604 FEDERAL REPORTER. �1879, Jie aslied for the surrender of the vessel to him for her owners and gave stipulation in which it is recited that the owners of said bark by William N. Thackara are the claim- ants and that the "owners or the claimants " would well and truly abide ail the orders of the court, otherwise he the said Thackara and his surety acknowledged themselves to be jointly and severally indebted unto the libellant in the suni of $1,500 to be levied of their goods and ehattels, lauds and tenements. �Thus far, therefore I am satisfied that although the record maynot be "pro forma," a.3 prescribed by the rules, yet it is in effect sufficient to estop Thackara or his owners from tak- ing advantage of the irregularity, especially after the delivery of the vessel to them. The duty to make the "pro forma" claim was theirs, they cannot now, after having received the vessel, take advantage of their own negleot to defeat the libellant. �They perhaps should not have been permitted to enter stip- ulation without first making the usual claim, but they icere so permitted. The right to insist upon this claim was waived for their henefit. It could not have been otherwise. Caii they now say that their stipulation should be avoided because of this waiver? I think no court would assist them under such circumstances. �The proceedings therefore being in effect regular up to this stage, what next do the rules prescribe. By the nineteenth admiralty rule (of this district) an answer must be put in before the return day. Answer was made on return day (November 21st.) Thackara answers, he says, his firm are the consignees of the vessel and this is the only title under which he claims a right to answer. Under the third admi- ralty rule (of this district) the answer must be made by the party, (when within the district) otherwise by an attorney in fact, specially instrttcted. Surely therefore his answer amounts to nothing. It cannot be said that it is within the line of the duty of a mere consignee of a vessel, to make answer and defend an action, unless specially authorized or instructed, especially when he does not even disclose his principals. The ����
