THE DE SMET. ���isf ���priority to mortgages and conveyances than they had before the net was passed, except to recorded conYeyancea and mortgages over mort- gages and conveyances not recorded in certain cases. It affects mortgages and conveyances on ships as the varions registry aets of the states affect conveyances and mortgages of lands and chattels; as a registration law aiiects the rights of voters. In other words, it gives no new rights; it preserves rights already acquired. It is a law that requires owners and mortgagees of ships to advertise their claims ; to give notice (constructive) to all the world of their demands ; but in a conflict of rights the owner must stand on bis conveyance, the mortgagee on bis mortgage. And as, prior to this recording law, liens, wbether maritime or domestic, under the maritime law or under the state law, had priority over mortgages, so now they have priority. These being my views of the law applicable, my duty in the premises as to the proper judgment to render in this case would seem plain. �But there is another and a very important matter to consider. The rule that bas been adopted, and bas prevailed for some years in this judicial circuit, is at variance with my views and conclusions. �My learned predece^sor, who now occupies a seat on the supreme bench and holds the highest judicial position in this circuit, estab- lished and doubtless still maintains the rule that mortgages duly recorded in pursuance of the act of congress are entitled to priority over domestic liens of subsequent date granted by the state law. I do not refer to the John T. Moore Case, reported in 3 Woods, 61, for I do not dispute the correctness of the judgment in that case, though I have criticised it somewhat herein. But in the Bradish Johnson Case, reported in the same volume, page 582, the rule is clearly laid down, and its propriety is maintained with the learning and force so characteristic of that eminent judge. Since that decision — 1877 — the rule there laid down bas been the law in this circuit. The emi- nent admiralty judges in this circuit, notably in Mississippi and this state, have indorsed the decision, and followed it in determining the rights of parties in many cases, and I am now confronted with stare decisis. Upon this, Chancellor Kent says, (I Kent, Comm. 475:) �"If a decision bas been raade upon solemn argument and mature delibera, tion, the presumption is in favor of its correctness; and the community have a right to regard it as a just declaration or exposition of the law, and to reg- ulate their actions and contracts by it. It would, tiierefore, be extremely inconvenient to the public if precedents were not duly regarded and implicitly followed. * * * If judicial decisions were to be lightly disregarded we ��� �
