The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-05-23


MAY 22-Geo. Montein and Others, Chas. Kirkpa-
1ck-Ihe libel in this is fled to freight
and charges for the OF $50 barrels Of flour
canal to Albany and thence to the city Of New York
Perry Van Dyck Of oswego shipped the aou. to John
for freight through the Lake, which 1882 IL, and
cbsrgeabe with IS 100 per barrel freight from thence to
New York They wrote the face OF the bill Of lading
'Pay charges to Albany Canal Line on safe delivery
Franklin Austin Of oswego orwarders on the canal
n ao"d orosr for Albany Canal The ouT
hbellsns, of ''Ths Albany Canal Line, thus
paying the Oswego charges, sl32 l3 and the freight
transported It to New York, and delivered Il to the
line from Albany New York On inspection Of the
-four arrival and delivery ut New York. 1t
to
at Albany The respondent seeks to abate the amount
of charges and freight claimed BY the hbenants BY de-
Quoting this damage to the -four. There could be OBJ
lection this il the hbellants responsible for the
carnage claimed. The difficulty is, that it does not ap
pear from proofs in the case that they were answer
able either the Lake upon the Canal
under the other OF whose charge must have hap
pened The bellsnts had interest in connection
with either the Lake or Canal navigation. They simply
the fonr at Albany and upon their
line from that place to New York It true that Franklin
& Austin, the forwarders the canal at Oswego,
in the habit Of favorng the line Of the ibsants In
the transportation Of goods but they do not to
from any partnership arrane existing between
the parties The lbeants therefore being Iespon-
Court below Another ground 81 defence is THAT the
beants not entitled to recover the charges paid by
n BIT the
advance made, according to the established usage
Of the shipping of goods from the port OF 0sweso to New
York. and the contract Of shipment therefore, must be
taken with reference and In to- this
The right to the charges stood upon the same
footing the right to the freight from Albany to New
York 1t is objected that the District Court had
jurisdiction Of the case far as related to these
dpur m ha canal. for on
the Ontario Lake as well as upon the canal and as We
have seen according to the usage o. hs the
cerakipg to repay them their making the advance;
and they became thereby chargeabe upon the goods
shpped, the same as the freight from Albany to New
York. The contract, therefore, az respected tho
whole amount claimed by the bslants sas in the judg
the essential elements OF maritime ccatract The ship
the goods to which it related began and ended
noned therefore to think that this ground Of force is
not we'll taken and that the decree below right and
Steamboat Washingtom W. Steamboat Peter Crazy
This is libel fled by the Of the Peter Crary
against the Washington to recover damages for COLI
about o'clock the night of the 18th October 1853
The Peter Cary had out of the East river and
Of harrison etr.et The washington had left the dock
at the foot Of Jay street and was passing down the
river on her cosrte TO the East river The bows Of the
Sides rome SIX feet abaf her STEM nearly
on doing considerable damage. The real controversy
unt er the entitled pass inside the
other that next to the piers along the margin OF the
river 1t was calm bright night, and there must have
been gross negligence Encouragement side or
the other The Peter Crazy starts with the benefit of
the rule of navigation in her favor in the contro
versy, namely: that where two steamboats, are APP
preaching in opposite directions 1t Is the duty Of each
to port the helm and pass on the right, And having
10 make state Of that required the
Peter Crazy depart from that rule and go to the left
ttarboard eide. This defence is attempted, and 1t is
SOU tn a
Battery she off the river continued that
course within thort distance of the Warrington
denly took rank sheer across her track making col.
eon inevitable. this view could be maintained, the
defence would be complete But unfortunately for the
namely that the Peter Crazy coming up the river
not inside Of the of the Washington at least
tie range Of the PIERS she The collision took
place nesrly opposite Pier No. and according to the
testimony Of Burpham, man on the Telegraph, which
lay at Pier No. the Peter Crary was within twenty feet
ness and supports the evidences of Braser the Peter
Crsry who up from below just before the accident
ing in tow ards them, when length length and
BALI or The truth of the is is apparent from
the proofs the collision occasioned by the ncompe
tency Of Decker, the pilot Of the Washington He
totally unfit to have the charge management of
eel difficult navigation of this harbor among the
crowd of vessels thronging both He not
pilot by profession or occupation Admits he never un.
dertook to pilot steamboat except on board the Wash
ipgton and he there engaged as cooper, and not
% pilot Being thus insx experienced and unskled, the
presumptions all against the discreet and proper
of his vessel at and previous TO the acci
dent. Owners OF vessels not only responsible for
full complement Of and officers beard, and the
faithful discharge Of their duty but also that they
Of competent experiences and skin to perform 1t In
tegiby and ndersandngly under all circumstances,
and in all emergencies Anc, they will find their
interest we'll that Of the public promoted by
vigorous exacton of this OF responsibility. Any
additional sum paid for the service Of
competent and skfu men will be than refunded
by Indemnity sranst losses and damage occasioned by
af tba INF