27 F. 871 | S.D.N.Y. | 1886
During the forenoon of the fourteenth of November, 1884, a fire broke out on the premises of the Pratt Manufacturing Company’s Oil-works, in a shed on the south side of Busliwick creek. The shed was about 100 feet long by 45 feet deep, inclosed by a brick fire wall about 20 feet high. When the fire broke out, the lighter Oregon lay outside of a canal-boat which was moored along-side of the shed, and within three feet of it. The canal-boat and lighter were immediately removed somewhat further up the creek; the lighter about seventy-five feet above the shed, and the canal-boat some two or three hundred feet further up. The premises in the vicinity of the shed were employed in the oil business, and there were various tanks in different parts of the grounds not far distant. The general orders of the Standard Oil Company, that control the whole premises, were that,/whenever a fire occurred along the creek, the creek should be cleared of boats. The libelants’ boat Alpha was towing a schooner down Newtown creek, when, observing the fire, the pilot dropped the schooner at the mouth of the creek, and went down to Bushwiek creek, not far below. Wlien he arrived there, he was hailed by the assistant foreman of the premises to come into the creek and tow out the lighters. The Alpha accordingly went into the creek, and succeeded in towing out the three lighters in a line upon a hawser. The Oregon had naphtha aboard; the other two lighters, refined oil. For this service a salvage award is claimed.
Two questions are presented; First,- whether the service is entitled to salvage compensation; and, if so, the amount.
The rescue of property in danger of destruction by fire is a familiar ground of salvage award, where the essential elements of a salvage service exist. The Connemara, 108 U. S. 352; S. C. 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 754. Such cases have frequently arisen in this court. The Tampico, 16 Fed. Rep. 491; The Baker, 23 Fed. Rep. 109; S. C. 25 Fed. Rep. 771. As respects the degree of danger, it is not necessary that there be a certainty of loss unless the service were rendered. It is sufficient that there is a reasonable apprehension of danger, and that the service is rendered in reference to that apprehension of danger, and not in the ordinary course of business. The Raikes, 1 Hagg. 247; The Jos. C. Griggs, 1 Ben. 81; The Plymouth Rock, 9 Fed. Rep. 413, 416.
There is much contradiction between the witnesses as to the amount of the Alpha’s exposure to the fire. On the libelant’s part the testimony is that her deck hands were considerably employed in throwing water upon her house; that the glass of her sky-lights was broken by the heat; and that the neck, face, and hands of two of tho persons thus engaged were burned and blistered; and that the paint of the boat was also injured,—her position being for some time opposite to the fire. Two disinterested witnesses who stood on the opposite bank testified to the same effect. Several of the respondents’ witnesses say that the Alpha lay lower down in the creek, astern of the two fire-boats, which lay partly athwart the creek; and that the fire-boats lay between the Alpha, and the fire. These discrepancies would, in the main, bo reconciled if the Alpha, after first going opposite to the fire, and throwing out her lines, had then dropped back astern of the fire-boats; and such may have been the fact,—the libelant’s witnesses testifying as to the former position, and the respondents as to the latter.
The services in this case, however, are not of any high degree of merit, considered as salvage services. Though the Oregon had naph