The J. C. Stevenson

17 F. 540, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maryland
DecidedJune 20, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 17 F. 540 (The J. C. Stevenson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The J. C. Stevenson, 17 F. 540, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114 (circtdmd 1883).

Opinion

Morris, J.

This libel is filed to recover damages for the loss of a. large number of cattle shipped by libelant on the steam-ship J. G. Stevenson, on November 13, 1879, to be carried to London, which were lost on the voyage, and for damages resulting from the delay of the steam-ship in arriving at the port of Baltimore to enter upon the-voyage. The'contract for the shipment of the cattle was as follows:

[541]*541September 22, 1879, Mr. Francis Bell, hereinafter called the shipper, hereby agrees to ship in the steam-ship J. C. Stevenson, to sail from Baltimore for London on the twelfth day of October or thereabouts, seven days’ notice having been previously given by the agents of the steam-sliip to the shipper, 380 cattle, subject to the following conditions:
(1) The steam-sliip is to carry the cattle stowed on her decks; (2) the steamship is to provide stalls or pens for .the cattle constructed upon the plan of those hitherto adopted, or such new plan as may be mutually approved; (3) the between-decks are to be satisfactorily ventilated; (4) a supply of fresh, cool water, equal to a maximum of eight gallons per head per diem is to be supplied by the steam-sliip; (5) the steam-ship is to provide free steerage passages to and from London to one attendant upon every 25 cattle, if required, and cabin passages to the foreman in charge; (G) the shipper is to provide feed, and all necessaries and utensils, such as buckets, pitchforks, ropes, etc.; (7) the ship is to carry all the feed that the aniihals consume on the passage freight free; (8) the shipper is to rope the animals before or after they are put on board; (9) the freight is payable upon said cattle, for transportation from'Baltimore to Deptford, at the rate of three pounds ten shillings per head each, at Baltimore or Deptford, at shipper’s option,but is to be collected upon the number shipped at Baltimore; (10) the steam-ship is warranted by the shipper free from responsibility for mortality or accident of any kind; and if any of them die, or are thrown ovejboard, or are washed overboard, or are lost in any manner whatsoever, the freight is nevertheless to be paid.
If the shipper desires that freight should be paid at Deptford he must, if required, deposit insurance policy with agent of vessel assigned to him, or, if insured in England, assign lien or policy to the amount that “may be incurred.”

The bill of lading, dated November 13,1879, contains all customary exceptions, and states the rate of freight to be £3 10s., “and all other conditions as per contract dated September 22, 1879.”

In the margin of the bill of lading is written: “Not responsible for mortality, nor for any accident of any nature or kind whatever; and if any of them die, or are thrown overboard, or are washed overboard, or are lost in any manner whatsoever, freight is nevertheless to be paid on them on arrival of vessel at London.” When the ship arrived in the port of London, after a long and tempestuous voyage, of the 380 head of cattle all had been lost but 21.

The respondents having shown that the steam-ship encountered a •storm of unusual severity, and having proved the character of the damage sustained by this and by other steam-ships carrying cattle which encountered the same hurricane, have shown enough, in my judgment, to put upon libelant the burden of proving that the losses sued for were occasioned by the want of due care in providing a proper ship, and suitable stalls and other fittings, for carrying the cattle. In judging of what was reasonable in this respect, we are to put ourselves in the situation of these parties who were contracting with respect to carrying cattle across the Atlantic in November, 1879. It was then a new and experimental venture, and the improved appliances now used in the business are greatly the result of the experience then being obtained. The original contract between the agents of the steam-ship and the libelant contained the following provisions with regard to the fittings for the cattle: ,

[542]*542“ The steam-ship is to provide stalls or pens for the cattle constructed upon the plan of those hitherto adopted, or such new plan as may be mutually approved.”

It is shown that the stalls on this voyage on which the loss occurred were the same which had been put upon the steam-ship at Montreal and used on the previous voyage. On that voyage she had successfully carried 350 head of cattle'and 400 sheep from Montreal to England, not losing a single head of cattle, and but a few of the sheep. Immediately after the voyage to England, on which she carried these cattle and sheep, the steam-ship came to Baltimore, bringing as cargo a small quantity of pig-iron. When the pig-iron was discharged, such of the stalls as had been taken down for that purpose were replaced, and all were put in repair by competent carpenters, experienced in putting up stalls for cattle on board ship. These fittings were then inspected and approved by a marine surveyor, who certified, after the cattle were on board, that the loading was completed properly, and the ship in good condition to proceed on her voyage. The stalls were seen by the libelant and his agents before and while the cattle were being put on board, and no complaint or suggestion was made with regard to them. When the ship arrived at the port of London the libelant paid the freight on all that were shipped, as had been agreed, and no complaint was ever made, or claim for damages, until the filing of this libel, 14 months after-wards. The respondents, in my judgment, have not only shown that the stalls and the ventilation were such as might reasonably have been expected to be sufficient, but have shown that they had been actually tested on the previous voyage and found sufficient.

It was urged on behalf of the libelant that the fact that 15 of the eattle between-decks died before there was any rough weather, and while the hatches were open, is conclusive that the ventilation could not have been sufficient. But it is shown that on the previous voyage 200 cattle were carried between-decks and not one died, although the weather experienced on that voyage required the hatches to be closed. In the face of this, it seems to me that it must be held that the owners of the steam-ship had every reason to believe that the ventilation was sufficient; and, indeed, it would appear that these 15 cattle must have died from some other cause than suffocation. As to the severity of the weather which the steam-ship encountered, and how long the cattle-stalls endured the violence of the storm before they were destroyed, I think that, probably, the most trustworthy testimony, after so long a lapse of time, is to be had from the ship’s log. It contains these entries:

Tuesday, November 18,1879. Towards midnight, íresh gale blowing, with heavy squalls and rain. I-Iands employed repairing cattle-stalls, and threw overboard three cattle that died in the hold. Midnight ends—fresh, increasing gale. Ship rolling heavily, and taking heavy water on deck.
[543]*543Wednesday, November 19, A. M. Increasing gale, with, hard rain-squalls; high sea getting up. At 2:30 a. ax., washed several cattle-stalls away on the after-deck. Some cattle rolling about the decks. Hove ship to, and slowed engines. All hands employed securing the loose cattle and repairing stalls. At 8 a. ar., set fore lower top-sail, and kept ship on her course. At 11 a. m., gale veered west with groat violence.

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

Related

The Saturnus
250 F. 407 (Second Circuit, 1918)
The Saturnus
242 F. 173 (S.D. New York, 1917)
The Hiram
101 F. 138 (S.D. Alabama, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 F. 540, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-j-c-stevenson-circtdmd-1883.