The sun., 1898-01-09
THE LAURADA ONCE MORE.
This Time Her Owners Must Pay
Big Wharfage.
TRIED TO REDUCE The RATE.
The Harlan & HOllingswOrth Com
pany Demanded sSS Per Day
and Got II.

In the United States Court yestertla,
the hearing OF evidence upon the claim
of the Harlan Il llollingsworth Com
pany for the allowance OF about $13O(
for the wharfage for the steamship
Laurada while in charge oi the United
States Marshall, was concluded.
The claim covers from April 9 to
December Is, 1897 and is based upon a
rate OF S. per day.
This rate was considered excessive by
the owners OF the steamship and they
made an effort to have it reduced. At
the conclusion of the argument, which
was conducted by H. II. Ward and
Andrew c. Gray for the Iaurada and
Levi c. Bird for the Harlan 4 Hollings-
worth Company, the court orally an
nounced its decision which was sub
stantially as follows:
MIR. Ward, representing the owners OF
the 9 'laurada' agreed in open court
that the money which was deposited in
the registry, in so far as it included the
amount now claimed by the Harlan
4 Hollingsworth Company, should be
treated as fund for the payment OF
whatever the court should determine to
be a reasonable claim for wharfage.
EIe admitted that there was liability
for wharfage but desired that the ques-
tion ba reserved whether S5 day, aside
from the charges for moving the Laurada
from time to time, was reasonable
wharfage charge.
A great deal of testimony which has
been adduced has only very remote
bearing upon the real question presented
to the court, such as testimony in rela-
ton to wharfage charges made in Phila-
deiphia or elsewhere. The question to
be determined is whether the wharfage
charge made by the Harlan and IIollns-
worth Company, for the use of their
wharves by the L;'lrada is reasonable in
amount. When first heard of the
charge OF 81 a day, it struck me as be-
ing highland in the absence OF testimony
and without experience in such matters,
it would still strike me in the same man
ncr. But this matter is to be decided,
not according to the impressions of the
Judge aside from the testimony, but in
connection with the evidence and the in
fcrenccs to be drawn from it. The
marshall was charged with the
custody of the Iaurada and with
the duty of taking proper care Of her.
For that purpose it was necessary that
hc should find Il place within the juris-
diction OF this court where the vessel
codlh be tied up to wharf or ether
wise secured. He took her to the yard Of
the Harlan 4 Ilollingsworh Company.
The president OF that company testified
that he considered the charge II reasorl-
able one Captain kcrshaw, who is a
nan OF considerable experience, testified
that he considered the charge very low.
Captain Hcald also testifcd that wharf.
age at the rat, Of S. per day for the
Lanr;lda would be reasonable. Mr.. Nc
Causiand in his testimony puts the
wharfage rate considerably above that
charged by the Harlan & ITol!ingsworth
Company. 1t cannot be assumed that
these gentlemen intended to do anything
else than state their convictions upon
the subject, ard they all are men who
are familiar with the premises Of that
The same considerations which
might apply toa rate OF wharfage at
the knickcrborkcr wliarvcs or those in
the Erie basin OF other places mentioned
in the test !nuny do not necessarily y apply
to wharfage at The premises OF the llar-
Ian a. llnilingsworth Company. But
aside from he testimony OF the wit
ncsscs on bchalf of that company ii ap-
pears that in one or two instances the
witnesses on behalf of the owners of the
Jaurada are of the opinion that under
he circumstances disclosed by the ev-
dencc, IL charge OF s. II day would not be
Mr.. Moore states that,
from his understanding OF the condition
Of things as stated by the counsel on
both sides, he would consider that
Il reasonable charge What is
there to offset this testimony? No wit
ness has been produced who has stated
hat in his judgment Il charge Of - II day
for tie wharfage OF the Laurada at that
place is unreasonable. A number OF wit
nesses having testified that the claim now
made is reasonable and it being neces-
.ary that the Marshal should keep the
vessel in this district, the burden OF
proof rested upon her owners to show
hat elsewhere within this district
she would have received proper wharf
,gc ut u lower rate. But not one witness
I;ls testified that he had sufficient
" facilities for the Laurada and
would have taken her ut il lower rate
han that charged or that he knew OF .
my others having such facilities which
would have taken her for less,
In the total absence of any affirmative
cstimony that the vessel could have
)cen cared for elsewhere within this dis I
rct than at the yard OF the Harlan 4
|lollingsworth Company for a less
.nount than has been charged by that
company, and in view OF the fact that
witness after witness has testified that
With respect to the use Of the wharves OF +
ha, company, the charge is reasonable,
here is nothing left for the court to do
Except to allow the bin, and it is accord
ngly allowed.