Millard v. The Rahway
Millard v. The Rahway
Opinion of the Court
These three actions consolidated are brought to recover salvage compensation for services rendered to the barge Rahway and cargo on the 13th of December, 1890. The material facts are as follows: On the morning of December 13,1890, the barge Rahway, belonging to the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and laden with a cargo consisting of 691 bales of cotton on deck and 43 bales of cotton and 300 bags and 150 barrels of flour in the hold, was lying moored at pier 39, East' river. The weather was cold, and a strong wrind was blowing. About half past 1 in the morning fire was discovered in the cotton on the barge by a watchman on the adjoining dock, and very shortly the whole barge was enveloped in flames. The tug Adelaide, observing the fire, proceeded immediately to render assistance. Upon arriving at the burning barge she made fast to her at once, and towed her away from the docks into the stream, meanwhile pumping water on the fire. It was about 1:45 in the morning when the barge was towed into the stream by the Adelaide. The two boats then drifted down the East river, the Adelaide pumping water on the fire. At 1:50 the city fire-boat Havemeyer came along-side the barge, and commenced ,to throw water. At 1:55 the tug Uncle Abe, owned by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, came along-side, and began to throw water upon the fire. At 2 o’clock, and
Upon the evidence Í am of the opinion that, in all probability, if the Adelaide had not come to the assistance of the barge as she did, both the barge and cargo would have been substantially destroyed; for there were no appliances upon the dock for extinguishing the fire, the barge had no means whereby to extinguish fire, and was without locomotive power of her own, so that it would not have been possible for the fire to have been extinguished by any means there present. The Adelaide arrived promptly, and by her prompt service the barge was moved into the stream, where she and the other tugs that arrived could throw water upon the fire. The situation presents this peculiarity: that, shortly after the Adelaide had towed the barge into the stream, the barge was surrounded by tugs belonging to the owners of the barge, and as able as the Adelaide to throw water, and do all that might thereafter be required, so that, if the Adelaide had then surrendered the possession of the barge to the tugs belonging to the same owner there present, no increase of risk would have followed. Undoubtedly, the Adelaide, having taken possession of the tug as a, salvor, and being able to tow and to
Taking all the circumstances into consideration, I am of the opinion that justice will be done by awarding to the owners and crew of the Adelaide the sum of $2,000, for the services rendered by the Adelaide on the occasion in question; the same to be divided, one-half to the owners of the Adelaide, and the other half to be divided among the officers and crew in proportion to their respective wages.
The Talisman is also entitled to salvage compensation. She arrived at the barge at 2 a. m., when the barge had drifted into the North river, and after not only the Adelaide, but also the fire-boat Havemeyer and the Pennsylvania Railroad boat Uncle Abe had come to the assistance of the barge. Notwithstanding the presence of these tugs, the aid of the Talisman was welcomed, and she threw water on the fire from the time of her arrival until 9:30 a. m. She applied her water directly to the fire, and some risk was assumed by her crew in remaining upon the burning cotton with the hose, as appears by the fact that one of the Talisman’s dock-hands, named George Anderson, refused to go upon the cotton with the hose. His place was taken by another deck-hand named Halvorsen, who stayed upon the cotton during four hours, handling the Talisman’s hose, and suffering considerably from the cold water, which froze upon his oil skins as he stood. To this man, Halvorsen, a double portion of the salvage awarded to the crew of the Talisman will be paid, and the man George Anderson is not permitted to share in the salvage award. For the services of the tug Talisman and her officers and crew the sum of $500 is awarded, one-half to be paid to the owners of the tug,
I do not consider the Henry W. Hohen entitled to salvage compensation. She did not arrive until 7:80 a. m. Then her services were not required. The Uncle Abe had already left, and the Hohen was told that her services were not required. She did afterwards put on a stream, but cannot be held to have rendered any necessary or valuable service. Her libel is therefore dismissed, but without costs.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- The Rahway. Millard v. The Rahway Jayne v. Same Winnett v. Same
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published