The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-08
AS TO SCALPED TICKETS.
Federal Judge Morrow Holds
That They Are Good on
the Sea.
The Decision Was in the Gleason Case
Against the Steamer William
cite Valley.

A decision that will greatly interest
transportation companies was handed
down by United States District Judge
Morrow yesterday, in the admiralty case
of Patrick G. Gleason against the Oregon
Pacific Railroad Company's steamer the
Willamette Valley. It's effect is to declare
a scalper's ticket good on salt water.
Gleason sued for $1,000 damages for being
refused accommodations on the steamer
on voyage from Yaquina Bay to this
City in August, 1893 He had boughta
first-class return ticket at Portland, Or,
good from Albany, Or, to San Francisco;
purchasing it of a scalper. The original
ticket had been issued to one Charles
Meyers at San Francisco. Gleason paid
81 sc for the portion of it which he got.
On the steamer he was allowed abin
accommodations the first day, but on the
second day he was elected from his state
room and then refused either cabin or
steerage accommodations, being COM
PEELED to sleep out on the forward deck for
the remainder OF the voyage and to go
without food
The first-class fare was So, and the sec
ond-class fare So. Gleason offered to COM
promise with the purser by putting up So
for steerage accommodations, but this
tender the purser arbitrarily spurned. In
consequence of having to sleep out in the
open air and being deprived of food, the
plaintiff showed that he had contracted
sickness, and that he was thereby inca
pacitated for any kind of labor for some
time, besides being disappointed in his
Midwinter Fair calculations on account of
this sickness.
The purser had S240 belonging to Glea-
son in his possession, and threatened to
withhold the $12 from this, but Gleason
successfully objected. Subsequently the
company's agents refused to turn over the
$40 to Gleason, and only after deal of
trouble did he succeed IN getting his
money returned to him.
Judge Morrow, in his opinion, holds
that the ticket entitled the holder to a
tirst-class passage with all the accommo-
datlons as 10 staterooms and meals it called
for; that there was nothing on its face in
the shape OF a contract to show that it was
not transferable; that the company had
received the equivalent for the ticket, and
was under obligation to give proper re-
turn, and that Gleason, being the posses
sor of it, was entitled to this return with
out question.
The defense made a very poor show
ing before the court, and contenting itself
with merely denying in toto all the plant
ifs allegations confined its attention
mostly to attacking the courts jurisdic-
ton, familiar method of fighting ad-
miralty cases involving an act part OF
which has been performed on land and
part on sea. The court demonstrates that
it had full and undivided jurisdiction, as
the act complained of by Gleason and
proved against the steamboat officers oc-
Cured at sea and therefore within mari
time jurisdiction, and that the sale and
purchase of the ticket. had no bearing
whatever upon the question of iurisdic,
ton or the merits of the controversy.
The amount claimed by Gleason. how
ever. was not awarded to him. In the
courts judgment $500 was proper COM
pensation, and this sum was decreed in
his favor.