Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/142

134 FEDEEAL EEPOKTBR. �was also commissioned by the same board as a firat-clasa pilot, "as appears from the certificate, of which a copy, 'C,' is annexed." The certificate I will give presently. The vessel was fitted, equipped and used as a passenger steamship be- tween Boston and Havana; carried passengers on this voy-' age; was under the charge of her said master; and was by him piloted into the harbor of Boston. �By the law of Massachusetts, Statutes of 1862, c. 176, schedule, clauses 4, 5 and 10, the "United States" would be liable for pilotage, unless relieved by clause 15. The America, 1 Lowell, 176. Clause 15 is as follows: "Ail passenger steam vessels regulated by the laws of the United States, and carrying a pilot commissioned by United States commis- sioners, are exempt from the compulsory payment of pilotage." When this statute was passed the act of Congress of August 30» 1852, (10 St. at Large, 51,) regulating steam vessels which carried passengers, was in force. By section 9, clauses 7 and 9, of that act, the boards of inspectors of steamboats were re- quired, within their several jurisdictions, to examine into the character and qualifications of any person who should claim to be a skilful pilot, and should offer himself for a lieense, and, if they found him competent, to grant him a certificate licensing him as a pilot of such vessels for one year, within the limits prescribed in the certificate. Clause 10 imposes a penalty on persons acting as pilots of such steam vessels without a lieense from the inspectors. Many able lawyers were of opinion that this statute was intended to require ail local pilots to be licensed by the inspectors of the United States, See The Panama, 1 Deady, 27, and the dissenting opinion in Steamship Co. v. Joliffe, infra. It is possible that the legislature of Massachusetts may have had this belief, but the supreme court decided in 1864 that pilots of harbors were not within the statute, and that, therefore, the state laws as to such pilots remained in force. Steamship Co. v. Jolife, 2 Wall. 450. �After this decision was given an act of congresa was passed requiring ail American steam vessels, whether carrying pasv Bengers or not, excepting public ships of the United States, to ��� �