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.
sold it was the respondent's duty to transmit its value in American money. His failure to do so rendered him liable to suit for the amount with interest for the delay. His liability could neither be increased nor diminished by the subsequent variation in the rate of exchange. The libelant's entire loss was the detention of the sum he should have received. paid, with interest for the detention, he is made whole. When jt There is nothing in the relation of the parties to affect" the result. The respondent was not guilty of fraud or breach of trust, in the technical sense;.lij;ldthe doctrine applied in Reese v. Bank, 31 Pa. St. 78; MU8gravev. Beckendor§, 53 310; Nf»ih v. PhiJJ:ipa, 89 Pa. St. 250; here. anq other cases of like chatacter, is, conaequently, not The error into which the adjusters fell, and led the partieEl,-by means of which the sum due was stated in the interlocutory order of October 81. 1890, all $51,842, instead of $51,343.86, may be corrected in the £nal settlement, now being, made. .The ortIer does not stand in the way ofsuch corrections. If the parties agree upon the amount still due (in. this view of the libelant's rights) a decree may be prepared accordingly; otherwise. tbecase .must go ,to a commissioner. See adjuster's.certificate annexed htlteto:
"BtatIJofNew York, OUyand OountyofNsw York-88.: Stephen Loines. being duly affirmed. deposesllnd says as follows: That he is a member of the firm of Wreaks & Loines, average adjusters in New York aforesaid, and that on or about December 31,1890. his said firm completed and issued an adjustment of general averages and special charges on cargo in the case of the British. Wl"atherby, mastl"r, while on a voyage from Hamburg. April, ·1890, for Philadelphia, in which statement, acting upon an erroneous impression of the faets. the net proceeds of cargo sold at Hamburg was stated liS being $51,842, whereas the amount should bave been stated as $51,343.86, thl" latter sum the equivalent at the rate of l"xchange current on prabollt June 15th, 18!lO. the day of the date upon which thl;l owner of the steam-Ship Weatherby should have transferred the amount received by him in England as the proceeds of the sale ofsucb cargo '(say £10,588-10-11) to the cargo owner in Philadelphia, or say· at the rate of exchange of $4,849.
,: "Btats of New York, otty and Oounty of NeUJ York. 1.'bis twenty-third day of November, 1891, before me pE'tsonally appE'ared Stephen Loines, to me known, and known to me to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing document,alldbe acknowledged that be executed the same for the purpOSE'S therein In testimony whE'reof l have hereunto setD;lY hand and.llt;1lxed my seal of olDce in the city of New York tbe day and year last above written. ' W. D. DESPARD, Notary Public."
I'EDERAL lml'ORTER I
iJ. D. Pennsylvania. November 10, 1891.)
.." '. . ...
Brokers who have no connection with a cargo, .as brokers to 'sell same, collect the amounts due,Jand pay the freight,· are notperBonally liable for the freight., .," . , . DuTY. 0 .. 011' FREIGHT.' . .' It Is the duty of a master'who has signed, under the provision of acharter, bills . of la<lini!'; the ·freight on.which llmounte(lto a greater &D;lOUnt than. the .charter freight, to accept the freight due undtlr the charter-party, when tendered, and to authorise the &Kents of the charterer to collect the· freight on the bills of lading.
ClU,BTEIUIBS' AGENTB-!.UBILITY FOR FREIGHT.
In Adiniralty. Libel by Baldasare Damora, master of, the bark Cuomo Primo, against JohnF.Craigand James 'Craig, trading as John F. Oraig& Co. The vessel was chartered to proceedtoSt.'Johntl Antigua,and take in a cargo ofsugar;thevessel to be oonsignedto charterers' agents'at port of discharge, and, being loadeil.,.to proceed to Delaware breakwater for orders. Master to sign bills of lading at any rate of freight required without prejudice to this at not less certain rates mentioned.The vessel arrived at the Breakwater, and received orders from Watson & Farr, the' charterers' agents, to The respondents, John F.'Craig & effected a sale of the whole cargo, as sugar brokers, to Spreckels, & qq., by order of said Watson & F;trr, and of the other cOllsigneesj and, agents, paid to the niaster.'s agent, $1 ,000 on account of charter freight, ,which, with advancesma4etQ the master at Antigua, including insurance, left a balance due unller the charter of $298.87, for which a bill Was presented by the master's agent. Resp lnd.. ents were. directed to paY,the amount of charter freight 'appeitring by to. ·,&t.1!'arr tq collect this the bl1111fIadmg (relghts, whl,ch to 'fhecap.tain refused to do so. Watson & Farr found that consignees of the rest of the. cargp were willipg to settle th.ebill:qf laqing freights with them without suchauthorizatWn,· and directed. respondE;lP:ls tQ '. pay the balanqe of the freight, as per bill rendered, which said mas1er's',agent refused to accept, and this suit was brought for 'the full amOunt', of the bill ofladjllg stated that they were authorized aud directed by Mei>l?fs. 'Watson & Farrto tender the chartet'freight due toth,E!vessel. John Q. Lane, for libelant. . " , '. Morton P. Henry, for respondents.
BUTLER, J. It seems quite clear that the respondents are not Hable. The cargo was shipped under a charter, between the vessel and Bennett & Co. Watson & Farr, were the latter's agents; they assumed charge of the cargo on its arrival at the Delaware breakwater, and ordered its delivery to Mr. Spreckels, at Philadelphia, to whom the respondents
JReported by Mark Wilks Collet, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar.