THE ZEALANDIA.
697
"By the settled law, in the absence of some valid agreement to the contrary, the owner of a sbip carrying goods for bire, wbetber employed in ternal, in coasting,or in foreign, commerce, is a common carrier, with tbe bility of an insurer against, all losses, except only sucb two irresistible causes ,, as the act of God and public enemies."
These bills of lading are to tbe same effect. There .is nothing in them that serves to protect the ship from liability for ciamage arising from other goods. This. damage did not happen from any peril of the seas, as the master himself testifies. The datnage is directly traceable either to unfit oil casks, or to improper,stowing of such casks over the plumbago, or to the lack of suitable attention to the leakage through the deck and in the,hold during the;voyage. Upon such, bills of lading, and in the ofsUl;h absence of any other exceptions, the ship takes the as respects bona fide purchasers and consignees of the goods to whom she issues bills of lading, even though the goods were shipped by the charterers. The T. A. Goddard, 12 Fed. Rep. 174; The Antoinetta C., 5 Ben. 564. The libelants are in the situation of bona fide purchasers, paying for the goods on the faith, of the bills¢ lading issued to their agents, Winter & Smilie. Decree for the libelants, with costa.
THE ZEALANDIA'.
SS:IPPINo-DAlIAGE TO OAllOO-PERILS OJ' THE· SEA.
Where a oask of oil,whioh is lashed securely as agaln,t all ordinary breaks loose during an extremely violent gale, and callBelI injury to other gpods, the damage must be attributed to a peril of the sea, especially when it that . such aooidents are notinfrequent. ; ,
.
'J. '1J;'Redding, for libelants.
In AdlUiralty.
Libel for damages to cargo.
Milton Andros, for claimants. HOFFMAN, J. The proofs show, I think; to 8 demonstration, thafthe very great damage sustained by the hides in question in this suit could not have been caused by the negligence of the carriers. 'If ariycon6dence can be placed in human testimony, we must believe that the ship was stanch and dry, and that no water found access to the hides by the leakage of the vessel. This is shown, not only by the testimony of the master and all his principal officers, but by the evidence of the'very capable and reliable surveyors, who examined the after-hold with the speoial object of ascertaining whether any signs of leakage could be discovered. It also appears that the vessel has conveyed several shipments of hides from S)·d'ney to this port,' stowed in the same place and same mlj.nner as the hides in question, without damage. She has also made two voyages since delivering the hides, with cargo in the after-hold, which 'waade-
698
FEDERAl. REf,QRTER,
vol. 48,
livered.ingood order, the vessel in the mean time having \Indergone no repairs whll.tever. It is impossible, I think, to attentiveJyperuse this testirriony caminl!; to the ctlU'olusion that this extraordinary and unprecedented the hides when delivered, whatever may havo been thEl cause, cannot be attributed to the fault of the carrier. The damage to"the skins waS caused by this breaking adrift of a cask of oil in thebetweenoodeeks. 'The testimony shows that the ship encountered weather violen'Cej thattbecask was securely lashed, and broke away dtirit1ga tempest,::J.o.an accident, it is said, of not infrequent occur· renee.' 1'Should haveth'OUght thM t\n accident of this character might be prevented by the exercise of proper care on the part of the carrier, but on tM proofs I .feel 'obliged to decide that in this case it must be attribtite'd ·toperilsof the sea. Libel dismissed. l (:
.. THE GERTRUDE. ABELL ". THE NATHAN HALE AND THE GERTRUDE.
(District Court, S. D. New York. December 17,1891.) PBR801UL 1l'IroRJEI '1'0 E1IlPLOn:-.DIVIDJNG F"'ULT.
Tow
VNDER
W
It is impruaent and hazardous to divide a tow under way in a tide-way and in a high wind, to be picked up by other boats; and this beinp; donewitbout necessity. Oifthe·Batterl, and a hand having nis cut off by a coil of. rope which rendered whUe:malUng fast totbe drifting tow; h6M negligence in thetng for which it was answl!tlilJIe.'··lJut'tbeoourtbeing ottha opinion that the hand!s attention was to some extent given to the naval parade at tne Ericsson tunerlll; and t.hat the hand was partly in fault, allowed him $700 only.
"
In Admiralty. Edward S. Abell sued the tugs Nathao Hale and Gertrude to recover for personal injuries. Hyland de Zabriskie, for libelant. for clahpants. of,August 23, 1891,tp,e libelant, who BRow;N:,.J.:·jn was the then in tow along-side of the steam.tugGertrude,h.ad his foot ,cuJf off at the. ankle b:y.getting ca.ught .in a which was whiJe he was making fast two other his l!ide. The three ' barges were bound for the North mvef.:They had c()me dQw:n the East river 'with six or seven for .Amboy. tow of the Nathan Hale and the Ger.AtapQllt30'clockin the afterrlOpn, when they arrived off the Battery:. oralittlebeyond, ·the Gertr,uqe.was assigned to detach three barges, whilEl; tAe 1;6st of the tow weIlct.to .Amboy. 'fhe Gertrude accorq· . WQk PJl_llerport sidethe)ibelan.t's. barge Susquehanna
m
