that thi:l'defendant waS to collect the delDurrage from the foreign steamship lines as the agent of the libelant. Had such been the case, the muneys 'Would have ,been at once paid oveno the libelant. Still furtherj the agent of thesteam-shipcompany,as'I understand his urged the foreign steam-ship lines to pay the Ocean Steam-Ship Company for the detention ·of the light(ira,upon the ground that the Ocean SteamShip Company was liable therefor to 'the ·lioelant. I have not looked the evidence which shows that, with regard to similar bills not here sued for, the Ocean Ste'am-ShipCompanyacceptedof the foreign lines 50 per cent. 'Of the amount of the Hbelant'sbill after having obtained the libelant's consent to receive that amount for them in full of the bill. But this fact does not seem to me to be inconsigtent'with the testimony of the libelant. ," Looking at all the circumstances, my opinion is that the weight of the testimony is with the libelant, and that he is entitled toa dedree. The parties can no doubt agree upon theamount.< Hoot, let a reference be had.
(O£rcwU Court, S. D. New Yor1c. September 29, 1890.)
SUIPPING-ltISTAXB IN BILL OFLAllING-AGBN1S' OPTION-LIAJlILITY OF
U.; ,the common agent,of several di1ferent steam-ships, owned by ditferentowners. and ruuning independently on stated w,.ya, forming the "auion Line, If agreed with libelallts to transport 800 bales of cotton per steamer A. W., agent's option. A part were sent by the A., the rest by the W·· a we.ek later·.. U. only had authority tOdeterm ine by w.hich vessel' goods should 11:0. Without bis knowledge or con.. "ent, shippiIlg receipts were delivered to libelants, through some mistake of the subemployes, apparently induced in part by the libelauts' ships. The receipts stated that.the .goods were to go ,by the A. only; upon the faith of which. without U.'s ki:lowledge, bills of lading were iSSUlild at bis office, for all the cotton per ste,a:rp.er A. The cotton shipped by the W; alTivedabout 10 days later than that bytlie A.· and. the price falling in. the mean time, the libelantllsued.the owner of the fOI) ,the loss. Held. that there was no liability on the part of the owner to libelants,except for the amount of insuranoe paid by the latter on cotton on the A., which wasllDt carried by that vesseL ,
In Admiralty. On appeal from district court. Evarts, Ohoau &- Beaman, for libelants. Wilcoz, AdamS &- Macklin, for respondent.
See 37 Fed. Rep. 432.
, First." During the months of August and September, 1887,.the libelants ,were, and have sinceoontinued to be, partners in business 'in the city of· New York, doing business under ,the firm name of Crenshaw & Wisner. , c,' Second:. During such times the respondent was, and is now, of thes.team-:-ship Arizona. '. :(, '
Third. In saidmonths of and September, 1887, the said steamship Arizona, and the steam-ship Wisconsin, with other steam-ships, constituted what is known as the lfGuion Line," sailing weekly from New Yorkto Liverpool, the pier at which the steam-ships belonging to the said line :lay in New York beingkn9wn as the "Guion Line Pier." Fburth. During said period, the steam-ship Wi!'Jconsin was owned by the Liverpool &.Great Western Steam-Ship Compnny, and was one of the steam-ships of the said Guion Line, the name "Guion Line" being a trade name ot designation tosa¥ under, the vessels of the line being owned by different personll. Separate and distinct. accounts were kept for each vessel; and the OWners oE!one vessel were not interested in the business of the other vessels·. During all of the said period, the firm of A. M. Underhill & Co. were the agents of the owners of all the steamers running in the Guion Line, including the Arizona and Wisconsin. , Fifth. On or about the 24th and 26th days of August, 1887, libelants made two contracts with said Underhill & Co. as such agents for the carriage, respectiv.ely, of 500 and 300 bales of cotton from New York to Liverpool. The contracts were negotiated through Carey, Yale & Lambert, freight brokers in the city of New York, acting as libelants' brokers in engaging the freight, and as the brokers of Underhill & Co. in letting the freight. The contracts as follows: . "NEW YORK, August 26th, 1887. . "Engaged for acct. of CrenShaw"&; Wisner, on board steam-ship of · Guion 'ElX:PElcteq !,ailing 6th (agents' option) for Liverpool, A. M. Underhill & Co., . Agents,abt.. SOO bales cotton, at 5/32d and 5 per cent. primage per for comp'd. and 7J32d' and 5% primage per lb. for uncomp'd. This contract ISlna.de subject to tbe terms and conditions of the' form of bill oflading approved by theNewYorkProdnce Exchange for this line. '"CAREY, YALE & LAMBERT, Brokers, . iH, "Per FRED. O. HOLMES. .. "("" . .!. "NEW YORK, Aug, 24th, 1887. "Engagedfol; acct. of Crenshaw &I Wisner on board steam-ship of "Guion Sept, (agents' option) for J.,iverpool, A.M. Underhill & Co., Agents,500bales ..cptton at 5/32d and 5% primage per lb. for comp'd and 732d and 5% primage for nncomp'd. This contract is made SUbject to the terms and conditions of the form of bill of lading approved by the New York ]?rQduoe ExcMngef-or thisJine.. . . ," "CAREY, YALE & LAMBERT, Brokers, "per FRED. O. HOLMES." . Sixth. ,During August, 1887, the said A. M. Underhill & Co. had advertised that the said steam-ship Arizona would sail from New York bound for Liverpool on the 6th of September, and the steam-ship Wisconsin upon the 13th of September. . ,(,:Seventh·. Freight·contracts in the form of those set out in the fifth finding, giving the agents the right to select either or both of. two steamers, are' common in the shipping business. The option reserved is a valuable one for the agents, since it ena1;lles them to load their vessels with perishable cargo, such as food lmd :fruit" which is delivei-edat the pier shortly before the vessels sail, and for which. a high J;ateoffreight is
CRENSHAW V. PEARCE.
charged; ttnd then, if any space remains, it is filled up with such chandise as cotton, which is carried at a lower rate of freight. The 'cuS-: tom benefits the shipper of the cotton, because, by reserving to themselves the option of selecting the steamer, the vessels' agents are able to reduce the rates of freight therefor. The exclusive charge of allotting cargo received by A. M. Underhill & Co. to be shipped by the vessels of the Guion Line was, at the time, with Harvey I. Underhill, one of said firm. Eighth. On or about August 26, 1887, the libelants received in due course of business from the said A. M. Underhill & Co., as agents of the steamers running in the said Guion Line, a paper called, in the export cotton trade, "a permit," reading as follows: "NEW YORK, Aug. 25th, 1887.
"Pier, Guion Pier· .. Received from Crenshaw & Wisner abt. 800 bales cotton; uncomp'd to Empire preSs. To be delivered on and after Aug. 30th. " All risk of lire or flood while goods are on the dock to lie borne by shippers. "A. M. UNDERHILL & Co., Agents. "F. O. Ninth. Pursuant to such contracts and permit the libelantson August 30. August 31, September 1, and September 2, 1887, sent by their truckmen 629 bales of cotton to the Guion pier, where the said steam-ship Arizona then lay bound for Liverpool, and 219 bales of cotton uncompressedto the Empire press. At the time of such delivery the Wisconsin. had not arrived at the port of New York. Tflnth ·.. ,As load was delivered. the truckman presented a "ticket" specifying the number of hales which he delivered. The person ing the load at the press, or at' the pier, as the case might be, counted the bales, and, if the number was found to be correct, initialed andreturned the ticket. When each truckman had'delivered the entire quan. tity whioh he was to carrY. he received a "general receipt" embracing all the lots which he had delivered. Such shipping receipts were ered to libelants, and specified the number of bales received for shipment. This was all in accordance with the course of business pursued by A. M. Underhill & Co. Eleventh. There were in all seven of these receipts given to libelants· · Three were for the 219 bales delivered to the press, were signed by the agent of the press, and were substantially in the following form: "Received from Empire cotton-press in good order from Crenshaw & ner, tor steam-ship Arizona, ... ... ... bales of cotton, marked as per margin. "Per Empire cotton-press. [Slgnatqre.]" Four o(said receipts were for the 629 bales delivered at the pier,and were substantially in the following form: . "GUION LINE PIER, Aug. 81,1887. "WILLIAMS' & GUION, No. 29 Broadway. ' "Received for steam-ship Arizona on account of Crenshaw & Wisner, 8Ubject to terms and conditions of company's bills'lading. for which it is agreed
.ah"ll be exchanged on or .before date of sailing. ··. '. .. .
