
    No. 925.
    John J. Adams & Co. v. Steamer Trent and Owners.
    The shipper of two bales of cotton transferred the bill of lading to plaintiff after the cotton had been discharged and delivered to the shipper: Held—*That the plaintiff cannot recover from the owner of the boat.
    A PPEAL from the Fourth District Court of New Orleans, TMard, J.
    
      Miles and Thomas Taylor, for plaintiffs and appellants.
    
      Clarice <£• Bayne, for defendants and appellees.
    
      Brief of Clarice & Bayne, for defendants and appellees.
    is a suit for -—This the value of two bales of cotton, alleged to have been shipped on the steamer Trent; that bill of lading was transferred to plaintiffs after arrival of the steamer and cotton at New Orleans, and that the cotton was not delivered to the transferrees of the bill of lading.
    The evidence shows that William Dunn, who shipped two bales of cotton, accompanied them on the steamer Trent; that the cotton was consigned to his order, and was received by him in New Orleans ; that being pressed by plaintiffs to pay a debt of about four hundred dollars due to them, he delivered to them the bill of lading after the cotton had been discharged and delivered to him. 1 The question presented is simply one of fact, and this has been decided in favor of the plaintiffs by the District Judge, who heard and saw the witnesses.
    This is a desperate effort to save a bad debt, and the evidence shows that plaintiffs are trying to cast on the defendants a loss already sustained by them. The defendants had oomplied with their obligation; by delivering the cotton on the levee, and pointing it out to Dunn, who accompanied it to New Orleans, and who had consigned it to his own order. Northern v. Williams, 6 An. Rep. 579. Gauche v. Slone, 14 An. Rep. 412.
   Hyman, O. J.

This suit is for the value of two bales of cotton, shipped by William Dunn on the steamboat Trent.

• The bill of lading given for the cotton toDtnin was transferred by him to plaintiffs, after he, as the evidence shows, had received the cotton from the boat.

The judgment of the District Court was in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiffs are appellants from the judgment.

Let the judgment be affirmed, at appellants’ cost.  