The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-04-19
SURVIVORS MUST PROVE NEGLECT
 TO GET DAMAGES
Even if This is Shown Titanic'S Owners Will Not be
 Heavily Liable
Lifeboats and Freight and Pas. senger Receipts About All
 That Can be Taken

ScNSCT NCCClplS AUOul All
 That Can be Taken
 New York, April 19.-Out of the loss of the Titanic the legal questions which arise promise to occupy the courts for years. The only other maritime disaster of recent times in any way comparable, the sinking of La Bourgogne, offers ample precedent for speculation as to the outcome of the litigation which is sure to ensue
 The circumstances from a legal point of view are not dissimiIar Both vessels flew the flag of foreign country, and in consequence claims for loss became adjustable under the laws of their respective countries Furthermore both were total losses a disaster which is rare enough at sea to offer few legal precedents as to the extent of the carriers liability
 Claims against the owners of the Titanic would come under the rulings Of English courts. Upon this point all the admiralty lawyers who have been consulted are agreed. Not only because the contracts of passage, as represented by the tickets, on the Ti- tanic were English contracts. but in
 
 courts have always maintained that the law to be applied in such cases is the law of the country whose flag the vessel flew. For example under this ruling actions in the case of La Bourgogne were determined according to the laws of France
 To constitute grounds for suit the nearest relatives of those lost upon the Titanic must make it appear that death was caused by negligence on the part of the ships officers or crew. Proof that she was proceeding at an immoderate speed under conditions unfavorable to navigation would fur nish such grounds. This fact was es- tablished to the satisfaction of the court which reviewed the collision of the Cromartyshire and La Bourgogne and the main point at issue was the extent of liability.
 A we'll known firm of lawyers with an admiralty practice when question: ed about the extent of liability yester- day. had this to say:
 'TO prevent the incurring by steam ship companies of ruinous damages from loss at sea their liability has been definitely fixed by statute and is left of the vessel and all moneys derived from the transportation of freight Or passengers on the voyage in which she meets with accident. It is customary for the owners to turn this fund over to to trustee named are paid pro rata. In the case of La Bourgogne, which came up to the Su- preme court nearly ten years after her destruction, her owners, claimed that the amount of this fund-abo out $1OO-was represented by the lifeboats vived the vessel. Their contention that the mail subsidy paid by the Government could not be included in the fund was sustained. But the court held that the passage and freight money for the last voyage limitation of liability was to be secured. Exactly this same ruling will apply with respect to the Titan ic." . In other words, as Moses H. H. Grossman of House, Grossman & Vor- haus, who were counsel for the sur vivors of the General Slocum, put it: ''The vessel that is guilty of the act causing damage may be sold and in the proceeds all the claimants may share"
 However he added, 'the case of the Titanic presents many new fea- lures which will undoubtedly develop new points of law in their solution Few cases are in the records of ves- sels which have been entirely lost through purely outside causes.
 'I am further of the opinion that any insurance which the owners might have on the vessel cannot be reached by claimants as their contract of in- surance is a collateral undertaking and its benefit would not insure in favor of the claimants"
 Admiralty lawyers say that the courts have in several cases decided that the insurance money cannot be Co., los, of fn or nQ F. go and that the contract of insurance is for the benefit of the owner alone and not for the shippers who were able to protect their own shipments by insurance.
 On the cargo which the Titanic car ried no claim for damages Will , ne according to the same authority. The Harter act of 1893 provides that ii it can be proved that at the outset ! of a voyage a vessel is seaworthy we'll found, properly manned and la den. she may not be made liable fo1 the welfare of her freight thereafter or even if damage results from error or carelessness That the Titanic complied with these conditions when she started on her maiden voyage seems to be true. As the Harter act does not apply to baggage or passen- gers the owners are liable thereon But even here the amount is limited on the tickets of voyagers and again by the size of the fund set aside for the payment of losses by the trustee Personal jewelry and the like may or may not be considered as baggage ac- cording to the disposition made o1 them by the passenger upon coming on board.
 The question of salvage is of un- usual interest, although it is not like ly that the Cunard company will take the matter into court on the score of the services rendered by the Car pathia. It is thought that the com pany will probably settle with the White Star line according to mutual agreement as to the service per- formed From legal point of view, however, a claim for salvage of the passengers brought off the sinking vessel could be brought St law. In the United States salvage is not ordinarily allowed for the saving of human lives, that being taken as a common act of humanity. But in Great Britain it is otherwise, and her laws apply in English waters or upon ships flying the British flag. Section 547 of the merchant shipping act states that when services are rendered in saving life from any Bri- tish vessel there shall be payable to the salvor. by the owner of the vessel reasonable amount of salvage.