From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

The Abercorn

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 23, 1886
28 F. 384 (9th Cir. 1886)

Opinion


28 F. 384 (D.Or. 1886) THE ABERCORN. United States Circuit Court, D. Oregon. August 23, 1886

Raleigh Stott, for libelant.

Henry Ach, for respondent.

SAWYER, J.

I think the view taken by the district judge is correct. I cannot add anything of importance to the observations made by him at the hearing below. In the language of the syllabus of the case, as reported in 26 F. 877, it was there held that 'the columbia river is the boundary between two states,--Oregon and Washington,-- within the purpose and spirit of section 4236 of the Revised Statutes; and therefore the state of Oregon cannot require a vessel bound in or out of said river to take an Oregon pilot, or pay him half or any pilotage, if the master thereof prefers to and does take a Washington pilot.'

For the reasons given in the opinion of the district judge, the decree must be affirmed; and it is so ordered.


Summaries of

The Abercorn

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 23, 1886
28 F. 384 (9th Cir. 1886)
Case details for

The Abercorn

Case Details

Full title:THE ABERCORN.

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 23, 1886

Citations

28 F. 384 (9th Cir. 1886)

Citing Cases

Thompson v. Darden

The law violates § 4236, Rev. Stat., under which a master in boundary waters can take the pilot of either…

The Alcalde

The question of whether Washington is a 'state' within the meaning of this act does not necessarily arise in…