Evening journal., 1898-01-10
MUST PAY WHARFAGE,
So Judge Bradford Decides in
the Laurada Case.
H. & H. COMPANY GETS $l,a89.5O

NEW OWNERS OF THE FAMOUS
CRAFT MUST PAYTHATAA1oUNr
TO THE WILMINGTON FIRM
JUDGE BRADFORD'S OPINION.
The new owners of the notorious
steamer Laurada must pay TO the Har-
Ian and Hollipgsworth Company ST.
1880 wharfage, being the full amount
claimed in the United States Court of
this district.
This was decided early Saturday night /
by Judge Bradford, after having heard |
all evidence for the defence in the |
case brought by the Wilmington COM
pany against the celebrated steamer |
so often charged with filibustering.
The evidence for the Harlan and |
Hollingsworth Company was taken |
about ten days ago. and the hearing of |
evidence on the part of the owners |
| began Saturday afternoon at 3 O'Clock |
Lawyers II. II. Ward and Andrew G.. |
! Gray represented the Laurada, while |
Levi @. Bird prosecuted the case for
Harlan and Hollingsworth.
The defence claimed that the ship
building firm was charging too much (
wharfage. They did not dispute that
the Laurada was tied up at the Harlan
and Hollingsworth wharf from the
time she was attached by Marshal
Lannan in April last until December
Is, when she was released.
In order to get the steamer clear Of
Wilmington, the owners deposited
SO 900 in the United States Court of
| Admiralty to cover all charges that
might be sued upon, including the
wharfage
JUDGE BRADFORD'S OPINION.
In announcing his opinion orally,
Judge Bradford awarded the claim of
lplaintiffs substantially as follows:
"Mr. Ward, representing the own
ers of the Laurada, agreed in open
court that the money which was de-
posted in the registry, in 50 far as 1t
included the amount now claimed by
the Harlan and Hollingsworth Com
pany, should be treated as a fund for
the payment Of whatever the court
should determine to be a reasonable
claim for wharfage. He admitted that
there was a liability for wharfage but
desired that the question be reserved
! whether S. a day, aside from the
I charges for moving the Laurada from
3 time to time, was a reasonable wharf
{ age charge.
t "The question to be determined Is
j whether the wharfage charge made by
3 the Harlan and Hollingsworth Com
Q pany for use of their wharvea by tn,
; Laurada sreasonablein amount Whe1
g / first heard of the charge of 50 a day
t it struck me as being high, and in the
= absence of testimony and without ex
r perience in such matters, it would still
,, strike me in the same manner. Bu
C this matter is to be decided, not ac
o cOrding to the impressions Of th'
Judge aside from the testimony, but II
connection with the evidence and tn
/ inference to be drawn from it.
THE marshal was charged with tn
N custody of the Laurada and with tn
Is duty of taking proper care Of her. Fo
T. that purpose 1t was necessary that b
t should find a place within the juris
ID diction of this court where the vesse
S. could be tied up to a wharf or other
Se wise secured. He took her to the var
le Of the Harlan and Hollingswort
In Company.
81 "The president Of that company ties
In titles that he considered the charge
e. reasonable one. Captain Kershav
ar who is a man of considerable expert
ia ence, testified that he considered tn
al charge very low. Captain Heald ais
of 4 testified that wharfage at the rate {
1d So per day for the Laurada would
,d reasonable. Mr.. McCausland, in hi
nm testimony, puts the wharfage RAJ
av considerably above that charged b
ed the Harlan and Hollingsworth Con
he lpany.
es But aside from the testimony of I'll
N witnesses on behalf Of that oompan.
a it appears that in one or two instanc'
a the witnesses on behalf Of the ownei
m of the Laurada are of the opinion tn;
~ under the circumstances disclosed I
,r- the evidence a charge Of $5 a dl
at would not be unreasonable. NJ
- Moore states that. from his understan
81 ing of the condition Of things
% stated by the counsel on both sides,
ed would consider that amount a reasons
az bic charge.
- What is there to- offset this tesi
~ mOny? No witness has been pr
20 duced who has stated that in b
- Judgment a charge of 50 a day f
lo lo- the wharfage of the Laurada at tn
fr place is unreasonable. "A number
10 witnesses having testified that d
claim now made is reasonable, and
being necessary that the marshs
should keep the vessel in this. distri'
2 the burden of proof rested upon h
red owners to show that elsewhere with
or this district she could have receiv
%. proper wharfage at lower rate. B
nc not one witness has testified that
Dry has sufficient wharfage facilities I
i'll the Laurada and would have taken b
rth at a lower rate than that charged,
oes that he knew of any concern havi
cen such facilities which would ha
sen taken her for less.
"In the total absence Of any affirm
ed. tive testimony that the vessel COZ
ned have been cared for elsewhere with
m this district than at the yard Of [
ing Harlan & Hollingsworth Company I
g a a less amount than has been charg
Who by that company, and in view OF [
has fact that witness after witness has {,
but titled that with respect to the use
sws the wharves Of that company, [
'ay. charge is reasonable, there is nothi