New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-08-17
THE COURTS.
LIABILITY OF THE OWNER OF A VESSEL WHEN
HIS Vessel Is DETAINED BY THE MILITARY
AUTHORITIES

LIABILITY OF TILE OWNER OF A VESSEL WHEN
His VESSEL Is DETAINED BY THE MILITARY
AUTHORITIES
Mr.. Justice Nelson has rendered an inn
porant decision in the case Of vessels nonfuldIment
OF party account Of her detention by the au
thorty OF officers of u. g. military station The action
was entitled Eberhard Fdber sgt The Schooner Orust
and the decision Is as follows:
The libel is filed in this 20 recover damages
charterparty by which the owner bound his vessel on
voyage from place or places designated In the state OF
cedar The charter. which is dated Dec H. 1865 recites
&" II Is understood that the vessel Is now loading for
thence direct 10 load on this charter" The
vessel reached Fort Jefferson az the Tortugas Jan
10 1865. aud discharged her cargo and was ready
to start for the port IN Florida as required by the
Fort and compelled TO 20 two voyages 10 Key West for
cargOcs OF coal for the alleged necessities IN the place
the allegation was that the officers aud soldiers OF
Fort depended upon coal eOudense water for the
There doubt but that the vessel was impressed by
the authorities for the voyages stated against the will
aud protest OF the aud that while thus engaged she
under the direction and control the public author
ties, and without any fault on his part Ihs detention
Occasioued the delay complained OF IN the libel rs in
fraction of the charterparty In Mitchell agt Harmony
u3 How y. lJ4), the CmetJustlee says: "IheIe are
without doubt, occasions In which private property
lawfully be taken possession OF or DESTROYED 20 pre-
enemy aud also where military officer charged
with a particular duty may impress private property
into the public service, or take Tor pubic use I'm
qucstOnaby," he further says ina such the Gov
eminent is bouud To make full compensation; butt or
ncer Is not HespdSScr He admits that IN all these
the danger must be immediate aud impending,
admit OF delay. In that case the Court held, upon
the testimony which was undsputed case Of danger or
necessity within tile rule OF law had been made out
aud sustained the Judgment for the plaintiff. He further
that m deciding upon the necessity, the state
acted must govern the decision; for, he must
sarily upon tho Information Of others, we'll
ton rs had right TO rely upon there is reasonable
ground for believing that the peril is immediate and men
upon IT, and tho discovery afterward That false
erroneous viii not make him lrespasser" Now within
VA ln ha
fore that the authorities at Fort Jefferson were jus
fled The vessel for the purpos and uses as
don of the fort remote from any supply of fresu water
for the garrison aud dependent upon the article OF coal
"a necessary material IN obtaining IT, Tie officers may
iGSment ON the facts as they appeared TO them they
Will sin be Justified. IL has been argued however
Stunning this be u constitutes defense against de-
lay Ia the voyage In this case, the carrier had
pressy agreed or coyenanted In the charerparty that
Ito would proceed directly from the Torugas, ON dls
charging his cargo, TO tie port or ports OF ading in
Florida aud having thus in terms, c0venanted TO pro
ton will him within the rule laid down in
Of eas@s "f otasF words Il party charge S
self with an obligation possible to be performed, lac
must make 70 good unless its performance Is rendered
impossible by the act Of God the law the other party
The law however, Is otherwise II the Obligation or duty
for the beant that by the clause in the charerparty
which have referred there Is an express and positive
from Tortugas ON unloading his outward cargo.
port or ports in Forda aud that the only excuse fog
delay Is TO found 10 the instances given in the OF
Paradlne agt Jayne We are OF opinion that this
narrow and strained construction of the word direct"
an the connection In which IL is found and fairer
and more natural interpretation is that 1t was used
TO express simply the course OF the voyage to be
nerforod by the vessel after arriving mt the TOrtugas
sho 80 direct that Is, abe was TO take direct
course thence the port or ports in Florida, without
deviation or unreasonable delay, aud giving TO the
phrase this Interpretations the duty to perform the
iant with diligence and In reasonable time, was an
BY positive contrast IL did not mean that the vessel
should depart iron inc Torlugas instantly, on lmmed
voyage provided for m the charters, proceeding IN
direct course To Ito place of ladmg Florida, The
degtce OF diligence and dispatch, according 10 this
Interpretation, IS question OF law. under the particular
circumstance Ut tho CASE It's insisted how.
ever that admitting tue officers AZ the fort were justified