Norris v. The Island City

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

Norris v. The Island City

18 F. Cas. 321, 1 Cliff. 219

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

DecidedMay 15, 1859

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 18 F. Cas. 321 (Norris v. The Island City) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Norris v. The Island City, 18 F. Cas. 321, 1 Cliff. 219 (circtdma 1859).

Pincite

Opinion

CLIFFORD, Circuit Justice.

Salvage is

the compensation allowed to' persons by whose assistance a ship or its cargo has been saved, in whole or in part, from impending peril on the sea, or in recovering such property from actual loss, as in cases of shipwreck, derelict, or recapture. When the property is nor saved, or if it perish, or, in case of capture, is not retaken, no such compensation can be allowed. A different principle, however, applies when the property is actually saved, and more than one set of salvors have contributed to the result. In such cases, all who have engaged in the enterprise, and have materially contributed to the saving of the property, are entitled to share in the reward which the law allows for such meritorious service, and in proportion to the nature, duration, risk, and value of the service rendered. Applying these principles to the case under consideration, it is impossible to say that the schooner did not materially contribute to the saving of all the property which constitutes the subject of controversy at the present time. All the evidence shows that the bark, when she was relieved by the schooner, was in great peril. She was dis-masted and without any rudder, and was in fact lying without any anchor attached to her chain. Lying in that condition in a severe storm, she was relieved by the voluntary efforts of the officers and crew of the schooner, placed in a safer position, and intelligence transmitted to her owners. .These were valuable services, and fully entitled [322]*322those who performed them to a liberal compensation. Considering thqt the duration of the service did not much exceed twenty-four hours, and that the value of the schooner and her cargo was much less than that of either of the steamers, her share of the amount allowed as salvage ought to be less. It has already been determined that the property is liable to pay a salvage compensation to the amount of thirteen thousand dollars. Of that amount the libellants and petitioners in this case are entitled to the sum of three thousand three hundred dollars, to be apportioned one third to the owners of the vessel, and the remaining two thirds to the officers and crew.

[For other libels for salvage services rendered to the bark Island City, see Cases Nos. 55 and 3,*10.]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CLIFFORD, Circuit Justice.

Salvage is

the compensation allowed to' persons by whose assistance a ship or its cargo has been saved, in whole or in part, from impending peril on the sea, or in recovering such property from actual loss, as in cases of shipwreck, derelict, or recapture. When the property is nor saved, or if it perish, or, in case of capture, is not retaken, no such compensation can be allowed. A different principle, however, applies when the property is actually saved, and more than one set of salvors have contributed to the result. In such cases, all who have engaged in the enterprise, and have materially contributed to the saving of the property, are entitled to share in the reward which the law allows for such meritorious service, and in proportion to the nature, duration, risk, and value of the service rendered. Applying these principles to the case under consideration, it is impossible to say that the schooner did not materially contribute to the saving of all the property which constitutes the subject of controversy at the present time. All the evidence shows that the bark, when she was relieved by the schooner, was in great peril. She was dis-masted and without any rudder, and was in fact lying without any anchor attached to her chain. Lying in that condition in a severe storm, she was relieved by the voluntary efforts of the officers and crew of the schooner, placed in a safer position, and intelligence transmitted to her owners. .These were valuable services, and fully entitled [322]*322those who performed them to a liberal compensation. Considering thqt the duration of the service did not much exceed twenty-four hours, and that the value of the schooner and her cargo was much less than that of either of the steamers, her share of the amount allowed as salvage ought to be less. It has already been determined that the property is liable to pay a salvage compensation to the amount of thirteen thousand dollars. Of that amount the libellants and petitioners in this case are entitled to the sum of three thousand three hundred dollars, to be apportioned one third to the owners of the vessel, and the remaining two thirds to the officers and crew.

[For other libels for salvage services rendered to the bark Island City, see Cases Nos. 55 and 3,*10.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 F. Cas. 321, 1 Cliff. 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norris-v-the-island-city-circtdma-1859.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack