vessel was not in the way of the navigation of the river, and would not have been materially damaged if she had remained in the river umil the spring following. Held: (1) That no part of the service thus performed was salvage service, and thereby superior to seamen's wages. (2) That it was contract service, and should rank' for lien with repairs and supplies. 1)ecree accordingly.
(Circuit Oourt, 8. D. New Yark. August 18, 1881.'
Where there was a stipulation that the intervenors should pay all costs and expenses which should be awarded against them, and the final decree awarded the intervenors, notwithstanding there was a defino costs oJ expenses ciency in the proceeds to pay all the costs and expenses, the decree must be reversed.
Beebe, Wilcox If Hobbs, for libellants.
E. D. McCarthy, for intervenors.
BLATCHFORD, C. J. The stipulation of November 1,1879, was that the intervenors should "pay all costs and expenses which shall be awarded against them by the final decree of this court, or, upon appeal, by the appellate court." The final decree of November 29, 1879, in the district court, gave a recovery for $749.68 to the libellants against the steam-boat Orient, which amount included certain costs, taxed in favor of the libellants at $127.20, (that amount including fees of proctor, clerk, and commissioner,) and the fees of the marshal, taxed at $251.49; but said final decree awarded no costs or expenses against said intervenors. It ordered that out of the moneys in court the clerk first pay the cost of the officers' court, and then pay the balance on account of the amounts decreed to the libellants. On the face of it it contemplated a deficiency by using the words "on account of." It was known to all parties that the proceeds in court were $615, and that there must be a deficiency of $144.38; yet there was no award for costs, or for any part or the whole of the deficiency, against the intervenors. The decree must be taken to have been made with knowledge of its provisions and effect. It was not appealed from, and was acquiesced in. If it was erroneous or inadvertent the libellants should have had it corrected
HAZLETON 'V.MANHATT.A:N ·lNS. CO.
by the district court. There is nothiug purporting to correct it, or to award any costs against the intervenors. The order of March 29, 1880, and the decree (Lnd summary judgment of May 17, 1880, cannot be construed as making such correction or awarding any such costs. The appellants are entitled. to a deceee reversing the said decree and summary judgment of May 17J 1880, with costs inhoth courts, to be taxed against the libellants.
(DiBtrlet Ot1Urt, .E. D. NfJlDYO'1'k. December 10,1880.)
NBGLlGl!l1ic:m.-hiJUR1E8 TO THE
PEBSON-AcCIDBNT. Where it is shown that an injury to the person was caused by an accident, and was in no way attributable to a neglect on the part of those in charge of the ship, the libel will be dismissed.
The libel is accordingly dismissed, with costs.
(District Oourt, N. D. IZlinoi8. April 24, 1882.)
1. GENERAL A
Where the libellants show that the cargo put on deck was properly stowed, and the respondent, who was the insurer of the hull, olIered no proof to show that it could have been stowed in any better or safer manner there, he' is liable to contribution on general average for a necessary jettison of such deck load.
UNDERWRITER ON HULL-Lu.BLE TO CONTRIBUTION-CuSTOM AND USAGE.
The underwriter upon the hull is liable to contribute to general average for jettison of the deck load when the custom or usage of the trade in which, the vessel is employed is to carry part of her cargo on deck.