16 F. Cas. 1272 | D. Mass. | 1866
I cannot doubt that the libellants have performed a salvage service. Salvage is the saving of vessels or other property from peril at sea by persons not bound by any existing contract to render the service. The compensation in the absence of express contract is understood to be contingent upon success, but that is perhaps not absolutely essential to a salvage service when it has been rendered by request, though if that contingency is shown the contract is presumed to be for salvage; the degree of peril is not usually important except as bearing upon the amount of the reward, provided it be something beyond the mere ordinary dangers of the seas. If there is no danger at all, as where a neutral vessel not liable to condemnation by the law of nations, has been retaken from a belligerent who respects and acts upon the law of nations, or where the master of a ship accepts some aid as mere matter of precaution or to accelerate his voyage or the like, no salvage service is rendered. But where the vessel is in actual or apparent danger, or her position or condition is such that she may probably soon be in danger, and the master acts and permits others to act upon that supposition, it would require a strong case of mistake on his part to reduce the service rendered to something less than a salvage service. So that if there were here merely the fact of the signal seen and acted on, it would be very difficult to say that a salvage service was not undertaken by the master’s request. I am aware that there are a good many cases in which salvage and tow-age have been discussed, and which have turned or seemed to turn upon a distinction between those two kinds of service, but the real inquiry in those cases was, not whether the service, but whether the contract was for towage or salvage. If a tug plying in her usual waters takes hold of a vessel and tows her into port, under no express contract, the question is what was the implied contract. If the circumstances were ordinary, we may well infer the usual towage contract; otherwise if the case is one quite out of the ordinary course. In this point of view the amount of danger may be important as a reasonable
The question of compensation remains; and this is always a nice and difficult question. Upon a careful examination of the evidence, I am satisfied that the property was in considerable danger, not of destruction, but of further damage. I cannot believe that the master felt then the confident security which he now testifies to. The gale was very severe, and the sea, considering the place, very high, three or four feet high, as the witnesses assert. It must have appeared to the master to be, and it was highly important that prompt relief should be afforded, not to save life, nor to save the ship from destruction, but to prevent damage to some extent to the vessel, and serious damage to the cargo of sugar, which, in case of a leak, must have been much injured. The aid was given with readiness and skill, and to so good purpose, that the small damage incurred is made a ground of argument to lessen its importance; and fairly, so far as it may tend to show that a longer stay on the beach would have had no very bad consequences, but no farther. Un the other hand the risk was, as I have said, not of destruction, but of such damage as one or two hours more of pounding and straining might have caused. The bark was in a harbor within reach of assistance, and would in all probability have been gotten off at high-water, if not by her own crew, which I think she would not, yet by the aid of other vessels. The case of a vessel stranded in a thoroughfare, is to be distinguished from that of one on a lonely shore, where relief may not be expected, and where the first vessel that offers may probably be the only one available for the purpose. Upon this ground it has sometimes been said that a vessel abandoned in or near a much used harbor, could not be considered derelict in the strict sense. Neither was the danger to the tug very considerable. There was some danger, undoubted-iy, arising from the high pressure of steam necessary to be used; and if this strain should break the machinery there would be great danger, but this was not very probable.
YVhat then should be the reward? Where a vessel on shore in such a place as this in good weather is pulled off by a tug, it has been held that one fair criterion of the value of the service is what the tug would have undertaken to do it for, if payment had been made contingent, upon success. The James T. Abbott [supra]. It is obvious, however, that this rule will not answer for all, or most cases, because it takes into view only one side of the question, — the risk, labor, and expense of the salvors, — without regard to the value of their services to the other party. Where the necessity is more urgent, and no time is given to bargain, and to choose between different offers, another element, namely, what would the owners of the property be willing to give rather than that the service should not be rendered, may fairly be looked at. That a' steamer, usually employed at remunerative pay, in towing about a harbor, does not stand precisely on the same footing in respect to salvage, as a vessel kept on purpose for saving life and property, nor as a merchant or passenger steamer deviating from an important voyage to give aid, must also be admitted. The H. B. Foster [Case No. 6,291], And in this point of view some of the cases concerning tow-boats find their just application.
Taking into consideration all the circumstances, I have concluded that a fair and adequate remuneration for this salvage service is fifteen hundred dollars, which is nearly five per cent of the value saved. Salvage decreed.