The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-01-08

TO leave the ship and bring their baggage ashore by
the assurance that steamer was waiting to convey
them TO New York. After carrying their chests, at
wharyes they found that the steamer had gone with.
out them II does not, indeed appear that any
steamer or other means OF conveyance had, at this
time, even been engaged for them by the representa-
to have the passengers carried forward had been
made within hour t10 10 the proprctors Of the
steamer by persons who disclaming everything Of lie.
gal obligation in the matter protested that they were
moved by charitable feelings Alone These PROPOSE
ti0ns moreover being altogether conditional upon fur
Their notice were never carried an engagement
The master protesting similar absence Of liability,
had sent after them supply Of food; but the steam
er having set out before its arrival 1t remained with
the libellants. Men, women aud children crowded
under an open shed on the pier, from before noon
until after the city lamps were lighted for the night
Thus destitute an appeal was made in their behalf
several citizens; and by the charity Of these, some
OF them, the passengers obtained food and lodging
The next day this libel WAS filed underline advice,
we have been given to understand, Of Mr. Consul
Mathew
| In considering the case threw out of my mind
a reference to the asserted charter party. It was
altogether intS altos, and formed part Of the
contract with the bellants. found, then, an agree.
ment made with them by person who announced
himself publicly as ship agent, and who was proved
to have been in communication with the master Of the
ship; this agreementwas made with apparent author
passengers were received on board and transported
to Philadelphia; and the certificate or ticket which
expressed is terms having passed into the masters
possession before the vessel left the harbor OF Cork
and retained by him ever since, without his contro
yertng disailrming IT in any respect or degree
had no difficulty upon this aspect Of the facts, IN con-
siderng these agreements made With his concur
renee and therefore, binding as the acts Of the mas
ter
held also. that this being q contract for trans
poItation 10 place beyond sea, and for diet curing
the voyage, Was a maritime contract, and that as
such, according 10 the repeated adjudications and
established practice of the courts in this and the adj
joiRing district, il VAS proper subject Of the Admit
rally jurisdiction (See the Aberfoyle and the Pac
&c, IN the Southern district OF New York; and the
Achssh, and Se Creole, and other cases in this
court The contract treated as an integral one;
the Endorsement having as much effect as the part
which was written or printed on the face; the par
ties the consideration, the object altogether one
throughout. And inasmuch as II not set out in
any part OF the instrument whether the distance be.
tween Philadelphia and New York was TO be ira
versed by the same ship or by another or by steamer
or on the open sea, or through canal, or even by
railroad, held it to be only the closing stage Of the
transportation contracted for. As such, it was bind.
ing the ship, not capable Of being divided up into
parcels involving distinct and limited obligations,
but as one single integral liability.
Had even the certificate or ticket set ont that the
vehicle was not TO continue the same, should have
likened the case, said to that of goods shipped to
OF nom Bremen, which are for convenience carried
by lighters between Bremen and Bremerhaven,
where, as we decided some months ago. the ship is
bound for the safety and despatch Of the subsidiary
conyeyance-to that Of passengers, familiar one
some years ago, who engaged for the voyage from
Europe to Wilmington, in Delaware, thence TO be
conveyed by steamer to Phadelphia-to the CON
tract for passage from England via Halifax TO New
York. when the line of steamers was interrupted at
the former portland to the great variety Of cases
familiar in the contracts Of commercial men, where
shipments are made for places not directly accessible
to the ordinary class OF seafarng vessels-n all Of
which supposed the ship to be bound for the deliv
cry of the goods at the place mentioned in the bill Of
ading. In word, asserted il to be the law, tina. a
contrac Illegal in its terms, and TO be performed
principally the ocean. could be enforced against
the ship, although the alleged breach Of its provi
sions occurred in port.
I think this may be fairly dsduced from the ad-
Indications have already referred TO in neghbor-
ing district. But unless ] am mistaken, II may be
traced back in principle to period earlier than the
Romah code. Il was the nocessitas narigdtvm,
the exigercies Of maritime commerce precludng
inquiry for the most part, into the ownership of the
vessel or the authority Of the master, which i'm
piled liability as under contract from the simple
Acceptance OF The goods on board fos carriage. Dig.
BIZ IA, I. l, De ekre totor aoiicne, 49, II is not
till within tie eighteenth century that the book.
speak OF bis LIABILITY as restricted in smount 70 tht
value Of the vessel and her freight; thor from some
q the aLaloeiss which are .a-eable bet Seen i, aud
me qualited h~nury Of owners for The unauthorized
OF Their servants do not doubt that the equity
which entered 80 largely into the administration OF
She Roman law must have intro iuced the lini.atien
practically, at an earlier Gay. Phe Oldest eompla-
tons tina. have come to us o The customs o. the sea-
regard the goods bound in the nature OF priv'.
isgnm for their freight, (Jodgecents Of 0leros,
Art. "a and require that the goods, though landed
st the port Of destination, shall be protected there at
the primary charge ofths ship until Their delivery TO
the owna-( Arts. Pardessuss nuuerat,n); and
Cleirac (res ct contuZes, % and 34,) afirms that
priv tgum is reciprocal between the sdip and Vie
cargo.
in favor Of this specific bsrality, as deducibe from
either the Dges, or the, perhaps, less ancient laws
OF the sea- applies with equal force and cearness to
all the obligations which were contracted in the case
their way in lighters from the ship, in the place Of
delivery, retained their rights against the remaining
interests for an average loss, ID. Blk. IA, l. Fr
De Jaetu and that goods when so transhipped still
remained at the risk of the vessel, ID Blk. 10, T. 2
Fr. ls, 81, Locat. Conduct) The articles have
referred to from the judgments Of 0eron, Carts. "a
and "a show continuing liability even after the
voyage has been terminated and the goods have been
landed. The import Of them both and OF many
other provisions that are found in the books, 10
merely tbs-that the shipper, when he places his
goods in vessel under contract for transportation,
is not to be embarrassed by questions Of ownership
or authority, or purposes OF which he knows nothing
He trusts what he sees If even the person who re-
ceives item on beard was not constituted by the
owner Of the ship; II even the masters orders from
his owners were that he should admit no substitute
III Ills plhSSs my, even IL llSy pIoulp'cu SpcCAhuy
the substitution Of that particular person who was
found acting board, the rights Of innocent ship
pers without notice were held not TO be affected.
De Exeret act. loo. citat. The reason OF il all is
found in the policy of facilitating maritime com.
merce, e. producenduIn ubilitatem nsvigantium.')
The reason Il en- applies TO all contracts Of trans
portaton and to all portions of such contracts,
whether made or sanctioned by the master, as it
might be reasonably supposed that he was authorized
TO enter into in the ships behalf no. merely to such
as we're to be executei on board the ships, for We
have that the Roman law extends the principle
TO the case OF goods in Lighter and Of goods landed
but not delivered; and did the laws OF Oleron.
The question narrows itself down to this: was the
particular contract, which claims incidental to it
hypotbecsticn Of the vessel, such as might be rea
soraole, regarded TO se without the authority OF the
party protesting to make IL
Now, as the hypotheca.ion ia the ordinary case OF
affreightment is the one most frequently and fami
liarly noticed in the books and as its incidents, 30
far as regards the ships, are the same with those OF
the passenger contract, will consider for the mo-
ment that the case before was one Of the ordinary
sort, for the carriage OF goods.
Suppose, then, contract, such az Is dis closed in
49, - h~fo. hut O. a.