report ofthe commissioner in the district court, and for her costs in the district (jOurt, and for the owner of the Nannie Lamberton lor costs of this' court.
J ORANNB. 1
LORENTZEN 11. THE JOHANNE.
(DfBt1ict Court, S. D. New
November 50, 1891.)
C.lBBIEBS-NEGLIGENT STOWAGE-CASES OJ' HOUSEHOLD GOODS.
Cases of under abill,of which contained the ex· ception, "not accountable for damage and breakage," were stowed in the lower we!-"e delivered damaged by water taken on by the ship in hold of the, heavy weather; 'The brig was old, and her construction was Buch as to necessitate more than usual care in the stowage of merchandise liable to be damaged by water. The master had notice that the cas,es contained, household goods. ,Held, that it was : 'negli'g'ence to stow such, goods ,near the bilge in the hold of a vessel of such con, struotlon and age, and the ship was liable for the damage.
,T. P. Kirlin, for libelant.
Suit to recover for damage to cargo.
Wing, Slurudy & Putnam, for claimallts.
B'IlOWN,'J. Sixteen cases qfbousehold goods, shipped at Bremen on the brig Johanne, were found, on discharge at New York, to have been damaged hy water. The bill of lading recited that the cases were receiveClin,good order and and, besides peril of the seas, contained ;the exception, "not accountable for damage or breltkagl;l." They were not broken, but had been ill water so much that permanent watermarks were left upon the,aidllS of some of the cases, and the contents, consisting of furniture and books, were The vessel was old, 'and her bottom, had not. been generally overhauled for four, yel¥'S. She encountered, two severestorr.l)s on the passage. Ipthe face of,the e,vidence,submitted, I Cttnnot find that she was generally unseawortllYi but she was certainly liable to incur more than usual lcakage,llnd:her great bteadth,of 35 feet, for her size, also required more than usual care in the 'stowage of any merchan<J,ise liable to .be damaged by water. The cases of furniture were: not stowed between-decks, butin the lower hold, on the starboard side of the ship, on top of about five feet of ore. Upon the the.officers, I must assume that thedamage to the. cases arosa frOIn accumulations ,ofwater in the hold heavy lea;kage of the ship in the storms which she encountered, and in the listwl;l,ieh she had while sailing for long periods on thA port tack, during which the cases were more or less in water. The bill of lading shows that the mastel" chad (notice that the contents of the cases were. household, goods. In. my judgJ;Uent" he was; not justiped in stowing such caslfs
by Edward lit Bllnl'l<1illt, ElIq., pfihe New Y9rk l:1ar.
holdarrd·o!i:t}ie-;sidedf iVbrig ohuch construction and age atUhiB; brig; reasonable'cMJtioo requlred that he-should stow it either or, if in the hold, in the center of the ship, where it would not be..subjected to water damage, through leaks which such a ship was specially liable to incur. The ship is therefore liable. The Hadji, 20 Fed. Rep. 875, 18 Fed. Rep. 459. Decree for libelant, with costs, and an order of reference to compute the amount, if thesaJJ;18 be not agreed upon.
(DIstrict G. .BlU.'L
8nECKEUI tI. THE WEATHERBT.
"A cargo of damajfed by a collision was lold in Germany, and the proceeds to the cargo received by the owners 01 the vessel, and subsequently paid ownel', less a portion retained to cover average charges; the rate of exchange calculated being the rate at the time of the payment by the vessel owner to .the cargo owner, After paying the average charges', the vessel owner claimed that he should be allowed the difference between the amount in Amerioan money whioh the amount of English money received would have produced at time of receipt of same by him and the amount of American money aotually aecounted for: - ldeZd; as the cargo owner was entitled to this amount when received by the vessel owner, the rate of that time Wal! by wnich the amount of Atpericau money due the oargo owner should be determined,the delay 'being compensated for by i11terest.
In Admirtdty. Petition by libelant for order on respondent to pay over remainder of money left in his hands after deduction of average charges. Answer of respondent,and cross-petition by respondent to restate account. A cargo of sugal'. shipped by Claus Spreckels on the steam-ship Weatherby, waa damaged by collision; and the proceeds of the sale of the cargo, which was sold in Germany, was remitted to the vessel owner in .l£ngland on June 15, 1890, and wRsretained by him until October, 1890, when, in purSuance of a decree of court, the sum in hand was declared to be $51,842, which, less a sum of 815,000, retained to cover average charges, was paid over to Spreckels. After adjustment Spreckels claimed 87,375.46, the difference between the average charges and the $15,000 retained, together with interest on the amount retained. The vessel owner then moved. to restate his acc6Ubt so as to account only for so many dollars as the amount of pounds which came into his hands would have produced on June 15, 1890, at the rate of exchange current on June 15. 1890. JohnG. Joh'1l8On and Motton P. Hflnry, for libelant. Ourtia TUton and John F. Lewis, for respondent.
BUTLER; J. On the question raised. by the petition and answer my judgment is with the respondent. On receiving the proceeds of the sugar
by MarkWUks Collet, Esq., of the Fhiladelphia bar.