illigned by the receiving cleJ.'k of said Guion Com./ , . M. Underhill & Co., as Pw/llftlt"It .was the custom of the said agente for: the steam-ships in the Guion Line, including the Arizona, tQ delive:ryby.the.shipper: to the Empirepresa'8 delivery to the steam-ship. . ;17a:irteenth·. By.said A. M. 'Undel'hill & Co. 's course ,of"business, when the Qoutract made with .uhiJilper provided farlan optionas tothesteamer :by which goods were to be carried, it was required that the shipping receipts given at the dock, or.at the .pre!ls, should..beinthe· same form as the .permit, and should !!lpecifyboth steamers, and no employe of hill & Co. had any authority·to depart from such rule without express instructionsfrc;m1 Mr. Underhill. The omission of the option from the Seven in theleventh .finding was without authority from HarveyT. Underhill or from A. ·M. Underhill & Co., and without his or ihair:k!fiOwledge,artd arose' from a mistake on the part of their pier, aoa of the agent of the Empire press. This mistake wllS caused partly by the form of the tickets brought by the truckmen' when .tbeydelivered itheir loads. These tickets were prepared by the Jibelamtsand in' many base'S specified the Arizona 8S. the vessel by which the Lcettol1 was to.'becarried, instead of expressing the option which the contracts and permit provided for. In preparing the general reoeipts, the tickets by the shipping derk at the pier and the agent of the press, who assumed that such tickets were correctly drawn, the Arizona being the next steamer of the Guion Line advertised ., to sail. . Fourteenth. Pursuant to the usual course of business the said receipts were presented at the office of A. M. Underhill & Co;, by libelants, and in exchange for them the;three bills of lading annexed totbe libel herein were given. In preparing the' bills of lading, the clerks employed by Underhill &00. followed the shipping receipts, and the Arizona as the vessel by which said' cotton was to be carried. F'ijreenth.The steam-ship Arizona sailed from the port of New York on the 6th day of September, and arrived in Liverpool about September 14th,carrying all the219bnles of cotton which were delivered at the Empire press, as aforesaid, and 70 of those delivered at the pier as afore- · said, and the rest of the said cotton, namely, 559 bales, were transpoUed to Liverpool by the.stearn-ship Wisconsin, which left New York .13th, and 'arrived in Liverpool on the 24th day of September, 1887 .· :;r1;1e in his possessionthe' said shipping receipts so given as aforesaid by hiD), hut failed to notify the libelants that any I,:otton was' not. shipped in the Arizona, and the first knowledge thai tne libelants had that all the cotton wall nQtcarried in or about October 2,lS87. $eventeeri.th.I;OnAugust '21, .1887. the libelants applied. to the BUb-
scnbers at United States Lloyds for insurance under their open policy with said subscribers in the sum of $46,000 on about 900 bales of cotArizona, other ton, valued at sum insured 011 board the steamer saule line at and. from New York to Liverpoot This application was accepted by such iilsurers. Subsequently, being misled by the designation of the Arizona in the bills of lading, the libelants notified the underwriters that all cotton excelJt 185 bales was going by the Arizona. Thereupon such application was changed to 'read ollly"Arizona," and certificates of insurance were issued in accordance with such notification, and the libelants attached drafts to the said eertificateand bills of lading, and sold such drafts to bankers in the city of New York. Libelants paidthe premium upon said risk. Eighteenth. Otherwise than as specified in the seventeenth finding, the libelants did not do anything, or refrain from doing anything, which they would have done, or refrained from doing, had they not been misled as to identity of the ve.3sel which in fact carried the 559 bales. Nineteenth. The price of cotton of the class in question fell in Liverpool between the of the arrival of the Arizona and the date of the arrival of Wisconsin three-eighths of a penny per pound. 'l'wentieth. The allotment of said shipment, namely, 219 bales to the Arizona and 559 bales to the Wisconsin, was made by Harvey T. Underhill.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
First. The libelantS are entitled to recover from the respondent the amount of the premjt1m of insurance which the libelants paid for insurance on cotton on the Arizona, which was not carried by that vessel. Second. 'l'here is no otQer liability on the part of the respondent to the .libelants. Third. The decree of the district court should be reversed, with costs . of thjs court only, and ,an order of reference made to a commissioner for the of ascertaining the said damages of the libelants.
THE NORTH STAB.
(InBt7'I.ct Oourt, E. D. Michdgan. January 9ll, 1800.)
. CoLLISION BETWEEN STEAM"SlIIPS-FOG.
When two steamers are approachIng each other in a fog, and repeated signals fl'f)m each of them indIcate that they are drawing together upon opposite or crossing it is the duty of each to stop until they come to a clear understanding with regara to their respective positions and courses, and, if there be any confusion of signals, or any other apparent risk of collision, it ia the1r duty not only to stop but to.reverse th.e1r engines. (811Uabus lYu the ooun.)
In Admiralty. This was a suit for a collision between Sheffield and NorthStar, which occurred about 5 o'clock in the afternoon of June 14,