THS DE SMBT. 48S �Thb De Smet.* (Oireuit Oouri, E. D. Louisiana. December 29, 1881.) �1. Rank op Lmss and MoKTQAaES upom Vbssel»— Rbv. St. J 4192— Admiraity �Rui-E No. 12. �Section 4192 of the Revised Statutes, relative to the recording of convey- anoes and mortgages on vessels, gives no lien or other priority to mortgages and conveyances than they had before the act was passed, except to recorded conveyanoes and mortgages, over mortgages and conveyances not recorded, in certain cases. It afiects mortgages and conveyances of vessels as the varions registry acts of the states aiiect conveyances and mortgages of lands. And as, prior to this recording law, liens, ■whether maritime or domestic, under the maritime law or under the state law, had priority over mortgages, 80 now they should have priority. �The John T. Moore, 3 Woods, 61, criticised. �2. Bame — Starb Dectsis. �But frequent decisions in the flfth circuit having held the contrary, the doc- trine of store decisis must govern in this case, and it is now held, in conformity therewith, that " the lien of a mortgage on a vessel, duly recorded accordingto section 4192, Rev. St., is inferior to all strictly maritime liens, but is superior to any subsequent lien for supplies furnished in the home port, given by state legislation." �Baidwin v. TheDracLUh Johnson, 3 Woods, 582, folio wed. �In Admiralty. �Chas. B. Singleton and R. H. Brown, for mortgagee. �Richard De Gray, Chas. S. Rice, Henry I. Leroy, E. B. Kouttschuidt, J. H. Kennard, W. W. Howe, and S. S. Prentiss, contra, for varions creditors of the beat. �Pabdee, g. J. The question presented in this case is as to the pri- ority of certain lienholders on funds (proceeds of the sale of the De Smet) in the registry of the court. The appellee claims the funds under a mortgage duly recorded aecording to the act of congress in that behalf, and bearing date of January 24, 1880. The appellants claim under liens and privileges granted the furnishers of supplies and material-men in the home port by the laws of the state of Louis- iana, some of prior and some of later date than the mortgage of appellee. Since the adoption of the constitution of Louisiana, of 1 879, such liens and privileges do not require to be recorded in order to rank prior mortgages, or to be valid against third persons. See article 177, Const. La. 1879. And the twelfth admiralty rule has not been changed sinee 1872. So that the questions upon which the Lotta- wanna Case, 21 Wall. 580, was decided cannot be made in this case, �*Reported by Joseph P. Hornor, Esq. , of the New Orleans bar. ��� �
