The Sultan v. Three Thousand Empty Oil Barrels

E.D. Pennsylvania

The Sultan v. Three Thousand Empty Oil Barrels

15 F. 618, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21

DecidedJanuary 30, 1883

StatusPublished

This text of 15 F. 618 (The Sultan v. Three Thousand Empty Oil Barrels) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

The Sultan v. Three Thousand Empty Oil Barrels, 15 F. 618, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21 (E.D. Pa. 1883).

Pincite

Opinion

Butler, J.

The defense is not sustained. Upon arrival of the cargo at Philadelphia, where the charter required it brought, the respondent ordered it back to Chester, several miles below, claiming a right to do so under the contract. Conceding Chester to be without the limits of Philadelphia, the respondent sets up a custom, which he says requires it to be treated as withiu, where the particular commerce to which this contract relates is involved. Without entering upon a discussion of the subject it is sufficient to say that no such custom existed at the date of this contract,—whether one exists now need not be considered. What is necessary to the establishment of such a custom is well understood; the burden of proof is on the party setting it up. In the case under consideration the proof is insufficient. That many outward-bound vessels, under contract to carry oil from Philadelphia, had, within two or three months preceding the date of this charter, loaded at Chester, and inward-bound vessels loaded with oil, or oil casks, had unloaded there, is unimportant. In each instance Chester was directly on the way, and a request so to load or unload tended to the carrier’s relief, and would, therefore, be favorably received. , No instance is shown of a vessel carrying her cargo back to Chester, under such a contract. The opinions of witnesses cited are of no value.

The libel is sustained, and a decree will be entered accordingly.

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

Butler, J.

The defense is not sustained. Upon arrival of the cargo at Philadelphia, where the charter required it brought, the respondent ordered it back to Chester, several miles below, claiming a right to do so under the contract. Conceding Chester to be without the limits of Philadelphia, the respondent sets up a custom, which he says requires it to be treated as withiu, where the particular commerce to which this contract relates is involved. Without entering upon a discussion of the subject it is sufficient to say that no such custom existed at the date of this contract,—whether one exists now need not be considered. What is necessary to the establishment of such a custom is well understood; the burden of proof is on the party setting it up. In the case under consideration the proof is insufficient. That many outward-bound vessels, under contract to carry oil from Philadelphia, had, within two or three months preceding the date of this charter, loaded at Chester, and inward-bound vessels loaded with oil, or oil casks, had unloaded there, is unimportant. In each instance Chester was directly on the way, and a request so to load or unload tended to the carrier’s relief, and would, therefore, be favorably received. , No instance is shown of a vessel carrying her cargo back to Chester, under such a contract. The opinions of witnesses cited are of no value.

The libel is sustained, and a decree will be entered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 F. 618, 1883 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-sultan-v-three-thousand-empty-oil-barrels-paed-1883.