SCOTT V. THE IRA CHAFFEB. 408 �favors the view taken by the libellant here. This was a con- traot under which the Tribune engaged to be ready within three days to load for the libellant, and proceed -without delay to Lubeo tç) ta-ke in a cargo, and proceed to Havana. After this memorandum was made a number of cedar posts were put on board of her by the libellant, as a part of her cargo, but before the schooner sailed the ownera of the vessel ordered the cargo so laden to be put on shore, and attached it under process for an asserted debt due them on a former voyage, for which they insisted libellant was liable. The charterer proceeded against the vessel, and Mr. Justice Story held her liable — First, upon the ground that the agreement consti- tuted a charter and not a preliminary con tract; and, second, because a portion of the cargo was actually taken on board, and the voyage was voluntarily broken up by the owners of the vessel. Here, again, however, there was a part perform- ance, ■which was evidently considered a material f act, although the opinion is not expressly put upon that ground. Indoed, the court intimates (page 149) that the question of jurisdio- tion depended rather upon the maritime oharacter of the oon- traot. �The case of The Flash, Abbott's adm. 67, waa very similar. The master of a New York vessel contracted at the port of New York to transport a cargo across the East river to Brook- lyn. He took a part of the cargo on board, but afterwards refused to take on the residue or to deliver that already laden. It was held that an action in rem would lie, both for the refusai to receive on board and the refusai to deliver. While a por- tion of the cargo was actually laden on board, the court appar- ently sustained the jurisdiction (page 70) upon the authority of the master to contract for the employment of the vessel, and upon the general doctrine of the maritime law that the vessel is bodily answerable for such contracta of the master made for her benefit. In the case of The Pacific, 1 Blatoh. 569, the libellant had contracted for a passage to California; had prepared for the voyage at considerable expanse, went to New York at the time appointed for sailing, and found that the accommodp.tionB were not such as he had bargained for. ����
