The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-01-28
NILS H|NDSGAUl LOSES.
Judge Hanford Decides the Libel
of Schooner Foster.
CAPT. o. O. KILLMAN INVOLVED
Court Renders q Decision ON . Point
That Has No Parallel Here In the
History Of Marine Practfce-Hinds-
gacl Is a Seaman and sued for
Wages-Had Been Discharged He
cause of Row-Court's Remarks.


In dismissing the libel of Seaman Nils
e Hindsgaul against the schooner Ly-
man D. Foster for wages yesterday after
noon, Judge Hanford. OF the Federal court
rendered decision on point that has no
parallel case in the history az marine
practice.
Hindsgaui is a resident OF San Francisco
and claims 10 be an able seaman, qualified
II, 1876. he made arrangements with Capt.
ID. .. killman. Of the schooner Lyman d.
Foster 10 make a cruise with him as first
mate. HindsgauI went from San Francis
co 10 Port Hadlock, where the schooner
was anchored. loading lumber. and on De-
cem5er Il. 1896. was shipped under duly
signed articles. to go to Freemantle, West
Australia, and back to some port in the
United states, at a salary Of $50 q month.
III was stipulated that the cruise was not
10 exceed sixteen months. Passing over
the merits OF the case il can be stated posi-
lively that when the schooner arrived in
the bay al Freemantie Capt. killman and
Mate Hindssaul had row. Hindsgaul
claimed that the captain hit him with a
heavy marine glass. while the captain
Claimed that Hindsgaul struck him on the
eye, inficting an ugly cut, which was
sewed up by surgeon.
capt klilman made complaint to the
american consular agent The matter was
then taken before the resident British
magistrate. who issued a warrant for
hinusgaul's arrest on the charge of as
sdult Hindsgaul was tried, convicted and
sentenced 10 twelve weeks in Jail. The
consular agent demanded of Capt Kill
man the wages due Hindsgaul I'D to the
time he was convicted. Capt, Killman
paid the AMOUNT due and took the agents
receipt.
In this connection IL Is important to
note that although the law provides that
consular agent under certain conditions.
such as characterization, can discharge
a seaman. thus releasing the ship owners
and master from further OBLIGATIONS I'M
der the shipping contract it was not done
In this case
Schooner Sailed Away
Before Hindsgaul was released from
prison the schooner sailed on her return
trip After Hindsgaul was released he
returned TO the United States at an ex-
pense according 10 his claim, of se35. He
stated his case to A lawyer. who instituted
Noel against the schooner Foster 10 re-
cover the amount of the wages alleged To
De Que Hindsgaul on his uncomplefed con-
tract with the Foster. He also asked 10
be reimbursed for the money spent in re-
turning TO the United States Incidental
~, suit for $4,000 damages for personal
injuries was included In the suit. At the
In
represented the schooner Foster. had the
damage feature eliminated The case
then went ahead on the libel for wages
testimony was taken before a commits
sioner and yesterday the case came ND he
fore Judge Hanford In the Federal court
Attornee Carroll claimed for Hindsga,,l
that on the trip 10 Freemantle. he was
sEoJected 10 cruel treatment al the hands
or CAPT. kilman. II was claimed for
instance, that on December IS the can
tam beat Hindsgaul: January y he kicked
MN IN the groin. II was also assorted
that when Hindsgaul was sick no assist
ahee was rendered him. Then came the
trouble IN the bay at Freemantle 1t was
claimed that Capt. KilIman struck Kinds
gaui with seaglass. and then had him
thrown In jail for assault ito die"
1t was the contention of Il. L. Carroll
counsel for Hindsgaul, that under the
law and facts his client was entitled To
receive The money on the remainder of
his contract. as he was willing to labor
but had been thrown In Jail at the in
stance OF the captain. He also claimed
that II was equity that Hindsgaul should
be reimbursed for the money expended in
returning 10 the United States.
Gen Metcalfe presented the other side
OF the case. 1t was charged that Kinds
gaul was source of trouble frequently
during ;he voyage: that he went 10 siean
ON duty in time of danger: that he was
Negligent in tho discharge Of certain du-
ties. and that while he claimed to b. sick
he was given access to the hoat's rnetli-
cines. but Yet he was bic TO eat a hearty
meal. While sick he was not compelled
10 work. The trouble at FreemantIe was
explained as follows: While dropping the
anchor Cant. Klllman went 10 a place
where he could watch the chain run out
He saw q man standing in dangerous
position, but did not notice that Il was
Hindsgauh lie yelled to him 10 get out
Of the way Then came the trouble
Capt kiIiman said he struck Hindsgaul
In selt-defense. As a matter Of fact. the
evidence did not bring out clearly vino
was the aggVeSsor.
Not Eutiticd to Recover.
Gen. Meicllfe claimed that The action
Of the American consular agent In having
Hindsgaul arrested. and his subsequen.
conviction by a British magistrate. would
under the Federal statutes be equivalent
10 a discharge 81 the mate from tha ser
vice OF the schooner while no formal
discharge was made by the consular
agent said Mr. Metcalfe. yet his ac.
Of causing the arrest Of Hindsgaul and
tire Subsequent action sof The court in an
rouncing Hndsgauls conviction amount
ed in substance 10 a discharge"
When Capt. Killmaa paid 10 the con.
sular agent an wages due HiBdsEagl. and
did 50 in Hindsgaul's behalf. that was
really payment TO Hindsgaul. and DIS
charged the ship owners and master OF
all liabilities for unearned wages.
When .he Foster had discharged her
cargo and was ready TO sail Hindsgaui
Was 10 fsil ard had about SIX weeks 10