The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-07-28

-.
Hoidsf &C. Aoti u 10 rec yer "a $40 or nij' slghe
GAYS q, Rluggs in virtue If cont act entered inso
b.t~esn plaintiff and eiend1,ts on she ZOh ~
January, 1850, for the charter ~ re ork - I'm
Rein man for a yoypga from New Yo,h 10 Sm
Franchise u defend .nts aging 10 furnish ii
car 30 Of merci andre, Gtn exception ~ desd
weight for bsliart AID aglPeng ~ pay 10 piaihLsu
for II ne ~ the said vessel during the v'yAge,
at tie ate OF sky cents Pr cnoie f,ot With lut
pIimaqe. It va. alsn agreed that tie jay days Tor
leading and disshargiug, co mmenSlng from .he
time Il Capiaiu reported h'Insef nady TO receive
or discharge cargo. should be one hundred run
ling bay oaya, and that for each anl every
dsy's oetepron, by default, the Diet. ndanti would
pay 10 tie pIairsin SO per day. The COMPLAINT
Showed q Ut on TIE 26th OF Mar b, 1850, the bark
sait a. 10 New Yo,k for San Franci-co, With this
cargo on boar d. and thar ono ab ut the Let OF De-
cemi er following, she arrived NJ her aestioa.ion,
AZ Der Ce tain then ready 20 deliver the cargo
hut the defendants neglected u tereWeor Aischargs
the fane spd did not pay the freight that
VAS due whereby the sad bark was detained hsty
e,gLt nys after ii time ollu@r: specified. Tue
paii,il now claimed demuTage tor these iity-
eieht dsys at the rnie u So per day making the sum
of stgf0 The defence set up that tic delay ia the
jeliv r. OF The caITn ocCasi3el h. sho poin,rs
ag,h ana that I! ~ lcon' ahis) wste nos liable,
In this ease Judsu Nccirul dehvered thg olcw
ing opinion
M, cor lssion ii this casa - that I'll defendants
being entitled ID DE ain the Ship a. SIN Francisco
for sixty.ex days, without paJ mont III tcnurfIge,
they en'tl to the benedt, during = gericd,
OF The chance OF hope thai the pansr u TIC gco's
would pay fright the. cfIl 81 in default thereof
that the roceeus OF the goods on sale would be
sufficient 10 pay The fall freight; uij therefore, ai
Tough n between tnaa,er AMI the owner og ihr
poous, lie for msr was nos Bound ., wall after n,
eXpp uti0b OF ,te ~, MY days mentioned III the bill
Of lad NJ yet as betweentLe plaiotif ana defend
ant such eale Mould have b.en VI The peril OF the
f'rn,r u il dlG not lrosuce ful freight. Thas IL
was duty of Il Defendants 10 here restored thu
ship to he plaintiff the end OF the period allowed
ioI j.niniy9pe aud deay caused by failure OF eon
seI,es 70 receive their goods ana ay freight, WIS
the itnt Of the Jsieldania as ohsr'e Although
the plan1f pied bills oi ladlng ~ pay ment for
freight OF charter money, il wa expressed 90 be
" / cut rejud.cc - tbs charter psry 20 thaS Ill
u e blgatiols Of the dsiendlnt' IT rels
az, 80 IL fa Tor r,eNnept that N tho extent OF
the bills ~ idmg they bac recelvcd ered, flc ,he
charter money, sish Ike sileet il charter uoaey
was paid in advance. Bdt Sbc defendants ara not
responsible for an unnecessary or unreasonable DC
10y atier tie rstervrd IeiiDd had eSpilei. "A he
I've tho ship owner and rhacterers,i was the
cu,y of ne oaser ~ agent for the piaUtif, 10 act
with just r,gad 10 the ribts aau liabilities CT the
aeen ants aud shat eq,nrcl him To sell the cargo
ED dis large IL Sonp - reasonably could be que
amer lie lelud allowed or deIuQfrage expired.
This he did, though b. bought TIN nim elf il that
pure asc liz IL 10 wise acted The agent for tie
claiie1elt IS such, and the eirjnmstau, that t,e
6e, nGaL Is lad ah interest ~ The recovery 0f full
fIeii ht MOI sufficient 80 wa rant hin Ia detsin
mr. tie slipnt lhtir expt nee ut . certain los. o.!
sIa per daycei family lot ~ q in wilton it Il
nor shown thar thsrs was the slightest reasoo TO
itifVe ,tetlt sale was Dot IN all respects dci ,u5
1T he ptir" bdtien ior The goods On tao ID of Fe.
brpaTy, vhea the nasler, ibstea Of Accepting the
bio, LeoalIe The purchaser himself. There is NJ
hing 10 The relation OF the oe'ylicnnrs 20 bin
which clothed b III with authority 20 make snch a
pun chase on th.ir account aud deta,n tho
ship Ut their expense ia the hope Of
dong better II deed, It IS qie apparent from she
whole ca that keeping the goods IN the hops Of
doing b ,ier me ant obtainipg nearer approxima-
IL 70 tie eight due - the plaintiff; athongt it
might re, ut. IL the deenaauts safe, ia the mean
tine, losers OF sI5 per day. fur the pantiG's bene
1T. 1hs master hao no such authority 20 speculate
tur the Iaii,tids bereht az the defendants cost.
Inc rules by which the case is decided is this
The Muster Was bound to sell the cargo within
reasonable time AFTER lie clay dogs" expired, and
any Gelsy boy Gnd that was not the fault OF the de-
PENDANTS, for VII Oh they eau be charged under the
chatter party. efter sale tile master had reason.
able time to deliver the lumber TO the purchaser aLd
any Celty ltyond such reasonable time vas not the
fault OF lie defendants. That whoever became tho
purchaser, such reasonable time shouid be allowed.
HE object being ~ discharge tue cargo aud restore
TIE nke VI tbe ship uhcncurlbessd J., her ow lcr
tie master The paiotn Was entitled Z, the sa n
pei iud to dtslha &C she lambeS h had been sold
70 Third person. That tus master having in fac
sod or llL up Ito property nc arct!on, upon due
notice ard on tue Sd OF February, and having be-
cone the puT,2ase on cha, aay, IL was MS doty. "
Iu chaser (1b,ther acting in hi osn fignt or as
agent o tie plaintiff, for pia ntiR am defendants
j0iltly) IL have Immediately discharged The carg,
although TWO VI the lay days remained u.c4pired
His ,cla'l d to the property had Taolg changed
a. even IL the interest OF the duieadsoss in the
height, and the ex,gency IN VII ch the MASTER foand
Lin self, be defined ~ giee hiu authority 10 n he
such pr chase for The bercht for the account #
lnlb parties (Which thigk il Old not) he lad 20
right ~ continue 40 uso the ship u s.orahDase, Of
u G deieLdalis sole sost while waiting Tor higher
prices. The Baiief ought theu, q have 0tscha ged
tie cargo nmt Glatey after tue 81 OF February, aud
20 have on,plsie5 itwitbp rcas nlos Lime. Up 70
the eyidel suhnt,ed dnd matter Of fact, mat
Unity tive days were sufficient for that purpose and
VAS Lot uDr asonab's. Though the witsassss diff
ter On ihe sui jset, think the basucs Of eviienc8 Is
that the hinc actually employed 10 dis hsrgin
Lot Unreasonable. Tbs iI,psance OF these thirty
Two days after tie 90 Of February, aud lesuc7iog
two days ipr lay 6.ys not then expi Cd, makes tne
Necessary ,.eiiJa of dedno' ion (antil tie tn OF
Mar y thirty Days, 4 which tho sum stipulated
should be allowed, amorntlns TO the sam OF.
Aud the Gum being due on that day, to
nit, 7ih of sar Ii, 1851, I aos interest
from that Gay, amounting 10. ......... $50 IS
And order Judgment FOR the pl4u,if Tor, s2,7s3 IL
With his costs Of suit.
I5as Hutchinson, yun., rs. Coraslius Yonley-
tih.-A mw srial grauiec on pay nlcnt W oosis on
lbs ground that the verdict, ia respect to she
amount OF damages, Ia contrary 10 law, given ~
iht jury tor their government and Is not supported
BY the tyiGtrcc-providcdi the plaintiff should elect
TO reduce the We dit TO si0o. This privilege the
plaintiff Ought to baye and he may have twenty
day IL dete. mine whether he viii take new trai,
OF make The abatement.
CANAL T0LLs.--The tolls received On the State
calais curing the third week in July, this year And
last. have be,n ~ follo1s:-
lsc3--Thiri week in July ,...... .sl02 ,es3 81
1851 60. do. ,.......,....... s6.259 90
n..,oaAn - ra.l a.. 80 -,