co., 1 Brown's Ad, R, 537.

You might also like