THE CLYMENE. ���165 ���3. Same— Statut» Exeiioisihg Exclusive Juiiisbictioii— Iuvaliditt of. �A State statute which prohibita any one not licensed under the authority of the State from piloting a vessel to a port within the state is void, so far as it interferes with the employment, on public watera, of pilota licensed by other States bordering thereon. �4. Same— Pilotage Laws dp Pennsylvahia and Delawahe. �A pilot licensed by the state of Delaware held entitled to recover for services in piloting a vessel up the Delaware bay and river to Philadelphia, notwith- standing a law of Pennsylvania prohibiting any one from acting as such pilot without a Pennsylvania license. �In Admiralty. Hearing on libel and answer. �This was a libel by Eobert C. Chambers, pilot, against the steamship Clymene, setting forth that in Jane, 1881, the steamship being at the en- trance of Delaware bay, libellant boarded her and offered his services as pilot to conducfc her to Philadelphia, her port of destination ; that his services were accepted, and that he did pilot the steamship to Philadelphia. The libel fur- ther set forth that libellant was a regular pilot under an act of assembly of the state of Delaware, passed April 5, 1881, and that he was entitled to the pilotage fees prescribed by that act, but that the maater of the steamship refused to pay the sama �The answer of the master admitted the performance of the pilotage service, but set forth that from the year 1803 to the passage of the Delaware act of April 5, 1881, under which libellant claimed, there was no System of pilotage laws in force on the bay and river Delaware, exeept the law enacted by the state of Pennsylvania, March 29, 1803, (4 Sm. Laws, 73,) and that during the same period there were no pilots on sald bay and river exeept those licensed under said act of 1803 by the board of wardens of the port of Philadelphia, under whose license libellant himself acted as pilot for several years, until he surrendered the same and took a license from the state of Delaware under the act of April 5, 1881 ; that when libellant boarded the steainsliip she was on the high seas, and respondent, without making any contract with libellant, allowed him to act as pilot, supposing that he was duly licensed under the laws of Pennsylvania; that respondent was advised that the state of Delaware had no power to require vessels bound to the port of Philadelphia to take a pilot or to regulate his compensation, and that the act of April 5, 1881, had no extraterritorial virtue; that by an act of assembly of the state of Pennsyl- vania, approved February 4, 1846, (P. Laws, 30,) it is made an indictable offence for any person to pilot a vessel into the port of Philadelphia without a license from the board of wardens, and that as libellant had no such license his services were illegal, and he could pot recover therefor �Henry Flanders and Hon. Thomas F. Bayard, for libellant. �Henry 6. Ward, Morton P. Henry, and Richard C. McMurtrie, for respondent. �Butler, D. J. The claim is for services rendered in piloting the respondent tip the Delaware bay and river to Philadelphia. The tender and acceptance of the service, as well as its performance, is ��� �
