100 F. 498 | N.D. Cal. | 1900
This is an action by seamen to recover damages for the alleged breach of a contract under which they shipped on the bark Belt Here for a whaling voyage from the port of San Francisco to the Vorth Pacific and Arctic Oceans, or elsewhere, as the master might direct, and return, the voyage not to exceed 12 months. The libelants were to receive as compensation for their services a stated share of the proceeds of the voyage. The breach alleged is that the voyage was protracted against the consent of libelants beyond the term named in the shipping articles, and is set forth in the libel in these words:
“That, by reason of the wrongful and tortious acts and misconduct of the said Millard, the master of the said Belvedere, * * * all of said libelants were held to service on board of said vessel for a period of about eight months after their legal term of service had expired, against the will and without the consent of said libelants, and in utter disregard of their rights as seamen on board of said vessel, whereby each and every one of said libelants hath sustained damages in the sum of five hundred (500) dollars.”
It appears from the evidence that the Belvedere left San Francisco, March 8, 1897, on the voyage referred to, and on or about September 21st of that year was caught in the ice near Sea Horse Islands, in the Arctic Ocean, and was not released therefrom until some time in the month of July, 1898, when she immediately proceeded to Port Clarence, Alaska, for the necessary purpose of tak
1. In addition to the facts above stated, it was also shown by the evidence that after the commencement of the action, and before the trial, some of the libelants, in consideration of the payment of a small sum in each case, and the cancellation of their indebtedness to the vessel for advances and merchandise, settled with the claimants, and executed a release of all their claims against the Belve-dere and her owners on account of the matters set forth in the libel. The settlement in each case was made without the knowledge or consent of the proctor for the libelants, but there is nothing-in the evidence to warrant a finding that the settlements were obtained by fraud or duress upon the pari: of the claimants, nor can the libelants be heard to allege that the consideration given to them was grossly disproportionate in amount to the claims which they released; that is to say, they cannot, for the purpose of defeating such settlements, be permitted now to allege that the ship’s accounts against them were of no value, and that the release by the claimants of the amount due on these accounts was not a sufficient consideration to uphold such settlements. It must therefore he held that those of the libelants who executed such releases are not entitled to recover in this action.
2. The refusal of the master of the Belvedere to return the libel-ants to San Francisco after the expiration of the time for which they had shipped was a breach of the contract under which they shipped as seamen, and for this breach of contract the libelants who have not released their claims are entitled to recover damages. The William Jarvis, 1 Spr. 485, Fed. Cas. No. 17,697. See, also, Allen v. Hitch, 2 Curt. 147, Fed. Cas. No. 224; The Minerva, 1 Hagg. Adm. 347. As to the measure of damages, the libelants are.entitled to recover such sum as will compensate them for the time they were unnecessarily detained beyond their term of service. The; term named in the articles expired on March 8, 3898, but at that date the vessel, without fault of her owners, was imprisoned in the ice. The detention of the libelants from this cause until July, 1898, was an inci