People ex rel. State Board of Harbor Commissioners v. Steamer America

Citations

• 34 Cal. 676

Syllabus

<p>Admiralty Jurisdiction.—A cause of action, to be cognizable in admiralty, whether- arising out of contract, claim, service or obligation, or liability of any kind, must relate to the business of commerce and navigation.</p> <p>Idem—Mode of Raising Issue on.—The only mode of raising issue on the jurisdiction of a State Court, on the ground that the cause of action pending therein belongs to maritime jurisdiction, is by presenting in the pleadings the essential facts showing such cause to relate to the business of commerce and navigation.</p> <p>Idem—Where the State is Plaintiff.—Whether a State Court would not hold its jurisdiction of an action brought in the name of the People and in aid of the public revenues of the State, even though the cause of action related to the business of commerce and navigation, suggested, but not decided.</p> <p>Power of Harbor Commissioners—Actions in rem.—The provisions of section two of the Act approved March 5th, 1864, (Stats. 1863-4, p. 139,) are sufficient to authorize the Harbor Commissioners of San Francisco to institute actions in rem, as provided in section three hundred and seventeen of the Practice Act, and generally to pursue all remedies that a private person could under the same circumstances.</p> <p>Idem—Wharfage, etc., Collectable in Gold and Silver Coin.—The provisions of section eleven of said Act, (Stats. 1863-4, p. 144,) which provide for the collection of “ all tolls, dockage, and wharfage charges Authorized and required to be-collected, shall be due and collectable exclusively in gold and silver money of the United States,” do not come within the provisions of the Specific Contract Act; but as charges upon property to raise money for public purposes, they do come within the principles laid down in Perry v. Washburn, 20 Cal. 350, and are valid.</p>