284 FEDERAL REPORTER. �in the harbor of New York hy said steaci-sliip, through the negligence of the persons navigating her ; that the canal-boat became a total loss, and the said intestate was then and there drowned ; that the said intestate's loss, by losing his part of the beat and property on board belonging to him, was $938.50, and that the administratrix was entltled to recover that amount, and the other libellant $600, against the steam-ship. The libel alleged that the libellants had applied " to P. W. J. Hurst, agent of the National Steam Navigation Company, owners of said steam-ship, the said owners being" "aBritish corporation," and requested him to settle with them for said damages, but he denied that there was any liability on the part of the said steam-ship for the said damages. �On the twenty-uinth of November, 1867, the proctor for the administratrix signed a stipulation in the suit, provid- ing that service of process of attachment against the ves- sel be waived, if the claimants would file a claim and bond the vessel, "the bond to be signed by F. W. J. Hurst, man- ager of the National Steam-ship Company, owner of the said steam-ship," and by a surety, and if the claimants would answer the libel by a day named. On the same day the National Steam-ship Company iiled a claim to the vessel in the suit, averring "that the company above named [the National Steam-ship Company] are the true and bona fide owners of the said steam-ship." This claim was sworn to on that day by F. W. J. Hurst, as "manager of the National Steam-ship Company," to the efiect that the claim was true of his knowledge. On the same day "the National Steam- ship Company, by F. W. J. Hurst, manager," executed and filed a bond for value in the suit, to the marshal, for the release of the vessel, and also a bond for costs. On the thirty-first of December, 1867, the National Steam-ship Company filed an answer to the libel, averring that "the claimants are and were the true and only owners of the said steamer Pennsylvania at the several times stated in the libel," and raising an issue as to the negligence alleged. The case was tried in the district court on the merits, and on the twenty-sixth of April, 1869, the court dismissed the libel, with costs. 3 Ben. 216. On an appeal by the libellants to this court it made the same decree. �The facts herein above set forth are those whicb appear from the proofs in this suit. This suit was eommenced in the ��� �
