353 >;r ■ fedeiue ebpobtbe. �nishing the victuals and men, and is the sole person respon- sible for the mode in which the business is conducted. I am not ready to believe that congress intended to punish the guilty by a penalty of $20, and the innocent one of $200. Of course, they might do so by a blunder; but that is not to be lightly imputed, and I find that a perfectly reasonable and not unnatural construction of section 4515 refers to the fore- going parts of the title. If this construction is wrong, the sec- tions are repugnant, because section 4521 purportsto impose the penalties, and ail the penalties, for a violation of section 4520, and the particular provision for coasting voyages must prevail over the one for voyages in general. �I am, therefore, of opinion : (1) That the offence of receiv- ing on board ship a seaman who has been engaged contrary to title 53 is an impossible one, because there is nothing in that title that requires an engagement to be made before the seamen are received on board; (2) if that section has any application, it has none to coasting voyages ; and, as a corol- lary; that no penalty was incurred by the Thomas W. Haven, when the master, being about to proceed from Boston to South Amboy, received seamen on boaid without having made a written contract with them. �Libel dismissed. ����
