Polynesian., 1853-05-21

quently to repair at his own cost all damages
| accidentally done to her in the course of her
voyage. And if the captain being unable to
raise the means of reftting her, is COM
| PEELED to force loan from the owners OF
the goods by sale Of their property, the
ship owner alone should make good the loss
SO occasioned. The proportion of the loss
arising from the sale chargeable to repairs,
is Just so much added to the cost of those re-
pairs, and should be borne by the party liza
BILE to make them. In other words the loss
sustained by raising funds to make the re-
pairs, whether it be by sale of goods, ex-
change or on bottomry bond is only part
of the expense ofthose repairs. The rule OF
the English authorities on this subject, seems
to me to be the sound one, namely, l. "That
where goods are sold by the captain in order
to raise funds for repairing particular aver
age losses, or for defraying the ordinary ex-
penses of navigation, the loss arising from
their sale must be made good by the ship
owner alone, who must in such case, pay the
merchant the price which the goods would
have fetched at their place Of destination. de-
Quoting ;herefrom the freight which would
have been due for their conveyance. 2.
Where on the other hand, they are sold for
the purpose of defraying expenses or repair
ing losses, which are themselves of the ma
ture Of general average, the loss arising from
their sale gives a claim to general average
contribution" e Arnould on Ins. SOL
S93, 9O6, 909)
1t is claimed that the wages and provisions
of the crew from the time Of bearing up for
port until she was ready for sea again, should
be contributed for in general average; and
to this claim it is objected that if the wages
and provisions are proper subject for gen.
eral average contribution, they cannot be al
lowed during the detention Of the vessel
while undergoing repairs.
1t has been distinctly settled in England
that the expense of wages and provisions du-
ring delay, and going out Of the course of
the voyage to re6t, are not to be contributed
doctrine. which, on this point, has been fully
adopted here, classes such expenses among
general average losses, and settles the ques-
ton conclusively in favor of the claim. Abb
bott on shipping 49S, note, Phillips on Ins.
ll9, 100. Padelford VS. Boardman Mass
54S. Potter VS. Ocean Ins. Co., Sumner
81. 2 Arnould on Ins. Oil note l. Peters
VS. Warren Ins. Co. 3 Sumner 4OO.)
There is also claim filed for the captain s
wages and board which is objected to, on the
ground that, even allowing the wages and
provisions of the crew to be a proper subject
of contribution in general average, yet the
captain not being one Of the crew, his wages
and provisions are not within the rule. Up
on what principle the wages and board Of the
captain while the vessel is undergoing repairs
are to be excluded from general average
while the wages and provisions of the crew are
allowed, is not easy for me to perceive. The
services Of the captain are ofthe highest i'm
portance to all concerned, and upon principle |
think they should be contributed for as much
as the wages and provisions ofthe crew. In the
case of the American bark Globe, settled in
the court of Oahu in 1874; the charge for
services of the captain was allowed as an
item Of general average, and it was stated as
one of the rules governing that court in ad-
justing cases Of general average, that when
a vessel puts into port in distress, the mas
ter's board while the vessel is undergoing re-
pairs should be the subject Of general aver
age In the case of Potter vs. Ocean lns
Co., 3 Sumner 81, the wages and provisions
of the captain were allowed in general aver
age and also in the case Of Bixby vs. Frank
lin ms Co., Sumner 46 in note, and
know of no American decision to the con-
trary.