The Neto

15 F. 819, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Florida
DecidedMarch 2, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 15 F. 819 (The Neto) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Neto, 15 F. 819, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31 (S.D. Fla. 1883).

Opinion

Locke, J.

This steam-ship laden with a valuable cargo of cotton, bound from Galveston to Liverpool, went ashore on Pulaski reef, a small rocky shoal, the most north-easterly of the Tortugas group, the evening of January 30th, and when boarded by the libelants, with two vessels and eighteen men, the next morning, was lying hard ashore on a rough and rocky bottom with the wind and sea pressing her further aground, with 16J feet of water under her bows, 17 under her stern, and from 12 to 14 feet amidship. A ridge of rock with from 12 to 14 feet, extended across at a short distance from her stern, and there was a shoal with 15 feet off her starboard quarter, and another, with about the same depth, a little forward, off the starboard bow. She was drawing before going ashore 18 feet 3 inches. She had struck the reef at about right angles swinging around, and must have surged backward and shoreward until she was in a very dangerous position. The weather was bad, with a strong breeze and high sea, and the libelants were unable to do anything the first day to assist her. She thumped somewhat heavily, and at times the sea broke over her. The next day, the wind and sea having somewhat abated, the libelants carried out a heavy anchor with chain, and an 11-inch hawser into deep water, took one load, 80 bales of cotton, about five miles to [820]*820Garden Key, then leaded both their vessels, discharging in all about 200 bales; but finding it necessary to lighten her still more, the master having consulted with libelants, they jettisoned between five and six hundred bales. By heaving constant strains on the windlass, about 3 o’clock the afternoon of the third day, at high tide, the steamer came ofK

The position of the vessel, the nature of the bottom where she lay, the force of the wind and sea while she wa,s aground, show her condition to have been one of considerable danger; Every moment she was resting on the bottom was one of unquestioned peril. The master was unable to do anything to relieve her from the bottom. He candidly admits that with the wind and sea as they were he could not carry an anchor with his boats, and every ton jettisoned until that had been done would have but served to drive the vessel further up into shoal water, while the shoals on the bow, quarter, and astern rendered it impossible to use her propeller with advantage. She was out of the way of passing steamers, with no assistance nearer than Key West, about 65 miles, and no means of communication.

The wind and sea increased the night and next day after she came off, and I' can but believe that had the salvors not rendered the 'aid at the time they did, she would, by another tide, have been so bilged and broken as to. have necessitated an entire discharge of cargo and probably a total loss of the vessel. They rendered the property an especially needed and valuable service. There are though some circumstances connected with it which must prevent the highest rate of salvage compensation, not from any fault of the salvors, but on account of their inability to save to the owners in an undamaged condition the entire property found in peril by them.

The fact that to save the ship it was necessary to jettison five hundred bales of cotton, although detracting nothing from the credit of the libelants for what they did, yet must reduce their compensation from what it might otherwise have been. Had there been a sufficient number of vessels present to save to the owners the amounts which must now be lost in the damage to jettisoned cotton, and salvage on it, providing it is all saved, an extraordinarily large salvage could have been more easily paid than can a comparatively small one under the present circumstances. I do not intend to imply that what was done was not for the best, and that the cotton should not have been jettisoned;’ on the contrary, I am satisfied that it was only by said jettison the rest was saved, but it was the' insufficient number of the salvors which necessitated it. Although the presence and aid of [821]*821tlie salvors I consider to have boon indispensable to the rescue of the property, and that they enabled the appliances of the steamer to be used with great advantage, yet the greater part of the actual labor performed was by means of the steam-power.

Under the circumstances what may be considered just and fair salvage or amount to be awarded ? It is unnecessary to review the principles of salvage and the grounds, reasons, or theory of its allowance or amount, as they have been so often stated and enlarged upon. Although all courts cite the same rules and decide upon the same principles, there is probably'no class of causes in which precedents are examined and compared with less satisfaction, than in those of salvage.

The learned judge in The Waterloo, Blatchf. & II. 124, remarks:

“ The want of fixed principles of compensation is the source of serious perplexity to courts and of uncertainty to parties in interest. * * * Probably, nowhere can judicial discretion bo less intelligently and satisfactorily exercised than in matters of salvage.”

Although each cause is disposed of upon its own particular merits, and is referred to the discretion of the court which acts in the matter, this discretion should, as far as possible, be guided and controlled by certain general considerations which have been found to enter into the estimates made by courts; and whenever several causes are found so nearly parallel in their circumstances ap to offer a line of precedents, or different circumstances can bo so explained as to show a similarity of reasoning and a common point of agreement as to amount, such should be considered in reaching a conclusion, although not, perhaps, necessarily accepted as binding.

Salvage services rendered in different localities are apt to be diverse in their nature—the character of the salvors engaged, the needs of the property assisted, or the probabilities of loss or the arrival of other help; and where causes can be selected from the same district it may not be amiss to accept suggestions and examples which may be drawn from them.

In this, as in all such cases, there seems to be a wide difference of opinion as to the value of the services rendered, or rather the amount that should be given for them; and it may be permissible in this connection to examine a few cases found in the records of this court, which, if not parallel in all respects, yet are sufficiently similar to assist somewhat in determining the question presented here.

In December, 1848, the steamer Anglo-Saxon was found badly ashore in an exposed condition near Cape Florida. The salvors with [822]*822three vessels and forty-three men went to her assistance- and by carrying out anchors, lightening her of cargo, and throwing overboard coal and wood, after three days hard labor got her afloat. Judge Marvin considered, that she was in great danger and the service especially valuable, and gave a salvage of 40 per cent, upon $30,000.

In April, 1867, the British steamer Gladiator went ashore on Florida reef within sight of Key West. Eight vessels with sixty-six men went to her assistance. The master declined aid until he had thrown overboard about 160 tons of coal and iron, when finding she did not float he accepted the services of the salvors; they carried out an anchor, and took out two loads of cargo when she came off without «damage-. There were no particular circumstances of peril. Judge Boynton awarded the salvors 9 per cent, on an estimated value of $160,000.

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

Related

Platoro Ltd. v. the Unidentified Remains of a Vessel
518 F. Supp. 816 (W.D. Texas, 1981)
The R. R. Rhodes v. Fay
82 F. 751 (Sixth Circuit, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 F. 819, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-neto-flsd-1883.