The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1873-09-03
s-4s'iou % 7soorsr. Tor Storqgs Of Goods IN
rae Government Harehou,e

t-act between the plaintiff and foreign
Steamship company Of which they are
agents. wherein il Is agreed that the Minis
terof the Interior shall set apart the Gov
e-nmeuf siorehouse and wharf for the ex-
elusive use OF the company also, that at Is
expressly understood that storage NAV be
charged for merchandise which shall not
be the subject OF steamship transporta-
non, no preference being given to particu-
lar Shipper jury was waived, and the
Cour1. Widemaun, 7, found that the de-
iendzuts had stored / 200 tons of sugar in
fhe house with the intention of forward
ING bv steamer, but which were shipped
BY packets, and gave Judgment for the
defendants
The Aaorney-General g. F. Judd for
Plaintiff
{. C. Harris for Defendants
oFD1oS oF THE MAJORITY OF TIE COURT
~ HAEIwELI, J.:
Il the contract does not exempt the
steamship company from paying storage
on goods ike these. of course It exempts
10 one therefrOm. The contract gives
the company the exclusive use of the
wharf and warehouse for steamship pur-
poses, with the sole object therein specified
OF encouraging steam navigation, and
not sailing vessels. Ii reserves the
1ghi 20 charge storage for merchan-
disc which shall not be the subject
OF steamship transportation" We think
Il Is evident that this right is reserved to
the Minister Of the Interior, and is not
granted 10 the company, since the ex-
pressed object Of the contract is to grant
privileges for steamship purposes, and
there Is nothing which leads US to infer
thar the company was to have free storage
OF packet goods with the right of charg-
Ing others therefor.
The only question then is, whether
goods sent on packets are exempt from
charges by reason Of the shippers inten-
uon 70 snip by steamer The words,
merchandise which shall not be the sub
jeci Of steamship transportation" may
mean, goods not susceptible of this mode
q conveyance, goods not intended to be |
Sc conveyed, and goods not conveyed by
steamers The first construction makes /
no goods liable and is at once dismissed. /
The second construction is open TO the OBJ |
ieciiOns that the shippers intention con-
corning the goods cannot be ascertained
until be ships them, and may often be
changed Goods for packet may be stor-
Cd for months, and finally shipped by
steamer. IF such goods were exempt from
charges during all OF such time, this would
open the warehouse free to all who at
any time intend to ship by steamer. On
the whole, We do not think this construc-
5iOn reasonably can be presumed to have
been contemplated by the parties. The
construction we place on the contract is,
that II gives the company free use of the
wharf ana stoDehouse for lis steamers and
Tor goods shipped thereon, and that it per-
1uiis the Minister Of the Interior to charge
Al persons, agents OF the company or
nol, for storage Of other goods. We
think this view is consistent with the main
obiec; expressed IN the contract
Tie EXCEPTIONS arc sustained and neac ,
f-s7F Is ordered
WmENANS, J., DISSENTING:
In this suit the Minister of Interior
claims from the defendants s655.66 under I
an implied contract for storage of goods 9
IN certain warehouse the property of the t
Government The defendants produced |
an express contract of the Minister of In $
terror with William H. Webb and Benia- $
MIN Holiday, partners under the style of r
the United States, New Zealand and /
Australian Mail Steamship Line" for S
whom they were acting as agents. The $
9Th Section Of this contract gives to the t
company the exclusive use of this ware d
house, and further provides that storage D
may be charged upon all merchandise
which Is not the subject of steamship t
transportation" S
With great Difference to the opinion ex- o
pressed by the majority of this Court, D
feel obliged to dissent from them. t,
must hold that, when the agents of S
tins steamship company received goods e
from A B. or C.,-their own goods, if you a
please,-fOr the purpose of forwarding b
them by the steamer. and placed them in CT
the said warehouse, the very placing OF Sc
these goods in the steamers warehouse a
made them the subject of steamship trans Il
poristioD as far as the owners were con- Sc
'erned- If Therefore anyone does become IL
liable it must be the company under the k
q
The Attorney-Gener raj for the Plaintiff Ii
'oniends that the wording in Section 4, to
merchandise which is not the subject of Of
steamship transportation is to be inter o1
lreted 70 mean "merchandise which does FL
lot 90 forward by steamer- The intan. ;s,