#### PRINCE LINE, LTD., *v.*THE UNITED STATES

[No. B-270.

Decided February 16, 1926]

*On the Proofs*

*.Salvage service; statute of limitations.*— The period oí limitation provided in sec. 4 of the act of August 1, 1912, does not apply to a suit brought in the Court of Claims to recover for salvage service rendered a vessel operated in the public service by the U. S. Navy Department under a requisition charter, bareboat form, act of June 15, 1917.

*■Same; war risTc under charter party.*— Where under the terms of a charter party salvage is to be for owner’s benefit, “ ship to be deemed off pay during the time occupied in salvage operations,” war risk was assumed by the owner during the time so occupied and may be included in the value of the salvage service rendered.

*The Reporter's*statement of the case:

*Mr. John M. Woolsey*for the plaintiff.

*Mr. J. Frank Staley,*with whom was *Mr. Assistant Attor■ney General FLermam, J. Galloway,*for the defendant.

The court made special findings of fact, as follows:

I. At all times involved herein the plaintiff, Prince Line (Ltd.), was, and it still is, a corporation duly organized :and existing under and pursuant to the laws of the United .Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and was at the *633time of the salvage hereinafter described owner of the steamship *Gaelic Prince,*

II. The Government of Great Britain accords to the citizens of the United States the reciprocal right to prosecute claims against such Government in its courts.

III. Neither the plaintiff nor any of its officers, nor anyone in whose behalf this petition is filed, have in any way voluntarily aided, abetted, or given encouragement to rebellion against the Government of the United States.

IY. The plaintiff owns the claim herein sued on, and no transfer or assignment thereof, or any part thereof or of any interest therein, has been made. There are not any just credits nor offsets to this claim.

Y. The steamship *Gaelic Prince*is a British steel screw cargo vessel, built in 1918 and commissioned during April of that year. Her home port of registry is NeWcastle-on-Tyne. She is 449.5 feet long, 51.3 feet wide, and 29.4 feet deep; her gross tonnage is 6,506 and net tonnage 3,952; her dead-weight capacity is about 9,900 tons. Her value at the time of the salvage service hereinafter referred to was $1,089,000.

YI. The steamship *Gaelic Prince*at the time of the salvage was in the possession of and was being operated by her owner, the Prince Line (Ltd.), under the liner requisition scheme of the British Government and under the conditions of the British Admiralty charter party known as T-99. Her owner was by said charter under the duty of paying for all wages, provisions, and expenses in connection with the-master, officers, engineers, and crew; for all stores, ballast,, and for other expenses, as well as for the maintenance and insurance of the steamer.

Sections 18, 19, and 28 of charter party T-99 are as. follows:

“ 18. The Admiralty shall not be held liable if the steamer shall be lost, wrecked, driven on shore, injured, or rendered incapable of service by or in consequence of dangers of the-sea or tempest, collision, fire, accident, stress of weather, or any other cause arising as a sea risk.

“ 19. In the event of the steamer (not being at the time-a constructive total loss) being burnt, sunk, taken, or injured as a result of warlike operations in which Great Britain is-*634engaged, the Admiralty shall notwithstanding the provisions of clause 18, be liable to the owners, if the steamer is totally destroyed, for her ascertained value at the time of such destruction, or if injured, for the ascertained value of the injury due to warlike operations, provided that at the time of such destruction or injury the steamer was proceeding in execution of orders given or sanctioned by the Admiralty or any other Government authority of officer. * * * ”

“ 28. The steamer has liberty to assist vessels in distress, and to deviate for the purpose of saving life. All salvage to be for owner’s benefit, but ship to be deemed off pay during the time occupied in salvage operations, and cost of coal consumed in such operations and port charges and expenses to be for owner’s account.”

The steamship *Gaelic Prince*was off hire for five days between the 9th and 16th of August, 1918, on account of salvage services rendered to the steamship *Katrina Luchen-*bach, and the hire of the vessel for that period was paid by the owners to the British Admiralty in the sum of £841.19.0, together with £250.18.9 for coal consumed during the towing. The owner of the *Gaelic Prince*paid $1,190 for repairs at Baltimore. Of this amount of $1,190, two items totaling $400 were for repairs occasioned by other causes than that of the salvage.

VII. The *Katrina Luchenbach*is an American vessel of 11,555 tons dead-weight capacity. She is 446 feet long, 56.1 feet wide, and 27.8 feet deep. She was built in 1918 and commissioned in May of the same year. Her value at the time of the salvage services hereinafter described was $2,310,000. She was contracted for in 1916 and was requisitioned by the defendant when 75 per cent completed. When completed in May, 1918, she was sold to the Luckenbach Steamship Co. by the defendant. The total cost of the vessel to the Lucken-bach Co. was $1,535,000. This sum includes the amount paid by the company to the shipbuilder prior to the requisition of the Government.

VIII. At all times herein involved the steamship *Katrina Luchenbach*was in the possession and control of the United States of America under requisition order dated March 11, 1918, made pursuant to the urgent deficiency act of June 15, 1917, and the President’s Executive order of July 11, 1917, *635and was being operated in the public service by the United States Navy Department for account of the War Department in the transportation of Army supplies between ports of the United States and ports of Europe under a bareboat requisition charter, Form No. 2, dated March 14, 1918, made between Edgar F. Luckenbach and the United States of America, through the United States Shipping Board.

The said bareboat requisition charter contained the following clauses:

■ “ Second. The United States, at its sole expense, shall man, operate, victual, and supply the vessel.

“Third. The United States shall pay all port charges, pilotages, and all other costs and expenses incident to the use and operation of the vessel.

“Fourth. The United States shall assume war, marine, and all other risks of whatsoever nature or kind, including all risks of liability for damage occasioned to other vessels, persons, or property.

*i\i** # * *

“ Ninth. In case of actual or constructive loss as provided in clause ‘ tenth ’ due to the operation of a risk assumed by the United States, just compensation for such loss, with interest at 6 per centum per annum, commencing 30 days after the date of such loss, shall be paid by the United States in the District of Columbia, interest not to be paid, however, if the owner resorts to any court for the purpose of establishing the amount of the just compensation. The United States shall, however, have the option (to be exercised within 90 days after the date of such actual or constructive loss) of delivering to the owner within a year after such loss, in lieu of such payment, a vessel of substantially similar tonnage, type, class, and value, and of substantially no greater age (any deficiency in value to be paid for in cash), paying interest in the meanwhile from the date of loss at the rate of 6 per centum per annum on the value of the vessel.

“In case of damage (not constituting an actual or constructive loss) due to the operation of a risk assumed by the United States, the vessel shall, at the cost to the United States, be restored to the owner at the expiration of her service under the requisition, in the same or as good order and condition as that in which she was when delivered to the United States, ordinary wear and tear excepted, or just compensation for the damage, with interest at 6 per centum per annum, commencing 30 days after proof of such damage *636upon redelivery of the vessel, shall be paid by the United! States in the District of Columbia, interest not to be paid,., however, if the owner resorts to any court for the purpose' of establishing the amount of the just compensation.

“ Tenth. If the steamship sustains serious damage or other ■ injury to the extent that the United States; shall, without regard to any rule of law, consider her- a total loss, the ■ United States shall have the option (to be- exercised within-. 90 days thereafter) of declaring the steamship to be a total loss as of the date of the damage, and of taking'-; over or selling her, and the owner’s rights as to compensation shall be-the same as provided in clause ‘ ninth,’ interest to- commence • 30 days after the date of the damage.”

IX. The United States of America, through, the United; States Navy Department, took delivery of the- steamship ■ *Katrina LucJcenbach*under the requisition charter aforesaid! on May 18, 1918.

X. The *Katrina LucJcenbach*was operated! under the-requisition charter, bareboat form, as aforesaid by the United States Navy Department until November 25, 1919,. on which date the said vessel was returned to Luckenbachi Steamship Co. (Inc.), as owner.

XI. On July 31, 1918, the *Gaelic Prince*departed from, the port of Gibraltar in convoy with 18 other ships. One-day out from Gibraltar 15 of the ships were dispersed and two days later the *Textan*and *Santa Paula*left the convoy,, leaving the *Gaelic Prince*and the *Katrina LucJcenbacJi*only in the convoy. Prior to the sailing the master of the *Katrina LucJcenbacJi*had been appointed vice commodore of the fleet with instructions that after reaching meridian 28-they were to sail and keep together until they reached Hampton Roads. During such period the direction of the-two vessels was under the master of the *Katrina LucJcenbacJi*as vice commodore.

XII. On the afternoon of August 6, owing to boiler-trouble and also to the fact that water was found in the fuel oil, the speed of the *Katritia LucJcenbacJi*was reduced to-about 12 knots; and, at the request of the master of the-*Katrina*LucJcenbach, the *Gaelic Prince*also reduced speed.. The ships were then in about latitude 35° N., longitude 40°' 16' W.

*637XIII. Further difficulties developed in the *Katrina Luch- • enbacKs*boilers, as a result of which, on the early -morning • of August 7, the speed of the *Gaelic*Prince, at the request • of the master of the *Katrina Luchenbach,*was reduced to . about 7 knots per hour, which was about the speed the *Ka- . trina Luchenbach*was making.

XIY. The *Gaelic Prince*stood by the *Katrina Luchen-*bach, both vessels proceeding at reduced speed until the -.early morning of August 9, when the master of the *Katrina Luchenbach*notified the master of the *Gaelic Prince*that they were having increasing trouble with the ship’s boilers, : and, finally, about 6.19 a. m., the master of the *Katrina Luchenbach*requested the master of the *Gaelic Prince*to - take the *Katrina Luchenbach*in tow.

XV. The two vessels were then in about latitude 34° 47' . N., longitude 49° 54' W., and about 765 miles from Ber-vmuda, and 1,350 miles from Cape Henry.

XVI. The ships were made fast by the *Gaelic Prince*coming alongside and about 30 to 50 feet distant from the *Katrina Luchenbach*and throwing heaving lines aboard and later hauling over and connecting with the towing cables. This connection was made on the second attempt.

At the time both ships were light, just in ballast; there was little or no wind, but a high swell from the north-northeast. Similar weather continued until the afternoon of the 10th, when the wind increased to force 8, Beaufort scale; the wind was dead ahead and was described as a fresh head gale. A heavy sea was running, for a time causing the vessel to pitch. The wind moderated about noon of the 11th, and during the remainder of the trip the weather was fine and sea smooth.

XVII. At about 2.45 p. m. of August 9 the towage started and continued until about 6 p. m., August 16, 1918, when the vessels arrived at Hampton Loads. At all times the *Luchenbach*carried steam on one boiler sufficient for the *Luchenbach*auxiliary and sufficient to keep the vessel properly heading and to give her full use of her steering gear. From and after August 13 at 12.10 p. m., both of her engines were in service at *“*slow ahead.” At 7 p. m. *638on August 16 the vessels arrived at Cape Charles, Ya. At 7.25 the towing line was let go; at 7.55 the *Gaelic Prince*shoved off, and at 8.03 the *LucJcenbacfi*got under way under her own steam and proceeded to Newport News off the shipbuilding dock for anchorage. She had been towed a distance of about 1,356 miles.

XVIII. During this towage the vessels were at all times subjected to danger of attack by submarines, which were at that time operating in the Atlantic, and especially along the coast of the United States. This danger was further augmented by the fact that the vessels were unable, because ,of towage, to maneuver in zigzag courses, and further because of their reduced speed. The *Luchenbach*had a gun forward and aft, and the *Gaelic*Prince, a gun aft.

XIX.By reason of the services aforesaid, the *Gaelic Prince*incurred the following losses and expenses:

*í s. d.*

5 days delay in arrival at Hampton Roads_ 841 19 0

5 days wages- 116 19 0

Overtime earned by crew- 19 17 6

5 days provisions_ 90 0 0

165 tons of coal consumed in the salvage service and replaced at Baltimore- 250 18 9

Total _1,319 0 3

a total of $6,418.96.

XX. The *Gaelic Prince*consumed, lost, or destroyed the following gear and tackle in the performance of the salvage service, representing a total loss to the plaintiff of $700:

120 fathoms 5-inch wire.

17 fathoms 4%-inch wire.

24% gallons of engine oil.

1% gallons of cylinder oil.

4 gallons of lamp oil.

10 tons of fresh water.

XXI. In the course of the salvage service rendered as aforesaid, the *Gaelic Prince*sustained injury and damage to her afterdeck and bitts. A survey was held at Baltimore by a representative of Lloyd’s Register of Shipping for the purpose of ascertaining the nature and extent of the damage *639sustained as aforesaid. The customary and reasonable fee necessarily incurred and paid by plaintiff to Lloyd’s Register of Shipping in respect of this survey was $40.

Necessary repairs were effected at Baltimore by Baltimore Drydocks & Ship Building Co., costing $790, which sum was paid by the plaintiff to said company. In the course of the repairs, effected as aforesaid, it became necessary to employ a superintending engineer to attend and supervise the repairs. The reasonable fee of this superintending engineer was $150, which sum was paid to him by the plaintiff.

XXII. The par rate of exchange for English pounds is $4.8665.

XXIII. Application was made September 26, 1922, to the Chief of Naval Operations, Navy Department; to the Chief of Transportation, War Department; to the Secretary of the Treasury; and to the United States Shipping Board for compensation for the salvage services hereinbefore described, but neither the plaintiff nor anyone connected with the *Gaelic Prince*has received any remuneration whatever for or on account of the salvage services hereinbefore described.

XXIY. The officers and crew of the steamship *Gaelic*Prince, with their rank and pay, are as follows:

Wages per month

£ *s. a.*

C. B. Anderson, master_ 47 0 0

E. Hardcastle, chief officer- 26 0 0

G. Scott, second officer_20 10 0

S. Sinclair, third officer-17 0 0

R. Grant, chief engineer (plus £8 for long service)__ 27 0 0

G. Gray, second engineer_ 24 0 0

S. Sampson, third engineer_20 10 0

G. Sadler, fourth engineer_17 0 0

O. Jones, fifth engineer_16 0 0

G. Sturdy, carpenter_14 0 0

E. Spence, boatswain_:_13 0 0

R. Thomson, sailor_11 0 0

K. Bergman, sailor-11 10 0

T. Allyn, sailor-11 10 0

S. Crawley, sailor-11 10 0

J. Kavalia, sailor_ 11 10 0

J. Hay, sailor_11 10 0

*640£ *s. d.*

K. Christiansen, sailor_11 10 0

A. Albert, sailor_11 10 0

J. Kerris, sailor_11 10 0

W. J. Williams, sailor_11 10 0

F. Fowler, donkeyman_IS 0 0

W. Crawford, greaser_:_12 10 0

Ali Mokamed, greaser_12 10 0

C. Curran, greaser_12 10 0

0 0 W. Donovan, fireman_12

0 0 W. McKaig, fireman_12

0 0 G. Mahomed,' fireman_12

0 0 Mohomed Hasson, fireman_12

0 0 J. Rontley, fireman_12

0 0 C. Teed, fireman_12

0 0 C. Le Tissier, fireman_12

0 0 R. Jackson, fireman_12

0 0 C. Coplind, fireman_12

0 0 J. Welsh, fireman_12

0 0 J. O’Neill, fireman_12

0 0 Ahmed Mohamed, fireman_12

0 0 F. Tenow, fireman-12

0 0 H. Chambers, fireman_12

0 0 F. Targett, fireman_12

0 0 E. Short, chief steward_17

0 0 E. S. Golding, second steward_11

W. M. Williams, third steward_10 15 0

Kam Wing, mess room steward_10 10 0

0 0 G. Merritt, ship’s cook (plus £4 bonus)_16

10 0 J. Townsend, ship’s baker_ 7

J. Softy, A. B_1_11 10 0

A. D. Arthur, ordinary seaman_ 6 0 0

N. Hunter, ordinary seaman- 6 0 0

N. Collier, ordinary seaman_,_ 6 0 0 T. J. Ball, gunner_ M. Mclver, gunner_ H. C. Harris, gunner_ P. Annable, gunner_ J. Carnell, gunner_ .Paid by British Admiralty.

J. Williams, wireless operator_ L. L. Neaverson, wireless operator-jPaid by Marconi Co.

The court decided that plaintiff was entitled to recover $101,098.86, to be apportioned as follows: To the plaintiff as owner of the vessel, the *Gaelic*Prince, $31,000, one-third of the salvage award, and $8,098.96 as expenses incurred and *641damages caused the *Gaelic Prince*in the performance of the salvage service; and the balance, or $62,000, to be distributed by the plaintiff among the officers and crew of said vessel in proportion to the wages received by them as shown by the findings.

Booth, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The plaintiff corporation sues to recover for salvage service rendered the defendant as owner *fro hoc vice*of the steamship *Katrina Luchenbach.*There is no room for dispute as to the character or extent of the service performed. The salvor, the steamship *Gaelic*Prince, under circumstances to be hereafter narrated, on August 9, 1918, in mid-ocean, successfully accomplished towage connection with the *Katrina Luchenbach*and thereafter brought her safely into port, arriving on August 16, 1918. The disabled condition of the *Luchenbach*and the necessity for the service are conceded. When the petition in the case was filed October 20, 1922, obviously more than two years after the rendition of the service, the defendant interposed a motion to dismiss the same on the ground that section 4 of the act of August 1, 1912, 37 Stat. 242, was applicable as a two-year statute of limitations and precluded the proceedings, fortifying the argument by reference to a similar provision in section 5 of the suits in admiralty act of March 9, 1920, 41 Stat. 525. The court heard argument upon the issue and overruled the motion without prejudice to renew the contention on the merits of the case. The defendant now • vigorously presses the defense.

We adhere to our former opinion. The act of August 1, 1912, “An act to harmonize the national law of salvage,” etc., provides in terms as follows:

> “ *Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress*assembled, That the right to remuneration for assistance or salvage services shall not be affected by common ownership of the vessels rendering and receiving such assistance or salvage services.

> “ Seo. 2. That the master or person in charge of a vessel shall, so far as he can do so without serious danger to his *642own vessel, crew, or passengers, render assistance to every person who is found at sea in danger of being lost; and if he fails to do so, he shall, upon conviction, be liable to a penalty of not exceeding one thousand dollars or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or both.

> “ Sec. 3. That salvors of human life, who have taken part, in the services rendered on the occasion of the accident, giving rise to salvage, are entitled to a fair share of the remuneration awarded to the salvors of the vessel, her cargo, and accessories.

> “ Sec. 4. That a suit for the recovery of remuneration for rendering assistance or salvage services shall not be maintainable if brought later than two years from the date when such assistance or salvage was rendered, unless the court in which the suit is brought shall be satisfied that during such period there had not been any reasonable opportunity of arresting the assisted or salved vessel within the jurisdic7 tion of the court or within the territorial waters of the country in which the libelant resides or has his principal place of business.

> “ Sec. 5. That nothing in this act shall be construed as applying to ships of war or to Government ships appropriated exclusively to a public service.

> “ Sec. 6. That this act shall take effect and be in force on and after July first, nineteen hundred and twelve.”

