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

Late Decisions in Maritime Law Legal Tips for Shipowners and Officers Specially Compiled for Marine Review By Harry Bowne Skillman | Attorney at Law NE advancing money necessary to release a ship under libel is entitled to a lien for interest paid on a note executed by him in or- der to borrow the money to release the ship and for his traveling and inciden- tal expenses in securing its release.— EGeEriA, 294 Federal Reporter 791. * * * “To make a ship seaworthy for the cargo sought to be transported, it must be shown that the relation of the ship to the cargo at the inception of the voyage was such as to make it seaworthy and fit to carry the cargo; not only must the ship be in a general seaworthy condition, properly equipped and manned, but the cargo must be stowed in such part of the ship as has been generally or specially pro- vided for the particular class of car- go. A ship properly equipped with refrigerator facilities could not ac- cept a cargo of fresh meat for ship- ment to the tropics and stow the meat in the engine room. To make a ship seaworthy for a cargo of fresh meat, it is incumbent upon the ship to show, not only equipment with re- frigerator facilities, but that the meat was stowed in these facilities at the inception of the voyage; and with a cargo of candles, the burden is placed upon the vessel to show that the can- dles were stowed in a place of the ship reasonably fitted for such cargo, and may not shift the burden upon the shipper after showing general sea- worthy condition, ete., to show that the candles were stowed near the en- gine room or steam nipes, or other hot objects. The exceptive clause “dam- age by heat” has operation only against outdoor temperature, and the usual and ordinary temperature of the vessel’s hold.”—Kaufer Co. v. Lucken- bach Steamship Co., Inc., 294 Federal Reporter 978. * % k Seaworthiness is a relative term, and is ascertained ordinarly by the nature of the voyage or the use for which the vessel is to be employed. * * * The owner of a vessel cannot delegate his duty toward a deckhand as regards seaworthiness of the vessel to others * * * Existence of a hole in the sheathing on the deck of a lighter, which had been there for a long time, rendered the ship unsea- worthy, so as to permit the deckhand to recover for personal injuries, the sheathing or false deck having been placed over the permanent deck to protect the deck while loading; the owner cannot escape liability because another member of the crew failed to repair the hole, so obvious as to ren- der the lighter plainly unfit for the contemplated work of loading.—Henry Gillen’s Sons Lighterage, Inc., v. Fer- nald, 294 Federal Reporter 520. * ** ** Where the vessel sunk in collision through fault of another is of such peculiar construction that there is no market for her, the owner would be entitled to the cost of replace- ment less depreciation, if evidence shows that it was earning for him a fair return on such value, or, if other- wise, an amount which would make good to him the diminution of his earnings resulting from his loss, it was held in the case of I. C. WHITE, 295 Federal Reporter 598. “The market value yardstick cannot be ap- plied to a ship of so peculiar con- struction that, while it profitably serves some need of its owner, nobody else has occasion, for it,” the court said. It was further decided that where, at the time of the loss of the vessel through collision, there had been a sharp decline in the value of ships, due to the falling off of de- mand after the war, and it appearing that there were enough ships for sale to enable the owner to buy another, there was a market, and if what was desired was to provide the owner with the means of giving him what he had lost, that was done by awarding him the price for which he could buy a ship, and it was error to dismiss the price level as so temporary as to be irrelevant. * * * “Obligation of the ship to furnish maintenance and cure attaches to accidents which happen in the brief interval between the time a seaman is paid off and formally discharged and the subsequent time at which, in ordinary course, he actually gets physically away from her. He went on her as a seaman, and for the pur- pose in hand he did not cease to be one until he was safely off her. What allowance should be made for main- tenance and cure, and in some cases for wages, must all depend upon facts of each particular case.”—MICHAEL Tracy, 295 Federal Reporter 680. * * ok “As between the vessel owner and the charterer, the general rule is that, when the terms of the charter differ from those of the bill of lading, the charter party controls, and the bill of lading will, as between them, be treat- ed as a receipt for the cargo de- livered on board under the terms of the charter party.” This rule, it was said in the case of the United States v. Fisher Flouring Mills Co., 295 Federal Reporter 691, is subject to exception where there is proof that the parties intended thereby to make a new agreement. 268 The question of rights to maritime liens was in issue in the case of WASHINGTON, 296 Federal Reporter 158, and the court there held: (a) Where a_ bankruptcy receiver con- tinued the voyage, and the seamen per- formed their usual duties, their serv- ices were maritime, and their lien for wages was not suspended; (b) where the bankruptcy receiver claimed bankrupt’s vessel as owner, she had no lien for advances made by her in operating the vessel in an attempt to make a profit for the estate, and which were not made on the credit of the vessel; (c) a canteenman on a ves- sel, whose equipment and belongings were lost when the vessel was libeled and sold, has a maritime lien for the loss, on an equal basis with a wage lien and prior to any liens for sup- plies furnished; (d) on libel of vessel for wages after appointment of a re- ceiver in bankruptcy, wages, subsis- tence, and return passage of seamen who were abandoned were properly al- lowed. * * * The meaning of the clause in a charter party, “the stevedore employed by the vessel to be approved by char- terer,” is that the appointment or nomination of the stevedore is to be made in the first instance by the vessel, and then submitted to the char- terer for its approval. The owner does not have the sole right of ap- pointment, and the charterers are clothed with a wide discretion in the exercise of their right of approval or disapproval. But such approval cannot be arbitrarily or unreason- ably withheld, it was decided in the case of Pool Shipping Co. v. Hanson Produce Co., 296 Federal Reporter 235, and what is unreasonable is a matter for determination under the circumstances of the particular case. Under the circumstances of the case at bar, it was held unreasonable for the charterer to insist upon a particular stevedore, when the work could have been done by an equally competent company for 20 per cent less. * * * Under sections 4283-4286 of the United States revised statutes, with- holding the right to limit liability if shipowner had “privity or knowledge” of the fault. which occasioned dam- ages, the privity or knowledge must be actual, not merely constructive, it was said in the case of: 84-H 296 Federal Reporter 427, and must in- volve a personal participation of the owner in some fault or act of negli- gence causing or contributi injury suffered. Mig