The Owego
Opinion
Consolidated under the above title are a number of original libels and intervening libels in rem against the steamship Owego by various maritime lien claimants for seamen’s wages, stevedore’s compensation, claims for repairs, compensation for materials furnished, and it also appears that prior to the institution of the causes herein a mortgage lien existed to secure unpaid purchase price of the ship. The vessel has been sold, and the proceeds paid into the registry of the court. The testimony has been taken covering the seamen’s wages and amounts unpaid for services rendered upon the vessel.
That the collision occurred through the negligent act of the seamen charged with the navigation of the ship; “the sin of the crew being attributed to the innocent instrument,” the ship, and that the crew should share in the fault imputed to the offending ship, because they were the instruments through which the ship was navigated. “We think it opposed to every principle of natural justice to permit one or more of an offending crew to hold priority over a claim for damages caused, directly or indirectly, by their act, and in the course of a common employment. That would be to reward guilt at the expense of innocence, and to tender premium to negligence. Careful navigation is essential to safety. It should be the constant care of courts of admiralty that no license * * * to conduct prejudicial to life or property; that no safeguard to prudent navigation be removed; that no immunity be offered to negligent conduct.” o
This sentiment is reflected in the other decisions. Justice Gray, in The John G. Stevens, supra, 170 U. S. at page 119, 18 Sup. Ct. at page 547 (42 L. Ed. 969), says that:
“The case at bar, however, presents no question of the comparative rank of seamen’s wages, which may depend upon peculiar considerations, and which, according to the favorite saying of Lord Stowell and of Mr. Justice Story, are sacred liens, and, as long as a plank of the ship remains, the sailor is entitled, against all other persons, to the proceeds as a security for his wages.”
[507]*507And he cites Sheppard v. Taylor, 30 U. S. (5 Pet.) 675, 710 (8 L.Ed. 269), where, in speaking of seamen’s wages, Justice Story said:
“This lien is so sacred and indelible that it has, on more than one occasion, been expressly said that it adheres to the last plank of the ship.”
And he also cites Pitman v. Hooper, 19 Fed. Cas. 730, No. 11,185, in which it is held that the claim for seamen’s wages takes precedence over all claims. I have merely referred to these cases to show the sacredness with which the wage claims of seamen are held by admiralty courts; seamen being considered wards of the court, and not because the cases have any special application to this issue. Recovery is sought by the objecting libelant because of the “unseaworthy condition of the steamship Owego, and because of negligence and faulty loading, care, custody, stowage, and discharge of the Steamship. & # * ”
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
292 F. 505 (The Owego) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.