The defendant applies the comprehensive exception in favor of the Government contained in section 5 of the act of 1912 as relating only to the provisions of the statute by which the crews of public vessels may be denied salvage remuneration for salvage services rendered other public vessels, and as an intended exemption in favor of the Government from the penal provisions of the law contained in section 2. We can not follow the contention. Section 5 uses the words “ nothing in this act,” language the ordinary meaning of which excludes the application of any part of the law to the Government. We may not indulge in seeming inequities respecting Government vessels in salvage cases where the statute itself is free from ambiguity. The reasons advanced for a contrary holding upon the part of the defendant rest upon inferences, and call for a construction of the law, which requires us to go outside the plain terms of the enactment and give effect to the sections of the act which favor the Government and withhold applicability where it *643is otherwise. In view of what was held by the Supreme Court in *The Western Maid,*257 U. S. 419, the *Katrina Luekenbaeh*was a Government vessel. In fact, in this very case Judge Knox of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York so held in a proceeding *in rem*against the *Luekenbaeh*commenced by the present plaintiff in 1919. In dismissing the libel the court followed the decision of the Supreme Court in *The Western Maid.*

We do not gather from defendant’s brief that the jurisdictional issue raised in the case of the *Venezuelan Meat Export Company,*58 C. Cls. 76, in this court under the suits in admiralty act of 1920 is renewed in the present case. If so, we think it sufficient to say that the adjudicated cases dispose of the same. *Banque-Russo, etc.,*v. *Emergency Fleet Corporation,*266 Fed. 897. Our jurisdiction attaches under section 145 of the Judicial Code, *United States*v. *Cornell Steamboat Co.,*202 U. S. 184.

The only remaining question for our decision is the amount of salvage to be awarded. The *Gaelic Prince*is a steel-screw cargo vessel built in 1918. Her dimensions and tonnage set forth in Finding V disclose a vessel of importance and great value — $1,089,000, her estimated worth, is conservative. The *Katrina Luekenbaeh*is accurately described in Finding VII. She was easily worth $2,310,000. The *Gaelic Prince*was at the time in the possession of and being operated by her owner, the plaintiff, under the line requisition scheme of the British Government, exemplified by the conditions of the British Admiralty Charter party known as T-99. On July 31, 1918 the *Gaelic Prince,*the *Katrina Luekenbaeh,*and 17 other vessels in convoy sailed from the port of Gibraltar. One day out from Gibraltar 15 of the ships were dispersed, and the third day found the *Gaelic Prince*and the *Katrina Luekenbaeh*in company alone. The *Gaelic Prince*was. bound for Baltimore, Md., and the *Luekenbaeh*for Newport News, Va., both ships being in ballast and under positive orders to remain together until Hampton Roads, Va., was; reached. On the afternoon of August 6, 1918, the *Lucken-baeh,*because of boiler and fuel trouble, found herself in. distress. She was compelled to reduce speed and signaled *644the *Gaelic Prince*to do likewise. The *GaeUc Prince*stood by. The difficulties of the *Luckenbach*increased until finally in the early morning of August 9 the *Luckenbach*signaled for help and requested the *Gaelic Prince*to take her in tow. At this time the two vessels were 1,350 miles from Cape Henry, the sea was comparatively calm, the weather good; the only real disturbance was a high swell from the north-northeast. The master of the *Gaelic Prince*skillfully and expeditiously arranged a towing rigging and without mishap came alongside the disabled vessel, made fast to her after one failure, and commenced the towage. Good weather attended the voyage except for about one day. On the afternoon of the 10th the vessels encountered a heavy head wind and choppy sea, causing the vessels to pitch. However, from about noon of the 11th the weather was good and the sea smooth. The *Luckenbach*was enabled on and after the 13th to employ two of her engines at “ slow ahead ” and at all times had sufficient steam for her auxiliaries and steering gear. She could not have maintained herself without the assistance of the *Gaelic*Prince, for her boilers were in a precarious condition and had given serious trouble on the outward voyage. On August 16, 1918, the vessels arrived at Hampton Roads at 8.03 p. m. The towage ceased, and the *Luckenbach*proceeded under her own steam to Newport News. She had been successfully towed for a distance of about 1,356 miles. The plaintiff asks $200,-000 for this service.

