THE 'SOHOON^fe-IEDWIK t-OST. 20'J �J&niLSXj 23, 1881i after ohe was p^it into winte» qdartersj^iu order io obtain their wages. 'The libel in this cause waa filed January 25,il881,'nearly three tnonthtf'iaftei*, the siaa ■wages were alleged to be barned. Exceptions- -were filed by the respondent, master (rf 'said'Behdonier, aliegini^ ' substari- tially (1) that the libel is irrogular, becauso it'does not ap- pear that the court bas jiiirisdiction of the cause in thisi First, that it does not appea;f that ten days had elapsed be- tween the time the seamen ■were entitled to receive their wages and the time of filing th^ir libel; second, beeause th0 preliminary steps pointod Ont by sections 4546, 4547, U. S. Eev. St., were not taken before suit was commeuced in this. court by the attachment of thevessel upon libel Eled. �Whatever defect there may have been uppn the face of thei libel which arose from not disclosing the period of time be- tween the earning of the wages and the filing of the, libftl, biis been corrected bythe filing of the amen^merit rectifying that omission, -which the court always allosirs with great liberality, in admiralty proceedings. So that the objection to the court exercising jurisdiction in this suit, because it did noiappear that 10 days had elapsed between the earning of said ■^ag^p; and the time of filing the libel, is thns disposed of by th^.; amendment. �It remains only to consider the other. proposition; iOf the. respondent, going to the full length of requiring,the proceed- ings to be taken under said sections 4546, 14547, U< S. Ete^r; St., as a prerequisite b.efore this court takes jurisdiction -of the cause. We. cannot assenfe to the oorrectness ©f this^ proposition. The practice in tbis districti^iand we mayisay generally, iS against^t, "and the decisions,' as opposed'to" the speculations of eminent laW--c^lriters, are against it.' iPhis question bas bfeeitt examiried'^t -sotoo length by Mr. Spftigne, an eminent admiralty judge,- vi'hd aWives at the conbrtision that the acts of congrees do liet, in aU «aises, imiiti'Be' a 'd'uliy on the sailor of proceeding to recover bis wages in the man- ner pointed out in the sections of the Eevised Statutes. In fact, be thinks that the statutes did not alter or restrain the ��� �
