The New York herald., 1869-10-28

C0radnche u.s. The coast WreckfJag Company OF Ne,0
York-Appeul from ne Circuit Court or the District
or California. libeants are the Coast Wreck
Ing Company, chartered by the Legislature OF New
York, with power to engage in general towing ana
salvage business to maintain the necessary vessels
and apparatus, and to make charges for salvage ana
enforce them in the same manner as private
parties; and in pursuance OF such authority
the company MAINTAINS constantly, In readl-
ness for emergencies, vessels and apparatus
specially adapted to the service, and keeps
as claimed. a stan OF officers aud men OF estaD
biished experience and Skill wreckers. divers
engineers. &c. In November, 1882 the ship Aquilla
owned by Donahuc, Ryon x Secor, Californian
nrm. having arrived in San Francisco from New
York laden with the materials and armament Of the
monitor Comanche, which was to be constructed
under contract with the government by that nrn,
sunk az her Inoorings IN port. lhe owners OF the
snip abandoned snip and cargo, the latter being but
partially Insured TO the agent oi the underwriters
at san Francisco. The agent did not accept, but
Jointly wilh the government superintendent Tor the
DuiIdlng OF the monitor took vigorous measures TO
save the properly, winch were continued for several
weeks ut cost TO the underwriters OF $38. .000 but
were finally given up. The Coast Wrecking Com
pany at New York at this Juncture agreed with the
Underwriters TO undertake the salvage OF the mate
riaS OF the monitor, ana despatched to san Fran
CISCO party or professionals, under command OF the
superintendent OF the company, which commenced
operations the latter part or January 1854, anu COM
peted the service IN about Six months. The original
value OF the properly saved the materials, dc. for
Tie m0nltor-wnS $4Ou, UOO SOC 700 Of which
insured The wreckng Company received sol. 900
for the service, hall cash and half In currency but
$l5,OOO represented by the Columbian Insurance
Company uhe company having laiiedl was not
pad. 10 recover the $4,000 unpaid by the the
10000 uninsured tins iibe was alcd In the District
Court below the decree was for the nbelants, and
they were awarded the sum OF $4,000 70. with inte-
rest. That decree was affirmed at the Crcuit and
the cause was then brought here, the appellants
claiming that the company cannot claim AZ salvor
a
service which can be claimed only by persons en-
gagged therein. II tile libcans can be . salvOr 1t
cannot claim az the solo savior, and payment to It
would be no protection to the claimants aaanst
ITS employees, each of whom can MAINTAIN
also commended that this Is not y case or
salvage SERVICE because contract was made
with the company to perform the service for sum
certain, and that even II 1t Is held to he case OF
salvage the amount allowed in this violates the
established principles Of law aud justice regulating
compensation lor salvage 1t Is also objected that
the decree is vague and uncertain. The company
| contend that the service was eminenty salvage
them the saving OF the cargo in peril board OF
The wrecked ship. The case presents all the lnGre
dents OF salvage service. the danger from which
tile property was rescued the value OF the property,
the risk incurred In the salvage tho value OF the
| property employed In the service, the skill aud
knowledge shown in rendering the SERVICE and the
| time AID labor expended. fubic policy requires
| this service to be compensated, not in pro-
to e the hazard d. Of s the I
view tO the encouragement Of such surviceS The
same policy demands that the means OF salvage
shall be the most efficient possible: hcuce the Court
| OF Admiralty has not hestated 10 accept all bene
| ncial mode aud Instruments OF salvage services
which from time to time are developed by the pro-
gresslve forces OF society. even though they may
depart from settled rule OF decision The old
that none can claim salvage VINO do not take part
In person in the service has been otcu disregarded
in important cases aud Is now rather the exception
than the rule, rs where ship sends part " her
crew Oh salvage service those who remain on
board are entitled to share III the salvage earned,
where salvage was allowed to the owner OF the
SHIP engaged In the service though he was absent
and ignorant OF the transaction This departure in
favor or the owner of the vessel was carried st
further In the OF steamers when they first
into use. The greatly Increased power ana efficiency
OF these vessels, then Il new force In the maritime
world. cordially welcomed in admiralty In the
first case that arose. John Il. Ward for the appel
ants; Senator Casscrly for tho Wrecking Company
Chief Justice Chase said, IN reply to the sugges-
ton Of Mr.. philips yesterday, that II was undoubt-
edly OF discretion when to move for writ
OF labeas corpus III the iergcr The point OF
Jurisdiction having been determined the Court
would hear motion for the writ whenever counsel
should see proper to make 1t.
The following named cases were argued:-Aven-
dano Brothers, plaintifs III error, vs.. Edward j.
l. GayIn to the Circuit Court for the Southern
District OF Louisiana, lnv0lvlng an advance OF
money to raise the crops OF 1855 The steamer
Carroll baltimore ana OHIO Railroad Company !.
claimant, Va. John Grecn-Appeal from the Circuit
Court for the District OF Maryland. This Is q case
| OF collision between the Carroll ana schooner Loon,
near Polnt-no-Point.