Conceding the importance and value of all that was done, and taking into consideration the exceptional and hazardous situation attending the salvage, we are nevertheless of the opinion that the award asked is excessive. The award to a salvor is manifestly dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Obviously it is not limited by any absolutely rigid rules of ascertainment applicable in every instance. The influencing factors forming the basis of the award are the dangers, the difficulties and the risk involved in the undertaking as well as the perilous situation of the salved vessel and the value of the *645same to the owner. This we think is the uniform holding of the admiralty courts. It is not primarily a question of compensation. On the contrary, it is an award and dependent in amount upon the relative situation of the parties at the time. Both vessels in this instance were of great monetary value. Large as it was it was comparatively insignificant when compared with the necessity of their preservation and the invaluable service they were engaged in during the war. The Allies needed both vessels and needed them badly. Both vessels were new and their tonnage capacity made them especially available for the service in which they were engaged. The *Gaelic Prince*under its charter party was free to assist vessels in distress, and at liberty to deviate from its ordered course to save life. During this service it was off hire, and in this case refunded to the British Government the full amount stipulated in the charter party for hire as well as cost of fuel consumed. She stood by and successfully rescued a Government vessel in mid-ocean at a time and in a place where the submarine menace of the German Government was acute, and in so doing manifestly risked not only the safety of the vessel but the lives of her crew as well. While the actual salvage service was itself not unusual, and attended inherently with no greater dangers than usually appertain to such a service, the conditions under which it was rendered were unusual and indispensably involved the assumption of a much greater and far more hazardous risk than in times of peace. For this unusual risk we believe the plaintiff entitled to an award in excess of what we would be constrained to allow in the absence of such surroundings. The defendant vigorously contests this position. In the brief the Government contends that war risk was borne by the British Government, and that even so, subsequent events clearly demonstrate an absence of submarine danger.

As to the first contention, the assertion of facts admits the right of the court to consider war risks in arriving at its award, but challenges the- right of the plaintiff to recover it under the charter party. The charter party T-99, *646as previously observed, granted permission to the owner to render salvage service at his own risk. The provision is set out in the fourth paragraph of Finding VI. Why was this provision made a part of the charter party if the owner was to reap the benefits of a salvage service and incur no risk other than the loss of hire and incidental expenses? It was a senseless stipulation if it declared the vessel “ off pay ” and charged the owner with the customary charges incident to the operation of a vessel, thereby suspending the charter party temporarily as to stipulated hire and operating expenses and leave to the charterer the assumption of the most imminent and costly risk to which the vessel was exposed. While engaged in actual war service redounding to the benefit of the charterer the latter logically assumed the risk incident thereto. If the crew saw fit to depart from that especial service and assume the hazards of a salvage service the charterer was willing it might do so and reap the possible rewards at his own risk and responsibility. The provision of the charter party could seemingly have no other application. The presence of submarines operating off the Atlantic coast in the waters through which these vessels sailed is so firmly established by the record that Finding XVIII is not susceptible to disproof.

The towage of a large vessel in a submarine area is a hazardous undertaking. It prevents maneuvering to escape in event of attack and is a salvage service warranting a most liberal award.

The plaintiff is entitled to an award of $98,000 in addition to the items of expense set forth in Findings XIX, XX, XXI, one-third of the award to go to the owner of the vessel and two-thirds to be distributed among the crew in proportion to the wages received, as appears from Finding XXIV. Judgment is awarded for the amounts as above. It is so ordered.

GRAham, *Judge;*Hat, *Judge;*Downey, *Judge;*and Campbell, *Ohief*Justice, concur.