The Emily B. Souder

8 F. Cas. 657, 7 Ben. 550
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJanuary 15, 1875
DocketCase No. 4,455
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 8 F. Cas. 657 (The Emily B. Souder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Emily B. Souder, 8 F. Cas. 657, 7 Ben. 550 (S.D.N.Y. 1875).

Opinion

BDATCHFOED, District Judge.

TheNorth Atlantic Steamship Company, as owners of the steamship Monterey, and William G. Fur-ber, her master, for themselves and all others entitled, bring this libel against the steamship Emily B. Souder, to recover salvage, for services rendered by the Monterey to theSou-der, in towing her into the port of New Fork, on the 25th of August, 1865.

The libel alleges that the Monterey, while on a voyage from New Orleans to New York, discovered the Souder in a disabled condition, with signal flying, whereupon the master of the Monterey hauled up for and came alongside of the Souder, and found that her propeller was gone, and that she was in a totally disabled condition, and in peril, and unable to make a port, and short of provisions, and in shoal water; that the master of the Monterey was requested by the master of the Souder to take the Souder in tow for the port of New York; that the master of the Monterey thereupon took the Souder in tow, and made for the port of New York, where he arrived with the Souder on the next day; and that the libellants are entitled to a reasonable share of the Souder, for the salvage thereof. The prayer of the libel is for reasonable and proper salvage in proportion to the value of the Souder.

The answer admits that the propeller of the Souder was broken, and alleges that the Souder was tight, staunch and strong, and well and fully supplied with masts, sails, crew and provisions for her voyage, and had proceeded on said voyage, with such injured propeller, from a. place in South America to the place where she was spoken, and had passed within easy distance of many ports in the West Indies and the United States, and, having fully means and ability, had reached the place where the Monterey spoke her; that, in order to expedite the passage of the Souder to New York, the master of the Monterey was requested to tow her to New York, but she was in no peril, nor did the Monterey, or her master or crew, incur any peril in the performance of said service; that the Monterey towed the Souder to the port, of New York, but, at all times during the towage, the Souder was tight, staunch and strong, and well and fully provided with men and all necessaries, except her propeller, for her voyage; that the Monterey rendered service to the Souder in the towage of her, but only towage service, and when the Souder was on ground in which pilots from the port of New York are to be found, and within a very short distance of where tugs can easily be had, and in the most direct route of the whole steam marine of the United States; that, at the time of the service, the Souder was owned by, and in the possession of, persons other than the claimants; that, after the service was performed, the Souder arrived at the port of New York, and the claimants, having a mortgage and lien thereon, proceeded to duly foreclose said mortgage, and became the owners of the vessel, without notice of the libellants’ claim; and that thereafter she left the port of New York, and proceeded and completed various voyages, and any lien of the libellants, if the same ever existed, was lost

It will be useful, in the first place, to recur-to the voyage of the Souder prior to her being spoken by the Monterey. She had come from the Pacific ocean around Cape Horn. She was a screw steamer. She lost her-screw about 250 miles from Maranham, in Brazil. She went by means of her sails, to Maranham, and there a new screw was put in. She then started for New York, under steam. One blade of her new screw was broken off between 400 and 500 mil,es from St. Thomas, and the other blade was broken off within 40 or 50 miles of St. Thomas. She then went to St Thomas by means of her sails. She remained there 7 or 8 days, and took in a supply of provisions, but did not put in a new screw, and left St. Thomas for New York under sail alone, intending to go under sail to New York. She had been out 2S days, under sail alone, and had arrived within some 50 to 100 miles of Sandy Hook when she was fallen in with by the Monterey. She had plenty of provisions. Her hull was-tight. Her spars, rigging and sails were in good order. She was in good condition, as a-sailing vessel. As a steam vessel, she was deprived of her steam power. She had some passengers on board, all of whom had come from ports beyond St Thomas. She behaved well on her passage from St. Thomas. She was one year old. She was put upon a dry dock, after her arrival at New York, and it was found that nothing was the matter with her, except the loss of her screw, and the roughing up of the copper in two or three-places on her keel. She had spare sails on board. Her suit of sails was foresail, topsail, top-gallant sail, fore staysail, jib, fore spencer, mainsail, and gaff topsail.

The Monterey, going the same way with, the Souder, and bound to the same port, descried the Souder ahead and to the westward, showing what the master of the Monte-rey understood to be a signal. The Monte-rey bore down to the Souder.

There is very little conflict as to the circumstances under which the Monterey took hold to tow the Souder. The only point of difference among the witnesses is as to-whether the Souder first asked to be towed, or whether the Monterey first proposed to the Soiider to tow her. But all the witnesses, agree that, when the Monterey hailed the Souder and asked what was wanted, the reply was that the Souder wanted the Monte-rey to take off the Souder’s passengers. This was said in view of the fact that each vessel was informed of the destination of the other. Then, when the Monterey hesitated to take [659]*659the passengers, in view of where the Souder had come from, and the risk of quarantine, the next suggestion, by whichever it was made, was to tow the Souder to New York, the common destination of both vessels. If the flag set by the Souder was a signal, it is apparent it was a signal to have herself spoken, with a view to having her passengers taken off. Failing that, and clearly with a view on the part of the Souder solely to expediting her progress, her being towed was proposed by her or assented to by her. The master of the Monterey could have had, and did have, no idea that the Souder was, or thought she was, in distress or peril or apprehension, other than as such condition may have existed, in judgment of law, because, being a steam vessel, fitted to be propelled by both steam and sails, she had been deprived of her means of steam propulsion, leaving her means of sail propulsion unharmed. The evidence of the master of the Monterey, and of Craig, the chief engineer, shows that the former did not, before he reached the Souder, or at any time, have any idea that her flag was a signal of distress, or that she had summoned the Monte-rey for any other reason than because her passengers desired to reach New York sooner, or for any other purpose than to have such passengers taken to New York by the Monte-rey, over the short intervening distance. Furthermore, when towing was suggested, because the passengers could not be taken off, there were negotiations opened by the Souder with a view to fixing a price for the towing. The Monterey was a large steamer, not a tug in the business of towing, and the Souder naturally desired to know what the price for towing would be. The Souder wished to make a bargain for the towing. The Monterey refused to make a bargain. Devoe and Sinsabaugh, both of them, testify that the master of the Monterey, while declining, when asked, to name a price, said to the Souder that he would not charge more than was right.

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

Related

The Robert S. Besnard
144 F. 992 (D. South Carolina, 1906)
The Santurce
136 F. 682 (S.D. New York, 1905)
Brooks v. Steamer Adirondack
2 F. 387 (S.D. New York, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 F. Cas. 657, 7 Ben. 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-emily-b-souder-nysd-1875.