
    The Lawrenceburgh Ferry-Boat v. Smith.
    Attachment by A. against a ferry-boat, for coal furnished to the boat for fuel. B., the owner, gaye bond, pursuant to the statute, and released the boat. Judgment for A. against the boat. The facts were as follows: A. furnished coal for the boat, at the request of G., which was used on the boat. B. was the owner, but had leased the boat to G., to be run at the expense of 0., who was to pay to B. a certain part of the receipts. Before the coal was furnished, B. had notified A. of the arrangement between himself and 0., and told A. not to furnish coal to the boat at his, B.’s, expense (as he had before been doing), whereupon he charged the coal to the boat.
    
      Held, that A.’s claim for the price of the coal was a lien upon the boat as against B.
    
    
      
      Held, also, that the judgment (the attachment haying been discharged by the execution of the bond) should have been a personal one against B.
    
    But, held, that the error, in this particular, was merely formal, and might be considered as amended in the Supreme Court; and the judgment was accordingly affirmed.
    APPEAL from the Dearborn Court of Common Pleas.
    
      Saturday, May 31.
    
      P. L. Spooner, for the appellant.
    
      D. S. Major, for the appellee.
   Perkins, J.

Attachment against the Lawrenceburgh Ferry-Boat, on a claim for coal furnished said boat as fuel.

The boat was owned by Piatt, was run by Thompson, lessee and master, and to the latter the coal was furnished by Smith, the plaintiff in attachment.

Piatt, the owner, gave bond as prescribed by statute, and released the boat. 2 R. S., p. 184, s. 661. He was made defendant, and answered. Replication. Trial by the Court, and judgment for the plaintiff, rendered against the boat.

The evidence was that Smith furnished the coal for the boat, on which it was used; that Piatt owned, but had leased the boat to Thompson for a year, to be run by him at his own expense, the latter receiving one third and the former two thirds of the gross receipts; that Piatt had notified plaintiff, Smith, of the arrangement, and directed him not to furnish coal for her on his, Piatt’s, account, as he had before been doing, whereupon said Smith charged the coal furnished to the boat.

The claim for coal was a lien upon the boat against the owner. 2 R. S., p. 184, s. 657, and p. 183, s. 655. The judgment should have been rendered against Piatt, and not against the boat, as he had appeared, given bond and discharged her. Jones v. Gresham, 6 Blackf. 291.—Brayton v. Freese, 1 Ind. R. 121.—Carson v. The Steamboat Talma, 3 Ind. R. 194.

The error is merely formal, may be considered as amended here, and the judgment affirmed. Alden v. Barbour, 3 Ind. R. 414.—2 R. S., p. 50, s. 101.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed, with 5 per cent, damages and costs.  