Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-04-28
AN IMPORTANT DECISION IN
MARITIME LAW.
Opinion Rendered In Case In United
states District Court.

John Erskine, in the United States District
| Court, In a case involving some important
points, will be read with interest, and has
been very highly spoken of by the bar as an
able, concise and lucid exposition of the
law:
| United States District Court, Southern District
| of Georgia, at Savannah. April "a. 1882 In
Admiralty. James K. Clarke & Co, libel
/ lants vs. the Spanish steamer Vidal Sala,
/ Jose Ant de LuZarraga. master and bailee,
claimant Libel an rem for use of dry dock,
1 etc.
ERsKINE. J.
The libel is based upon a written contract
M ade in the city of Savannah between S. Fat
/ man, as agent OF the Spanish steamer Vidal
| Sala- then lying in the port of Charleston. S.
c.. disabled, having her propeller shaft broken,
and said James K Clarke & Co.. hbellants.
| The following is copy OF the contract:
| tSAvANNAH. December 81. 1881
| james K Clarke Dc Co.. CitU:
| DEAR STRs-In confirmation of our verbal
| agreement hereby repeat that it is mutually
understood and agreed between your good
| selves. as owners of the dry dock. and myself.
as agent of the Spanish steamer Vidal Sala that
| the said steamer will enter your dry dock upon
her arrival here, for the purpose of attending
| TO certain repairs to her machinery, and that
4 you viii have the dry.dock in readiness to re-
| ceve her on Tuesday next. the ID prox unless
| prevented by some unforeseen accidents or i'm
| pediments
Your charge for attending to and carving
| out o. docking with crews assistance raising
| steamer, clearing and keeping dock clear of
/ AT the shaft while the steamer is undergoing
| repairs. covering releasing rent and
| all other expenses which may be incurred
IN the carrying out ct such repairs. tn he
/ So. 500. say twenty five hundred dollars
| such sum to be paid to Won Qibellants) by
| rue (Fatmap), for account of whom it may con.
| Germ. upon the satisfactory termination or the
contract. 1t is understood that the dry dock and
its owners are not tn be held liable for any acct
| dent that may happen through the giving wav
| breaking. or other accidents that may orcur
| over which thew have no control It is further
understood and agreed that should the said
/ Vidal Sala be lost before entering your deck
this contract shall be considered null and void
| Phase acknowledge the above and ohlige dear
Received Just now following telegram:
| Weather permitting Vidal Sala leaves here
/ Monday arriving Tuesday, to enter dry dock,
| of which please take note.'"
AS the question now presented for determi-
nation arises on exceptions to the jurisdctionof
| the court because, SIS is alleged. this contract
| for the use rent of hbellants dry dock is not
| a contract maritime in its nature. and conse-
quentlY not cognizable in the admiralty, there
fore nothing more than an outline of
given The libel'ants say that they are en-
gagged in the business of docking vessels need
| ing repairs; that they are the owners of said
| dry dock: aud that it is located
| on HutchirSon's Island. opposite the
| city of Savannah. and within the ebb and
| flow of the tide; that, assisted by the crew of
| the said steamer Vidal Sala. they placed her in
| their dry dock snd fixed her there. prep aratory
| to the repairs which were to be made on her.
| and when made they removed her from the
dock: that their suit is founded upon a con-
| tract civil and maritime: that the stipulated
| sum of 50 500 is but Just and reasonable com
pensatiOn for their labor. skill and use of their
| dry dock. its apparatus and appliances: that
| having fully and faithfully performed the con
! tract, in all respects, according to its terms
| they demanded the g, 800. no part Of which has
| yet been paid; that the said dockage was fur
nisked on the credit OF the said foreign steamer
| her tackle, etc, and that the premises are
4 trne. and within the jurisdiction of this court
| Where a party seeks the aid of court of
4 admiralty to enforce a special contract. the
| entire contract must be essentially maritime in
| its qualities and attributes Il is not sufficient
| ground for admiralty jurisdiction that the CON
| tract involves some elements of e maritime
| Bature-the substance OF the whole contract
/ must be maritime. And maritime privilege or
| lien, impartiug. as If does. a taoit hypotheca-
ton of the subject Of it, is a strict right and
| cannot be extended by construction analogy
| or inference: 4 Mas, 800. 10 H. p.
| The learned proctor for the claimant argued
| to show that the contract, in its totality, did
not contain those ingredients which are neces-
/ Sary to constitute II maritime contract, and
| that none Of the acts done by the libellants
| we're m ritime service, and gave them no lien
on the vessel. In support of his views he cited
| and collated numerous cases. Those most
| prominently relied on are Bradley vs. Bollss
| Abb. Adm. R. 500. and Ransom VS.. Mayo 3
| Blatch, 20 In the first case it was ruled that
| work done upon vessel in a dry dock, in
! scrs ping the mud and barnacles from her bot
| tom preparatory to copperipg her. is not OF
! maritime cha racter, the court remarking
that the services we're mere shore work, and
| menial. requiring no mechanical skill, and did
not relate TO repairs, or any betterment attached
| TO her in promoting her safety or navigation;
| but were only preliminary TO the reparation
| intended 70 b. put upon her In the other case,
| libel in DerSOndBl was brought against a ship
| builder to recover for damage done 70 YES
| sell in consequence Of her having broken her
| fasteninss upon the ways. as she was being
| hauled uD to be repaired in the shipyard The
District Court dismissed the libel on the ground
/ that the duty of the respondent did not arise
| out of maritime contract. That the contract
was made upon land and related to service to
| be performed upon land, and that. therefore,
/ the case did not fall thin the admiralty ju-
| isdiction. On appeal to the Circuit Court, Mr..
| Justice Nelson concurred with the District
| Court.
Three years later the case of Wertman VS..
! Griffith Oh. 500 came, also an appeal before
| the same eminent Judge. 1t was a libel in
| perSOndn to recover compensation for services
| rendered by lbellsnt, W. o was the owner of a
ship yard, together with certain apparatus,
| consisting of a railway cradle. ETC.. used for
| hauling up vessels out of the water and
sustaining them while they were being r.
| paired. Objections were raised to the Jurisdic
| ton, upon the ground that the agreement for
| the service rendered must be regarded simply
as hiring OF the yard and apparatus. But
the court upheld the jurisdiction. and decided
L
| in the admiralty, although the repairs were
/ made by other parties. Said the court; The
/ service requires skill and experience in the
| business, and is essential TO the process of re-
/ pair do not go into the question whether
| this is a contract made or service rendered on
| land or on water IL undoubtedly partakes of
| both characters. But | am free to confess /
| have not much respect for this and other like
| distinctions that have sometimes been
resorted to FOR the purpose of ascer-
| tanning when the admiralty has and when
| it has not jurisdiction The nature and charac-
| ter Of the contract and the service have always
| appeared to me to be the sounder guide for
| determining the question. Although a dis
| tinction may be made between this case, in the
| aspect presented, and the case where the ship
| master is employed to make the repairs, l am
inclined to think that it is not substantial one,
and that to adopt it would be yielding to a re-
| hnement, which am always reluctant to in
| corporate into judicial proceedings. A dis
| tinction, to be practical should be one Of sub.
stance and one which strikes the common sense
| as founded IN reason and Justice" do not
see clearly how these cases are to be recon
| ced.
Savannah NEWS, November 18th, 1874, this court
held that wharfage is a maritime lien, and may
| be enforced in the admiralty, the court oh
| serving that 1.-The owner and master of the
| ship or the ship herself, or the proceeds arts
| ing from her sale, may be proceeded against in
| the admiralty to enforce the payment Of wharf
| age, dockage or pierage." Whatever doubt
| arose in regard to the correctness of this
/ ruling is now put at rest by the Supreme
| Court Of the United States in the case Ec Ddrte
| Easton, e5, u. s. S. R., 6S, where it is ex-
| pressly decided that claims for wharfage are
| cognizable IN the admiralty. And Mr.. Justice
| Clifford, in giving the opinion of the court
| said; These remarks are sufficient to show that
| wharves, piers, or landing places are well-nigh
as essential TO commerce as ships and vessels,
and are abundantly sufficient to demonstrate
| that the contract for wharfage is q maritime
contract for which. If the vessel or water craft
| is a foreign one or belongs to part of State
other than that where the wharf is situated a
/ maritime lien arises against the ship or vessel
| in favor of the proprietor OF the wharf. Water
crafts of all kinds necessarily lie at a wharf
when loading and unloading; and Mr.. Benedict
says that the pecuniary charge for
| the use Of the dock or wharf is called wharf
| age or dockRge. and that it is the subject of
admiralty Jurisdiction. Such erections
| (wharves) are indispeDsably necessary for the
safety and convenience OF commerce and navi-
CATION and those who take berth alongside of
them TO secure those objects derive great ben
eft from their use" If wharves are essential
| to commerce. navigation, and for the preser-
walton of ships and other vessels, then IL must
follow by parity of principle. that auays, ma
rine piers and docks, whether it be the com
sells are protected from the influence of the
tide by closing the dock Gates, not during the
flowing but during the ebbing Of the tide, thus
keeping the vessel afioat at low water, are
eoualIy Indispensable for like purposes and
uses and entitled to like maritime privileges or
liens.
Opposite the city of Savannah, forming the
left bank of the Savannah river, lies Hutchin-
son Island. and there the libellants alege their
| been presented to the court. shall endeavor
To erix- q stxa ~ n drzO craving dOck