The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-03-07

p pro hs Cannot With the own
casualty Tor whom L may concern. II dlsas.
tor happens, and 1t Ia subsequently established
hata total loss. either constructvely or actual
come the acts Of the underwriters Lawrence
w. New bedford Insurance Company, lat OF
Story page All.
Tho question before me. 40 far M technical
parties are concerned. Is n question between
the salvors and tho master. In such contest
The court L. bound to regard the in,eres Of III
some Ia interest may not DO before The court as
parties. The salvore insist upon sale: the
the property. iias tbs rght to tako tho property
and convey 1t to It's port Of destination. and
thns. earn tho freight FIR tho owners OF tho ship
owners OF the cHrgo for II It b. total loss II is
q matter Of indifference to thom., He asks In
Tho interest Of the shipown.r rs that he DO nj
yey It to liverpool although it Is establshed
by the evidence that the net proceeds Of the
property as thus treated and disposed Of would
be less than tho proceeds which would be rohl-
II seems to me that 1t la The duty Of tho court
10 tail an w"m tho has T.
ter cannot ask, whore vovHge has boon inter
rupted by calamity which resulted in the sal
vnge service. and where the property has boon
placed In tho custody Of u court q admiralty, to
bond. not In tho interest OF the owners OF tho
cargo merely Tint he may complo 9 the yoyinge
this argument. would be to exercise it's diRcre-
ton for one Of the part les In interest against
another. think there is no precedent or , rsa.
party must he left whore tho disnstor has placed
him. Tho court. "a between tho parties In in.
tarest. ought to interfere for neither. but should
leave ths owner Of tho cargo. tho insurer and
tho owners ofthe freight whore the disaster has
left them.
institution OF salvage suit, and tho liabilities
and the rights Of the underwriters, both OF
cargo and freight The rights q tho shlpper1 Of
ship and the freight. should, IN my opinion,
whore 'hey contlei BE- allowed by tho court to
he asserted and settled upon Just tho state
Of facts which nxised when The property came
into tho custody Of tho court upon tho libel for
ealvage
civil salvage Il claim Of freight wns, rejected on
tho ground that, M against tho anlvors. ihore
wns no pretext for claiming freight; and 1t WINS
sned their rights by libel or petition Of libel
against the portion Of the proceeds Of tho cargo
thnt WAS ndjudged to the shippers: a forfior'.
heard In their demand that the cargo may tbs
, relsased upon bond, merely in ordor that
The discretion of tho COURTS dscr ton to
DO exercised In the interest OF all parties who
nre concerned. 1t should follow the rnlo which
Is prescribed for the muster whore there has
been no resort to tho court, pref"rring the in
tsrset Of neither. but to make that disposition
of tho properly which prudent man, would
make who was the owner OF both shit and cargo.
without Insurance on either
CIR on Vs. Royal, Exc. Assurance CO.. 9Th of
T.nnton. phga g.
Marvin on Wreck md Salvage. phrhgraph4
In the case Of the Gov. Morton tho showing
was that tho property would be benefited by
bonding.
Tho salvors have consentod TINT tho vessel
aud tho cotton In the Levee Press. which 10
cnnable Of being sent forward, may be bond d.
Lot. therefore. tho application to bond the
ship and the cotton in the Leveo Press. which
WINS uninjured. be granted, and tho balance II
the cargo bs sold; and let VIM. g. Black be ap-
pointed to nppra'se tho separate lots Of cotton,
both that which is to be delivered on bail and
thnt which Ii to be sold.