The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

AANA FERRYBOAT must slow down ‘before entering her slip, and in A at which the order to slow should be given is a matter depending upon cir- cumstances, within the discretion of the master.—Bronx, 250 Federal Reporter 843. starboard hand rule. The time * * * The rule in respect to harbor salvage, where assistance is abundant and avail- able, is that awards should be moderate. Failure of active duty laid on salvors in possession of caring for what they’ have in charge is mot sufficient to forfeit award, but it must diminish the re- covery, for salvage is not only an award but a reward for successful welldoing.— GreorcE W. Euzey, 250 Federal Reporter 602. * * * A lookout’s duty, it was. said in the case of Manprson, 250 Federal Reporter 850, is to report as soon as he sees, not only any vessel with which there is dan- ger of collision, but any which may in any way affect the navigation of his own. He may not himself engage in speculation about the probabilities of collision, or the relative movements of the two. That responsibility rests upon the master alone. ; rte eee In cases of collision, the great weight of authority is that interest on damages eventually awarded should be computed from the day of the collision, or from the dates when payments for the neces- sary repairs were actually. made. In collision cases, interest on demurrage should be computed from the time when the vessel returned to service—In re Great Lakes Dredge & Dock. Co., 250 Federal Reporter 916. ~ * * * Where, when fire on a_ steamship started, neither of two vessels engaged in salvage service had on hand hose of such size as was required to make effi- cient use of the other fire-fighting equipment which was on hand, and the fire made considerable headway before such use was obtained, special reward for exercising the foresight and making the outlay required to be ready to fight fires on vessels cannot be claimed.—- Rosatiz, Mauonery, 250 Federal Re- porter 795. kook A stevedore not in the employ of a barge, but of an independent contractor with whom the owner had contracted for her discharge, is considered as be- ing upon the barge at the invitation of the owner, whose duty it was, through its representatives, to see that the barge, insofar as it knew or had doing so is not violating the — AA Late Decisions in Maritin Legal Tips For Ship Owners and Officers Specially Compiled for The Marine Review By Harry Bowne Skillman Attorney at Law reason to anticipate that she would be used by the stevedore in going to and from his work and while at work, was reasonably safe—Consolidation Coast- wise Co. v. Conley, 250 Federal Re- porter 679. - Pee The intent of congress in passing act of June 23, 1910, providing that any person furnishing repairs, supplies or other necessities to a vessel shall have a maritime lien on the vessel, and that it shall not be necessary to allege or prove that credit was given to the ves- sel, was to give a lien for supplies, etc., to the person furnishing the same, upon the vessel to which same was fur- nished, and a lien arises, though supplies were furnished to a boat in her home port; this lien cannot be displaced by any act Of the claimant in advertising and selling the boat subsequent to the time such lien attached—Bup III, 259 Federal Reporter 918. * * * In the case of JosepH F. Ciinton, 250 Federal Reporter 977, it was said that awards of salvage almost always de- pend for propriety on such a nice ad- justment of differing estimates of dan- ger and value that appeals, to merit consideration, must show a yielding to erroneous principle or plain misappre-’ hension of facts. It was further said that a tug is bound by the contract of towage not to abandon both tow and contract when the former gets into trouble, until the reasonable resources of good seamanship are exhausted, that the tug’s engagement is usually to take the tow from one place to another in a skillful manner, and when danger arises the tow cannot be abandoned until. all reasonable efforts for its preservation have been exhausted. * * * The question of attendance fees was discussed in the case of MoNKSHAVEN, 250 Federal Reporter 1000, where the. court said that it is usual for charter parties to provide for the. cost of car- riage and then allow a rebate from the charge in the guise of a commission to the charterer. The court said also that the presence of a cesser clause is also frequently to be found in them, and that it is further usual, and indeed prac- tically necessary, particularly in foreign ports, that someone familiar with it should look after the ship’s business while in port. The person who takes this responsibility is by a custom, which is. world-wide, entitled to receive what is in effect a retainer, known as an at- tendance fee. Expressed in terms of moneys of the United States, this sum is $50. The court called this fee a “retainer,” because it is paid, whether 148 the person is called upon to perform any actual service or not. The service which he may be called upon to per- form can never, of course, be fully an- ticipated. In this case it appeared that the charter party provided that agents of the charterer should attend to the ship’s business on the customary terms, and it was held that, in view of the custom in such matters, that the repre- sentatives, who, as agents, collected de- murrage under direction of the ship’s master, were entitled to retain a com- mission of 2% per cent, the usual amount allowed. ee The word “port” was defined in the case of Hamburg-American Steam Packet Co. v. United States, 250 Fed- eral Reporter 747, where the court said: “From what has been said it appears. that the word ‘port’ is a somewhat in- definite term; that its meaning is not exact but depends upon the connection in which it is used; that it has been employed to designate a place where ships are accustomed to load and unload goods, or to take on and let off pas- sengers, and where persons and mer- chandise are allowed to pass into and out of the realm.” The court then fur- ther said: “We find nothing in the cases examined which leads us to be- lieve that a place on the high seas, where ships are not accustomed to stop, or to discharge or .to take on cargoes, where vessels cannot anchor, and which is not a place of safety for either ship or goods, can be regarded as a port.” * * * In the case of VANApIS, reported in 250 Federal Reporter 1010, it appeared that libelant’s pleasure yacht was_ in- jured in a collision so that it had to be drydocked for repairs. The point in issue was whether libelant was. entitled to damages for detention, in view of the fact that libelant had no intention of chartering the yacht, but intended to use it for his recreation or pleasure. In deciding in favor of libelant, the court said: “On principle it seems to me im- possible that we should’ draw any dis- tinction between yachts and any other property capable of use only as means of recreation or pleasure. Nobody has any hesitation about such as are con- sumable, like wines, or flowers, or per- fumes, or tobacco. It would be a. fatu- ous defense against an action for in- juries to such as these to prove that the owner would certainly have consumed them himself. Furthermore, if the de- fendant had wrongfully destroyed a yacht or motorcar, he would be hardier than most, were he to offer to show that the owner was bound not to sell or to let it.”