The Blackwall

77 U.S. 1, 19 L. Ed. 870, 10 Wall. 1, 1869 U.S. LEXIS 1037
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedApril 30, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by225 cases

This text of 77 U.S. 1 (The Blackwall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Blackwall, 77 U.S. 1, 19 L. Ed. 870, 10 Wall. 1, 1869 U.S. LEXIS 1037 (1870).

Opinion

Mr. Justice CLIFFORD

delivered the opinion of the court.

Salvage is claimed by the libellants, as owners of the steamtug Goliah, for services renderd by the steamtug, her master and crew, on the twenty-fourth of August, 1867, in saving the ship Blackwall and her cargo, then lying at anchor in the harbor of San Francisco. They allege that the ship was on fire; that the cargo as well as the ship was in great danger, and that both would have been destroyed had it not been for the exertions of the steamtug, her master and crew; that the master and crew went with the steamtug to the *9 assistance of the ship, and that they succeeded, after great trouble and great risk to the tug, in quelling and subduing the flames, and that they then towed the ship to a place of safety.

Information that the ship was on fire was communicated to the master of the steamtug by one of the deck-hands of the tug, and he went immediately to the slip where she was lying, in order to give directions to the men on board to kindle up the fires and put on steam; but he found, on arriving there, that one of the harbor police had been there before him, and that he had made a similar request, and that the firemen of the tug had started the fires for the purpose of putting on steam.

Two persons ivere sent to the ship, which was lying at anchor in the harbor, some seven or eight hundred yards from the wharves, to see if there was any chance to extinguish the flames, and they reported that the ship might be saved. She was an English ship of twelve hundred tons burden, and she was ready to sail for her port of destination with a cargo consisting of thirtyleight thousand five hundred and one sacks of wheat, valued at sixty-thousand dollars, and she was lying at anchor where the water was eight or ten fathoms in depth. They discovered the fire at four o’clock in the morning, and at six o’clock, or a quarter past that hour, they proceeded to the ship in. the steamtug, having previously taken on board two steam fire-engines, each weighing five tons, with the engineer and several firemen belonging to each engine, and the chief engineer of the fire department, making twenty persons, including the master .and cre'w of the steamtug. Both engines were well supplied with hose, and they had on board a considerable supply of fresh water. When the steamtug reached the ship those on board had become discouraged, and there were ten or twelve boats around the ship taking off the crew, but the boats were utterly unable to do anything towards extinguishing the fire.

Commanded, as all on board the steamtug were, by her master, their first act, after running alongside, was to fasten a stern-line to the main-chains of the ship, so as to lie across *10 the tide on the port side of the ship. At that time'the tire seemed to be between decks, but the houses of the ship on deck were also on fire. Great apprehension was felt lest the foremast should fall, as it was on fire between decks, and the flames had extended to the deck and twenty feet up the mast. Her bulwarks were also on fife, and the master of the tug deemed it necessary to cut away the port-rigging attached to that mast to prevent it from falling across the steamtug. They put the-engines in operation .promptly, putting' four streams of water on to the ship, and by'those means extinguished the fire in an hour, the firemen working the engines under the command of their respective engineers. Some of the persons present advised the master of the steamtug to unshackle and slip the anchor; but he insisted that it could be saved, aiid it was hoisted on board the ship by the windlass.

Promptness and efficiency characterized the conduct of all engaged in performing the service throughout the transaction, and the steamtug, as soon as the fire was subdued and extinguished, took the ship in' tow and proceeded with her to the adjacent flats, and left her there in safety in charge of her master and crow.

I. Certain preliminary objections are made by the appellants to the maintenance of the suit, which will be first con-, sidered. before proceeding to examine the merits. Those objections are as follows: (1.) That the master, having no interest in the claim, is improperly joined in the suit. (2.) That the libellants have no just claim to compensation, as the salvage seiwice was performed by the members of the fire department. (3.) That the service having been performed by the-members of the fire department, in pursuance of a public duty, they are not entitled to auy compensation afs salvage. (4.) That the decree, inasmuch as it is joint-, in favor of the master as well as the owners of the steamtug, is erroneous, because the master makes no claim to recover any compensation for his services.

1. Salvage suits are frequently promoted by the master *11 alone, in behalf of himself and the owners and crew, or in behalf of the owners and crew, or the owners alone, without making any claim in his own behalf, and the practice has never led to any practical difficulty, as the whole subject, in case of controversy, is within the control of the court. Much examination was given to the-question as to proper parties, in a salvage suit decided at the last term, in á case where the owners of the steamer rendering the service were an incorporated company, and by reference to the authorities cited in the opinion of the court in that case it will be found that the suit is frequently promoted in the name of the master, or of the company and master, as in this case. *

Many other cases of like import might be referred to, but it must suffice to say that the court is of the opinion that the shit is wmll brought.

2. Service undoubtedly was performed by the members of the fire department; but it is a mistake to suppose that service was not also performed by the steamtug, as it is clear that without the aid of the. steamtug and the services of her master and crew the members of the fire company would never have been able to reach the ship with their engines and necessary apparatus, or to have subdued the flames and extinguished the fire. Useful services of any kind rendered to a vessel or her cargo, exposed to any impending danger and imminent peril of loss or damage, may entitle those who render such services to salvage reward.

Persons assisting to extinguish a fire on board a ship, or assisting to tow a ship from a dock where she is in imminent danger of catching fire, are as much entitled to salvage Compensation as persons who render assistance to prevent a ship from being wrecked, or in securing a wreck, or protecting the cargo of a stranded vessel.

*12 Salvage is the compensation allowed to persons by whose assistance a ship or her 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. Success is essential to the claim; as if the property is not saved, or if it perish, or in ease of capture if it is not retaken, no compensation can be allowed.

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

Related

Arnaud Girard v. M/Y Quality Time
596 F. App'x 846 (Eleventh Circuit, 2015)
Francisco Martin v. One Bronze Rod
581 F. App'x 744 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
Northeast Research, LLC v. One Shipwrecked Vessel
790 F. Supp. 2d 56 (W.D. New York, 2011)
Dorothy J. v. City of New York
749 F. Supp. 2d 50 (E.D. New York, 2010)
R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. the Wrecked & Abandoned Vessel
742 F. Supp. 2d 784 (E.D. Virginia, 2010)
Kiesgen v. St. Clair Marine Salvage, Inc.
724 F. Supp. 2d 721 (E.D. Michigan, 2010)
Smith v. the Abandoned Vessel
610 F. Supp. 2d 739 (S.D. Texas, 2009)
Joseph v. J.P. Yachts, LLC
436 F. Supp. 2d 254 (D. Massachusetts, 2006)
Atlantis Marine Towing, Inc. v. the M/V Elizabeth
346 F. Supp. 2d 1266 (S.D. Florida, 2004)
Phillips v. Sea Tow/Sea Spill of Savannah
578 S.E.2d 846 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2003)
Margate Shipping Co. v. M/V JA Orgeron
143 F.3d 976 (Third Circuit, 1998)
Sands v. One Unnamed 23' Seacraft, Pleasure Vessel
959 F. Supp. 1488 (M.D. Florida, 1997)
Fine v. Rockwood
895 F. Supp. 306 (S.D. Florida, 1995)
Ocean Services Towing and Salvage, Inc. v. Brown
810 F. Supp. 1258 (S.D. Florida, 1993)
Trico Marine Operators, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Co.
809 F. Supp. 440 (E.D. Louisiana, 1992)
Flagship Marine Services, Inc. v. Belcher Towing Co.
761 F. Supp. 792 (S.D. Florida, 1991)
Brown v. Johansen
881 F.2d 107 (Fourth Circuit, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
77 U.S. 1, 19 L. Ed. 870, 10 Wall. 1, 1869 U.S. LEXIS 1037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-blackwall-scotus-1870.