The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-09-18

?. CHuRcBNAN AND OTHERS vs. THE STEAMSHIP CITY
OF Nsw YORK-ArPEAL IN ADMIRALTY.

?. CHuRcBNAS AND OTHERS vs. THE STEAMSHIP CITY
OF NEW Y0RK-ArPEAL IN ADMIRALTY.
NELSON, Circuit Judgs-l. am strongly inclined 70
think that Haght Palmer the chaterers in this case
are to be deemed for the voyage; and the
purser Of the ship who was their agent was compsten
to bind the ship for the necessary supply Of coal At Por
to Beo and this although the person furnishing the
supplies knew Of the charter and that sscordicg 70 its
terms the charers bound to furnish coal for the
voyage Upon any other rule the master agent Of
vessel in foreign port in distress, would oftensmes
find himself unable TO procure the necessares essential
for his relief the voyage might become broken up for
want OF supplies tie ship to decay in port for want
Of proper repairs. I have found whore this
kDowedge the part of the furnishing the sup
plies, making repairs under ccumstAnces stated,
rity for the payment The right TO charge the
general owner personally is very different question
g But admitting that the charterers not owners
for the voyage but hers of the Of the vessel to
passengers and freight and that the genenl wners
had the sion ana nayg OF It, the charter party
resting 10 covenant and in letting Of the ship in
my u gmsnt the result must be the same. The proof
shows that the ship was out OF coal and went to Porto
and without which she could not have performed her
voyage Under such circumstances, canpot Doubt but
thai the cosl procured By the mlster would bssome
charge upon tie vessel according TO the settled mari
time law II Il true, the claimants seek TO exonerAte
her. upon evidence the purser who the agent Of
the chareIes that ne contracted supply Of COAL
and not tue master On the contrary, that the master
epudiated the purchase for himself and the ship The
MASTER has lot been examine3 the Defence in this
spsct allowed to upon the evidence Of the purer
He ced by the captain Of the GOAL ship who
made the sale; and according to whose evidence all
given to that the vessel would be
looked to- in Of failure 70 pay the draft drawn upon
HAight 4 Palmer. he puIser contrasicts himself
psrs of his evidence in other respects II is
not calculated TO inspire confidence lie tesiies ia the
fret place that Captain Thompson did not tell him at
the time be consented to take the Draft that he SHOULD
lock tn the vessel ii Il not paid but after Is
Obliged 10 admit that he old. He also testes that he
had sufficient funds hand TO pay for the COAL and for
other expenses age but after Yards sho that
Thompson entitled 10 the most credit and according to
he regarded participating In the purchase He
present wLen The contract made for the coal and
THE draft for the balance of the purchase
accepted and according 10 the evidence Of Captain
Thompson feaRretd to accsot II only on the condition the
rbip should be liable il the draft not paid At maturity
II IL true the master sleLt but the inference ma
turay drawn under the circumstances, must have beo
that be scquietced In the condition.
8. The whole Of tie proofs show that the sale Was
maze and draft taken expectation the part Of Capt
Thompeon that the ship would be liable for the balance
Of the coal unpaid IL the draft not mot ~ maturity
This conr4dicted by the evidence OF the
ser That evidence seeks repe the effect b. establish
ing the fact that the master gave notice NJ the time that
the vessel would be considered as liable On this
point in The absence Of evidence Of the master
weight fer The reasons already stated, according to
which the credit given 10 the vessel must, there
the decree below and decree that the YES
sci ia charge for the balance due for the coal with
reference to the clerk If necessary to ascertain the
| amount.