Clinton

Libelant, a seaman, brings this suit under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1916 . This libel is difficult of interpretation, but the gravamen thereof seems to be that libelant was a member of respondent union, that an officer or agent of said respondent union “wanton and wil-fully through his negligent interpretation” of the union constitution, rules and by-laws, dispatched libelant to a temporary job, promising him a preferred position with respect to other jobs that might become available after the completion of the temporary assignment, but that said agent failed to do so. Libel-ant’s statement of facts lends itself to a theory of negligence by a union officer, or breach of contract by the union.

On neither of these theories is there any action within the admiralty jurisdiction of this Court. This is a dispute between a member of the union and the union, or a union officer, all residents of California, with respect to certain rights of the union member under the terms of membership, and, conceivably, a separate agreement made between the member and the union. This is not a maritime case. The mere fact that libelant is a seaman does not convert his disputes into maritime…