Cavalier v. The Christobal Colon

• Decision Date: 26 December 1890
• Parties: THE CHRISTOBAL COLON. v. THE CHRISTOBAL COLON. CAVALIER
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana

44 F. 803

THE CHRISTOBAL COLON.

CAVALIER v. THE CHRISTOBAL COLON.

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.

December 26, 1890

Percy Roberts and Alfred Goldthwaite, for libelant.

Bayne Denegre & Bayne, for claimant.

BILLINGS J.

This cause is submitted on the exception that no cause of action is shown in the libel against the vessel. It is not denied that there would be admiralty jurisdiction in an action in personam. The question presented is whether the libelant upon the alleged facts, has a lien upon the vessel. The facts alleged in the libel are that the Christobal Colon was a vessel engaged in foreign commerce, (the claim filed by the respondent shows that she is a foreign vessel, her owners residing in Barcelona, Spain;) that she was taking on coal for a voyage; that the libelant was employed to aid in loading the coal; that while so employed, through the negligence of the master and owners in not closing certain sections of the hatchway, he fell through the same and was injured, and thereby has suffered damage in the amount of $10,000. The question then is whether a person injured by the negligence of the master and owners, while employed in loading coal supplied for a voyage upon a foreign steam vessel, for the damage which he has suffered has a lien upon the vessel.

Those who supplied the coal have a lien. It is difficult to see why those who were employed in loading the coal should not also have a lien. In several cases in this court judgments have been given against the vessel for injuries suffered by employes through the negligence of the owners. On appeal to the circuit court the libelants also recovered. It is true that no question was made in these cases as to the lien. See The Explorer, 20 F. 135, and The Mandalay. ^[1] In Cope v Vallette Dry-Dock, 10 F. 144, this court gives a brief summary of the doctrine of maritime liens and their origin, and the measure or test as to their existence, as follows

'The reason of this precise discrimination is that, with the exception of derelict and things found, and the ship, her cargo, and freight, there could be no basis in reason for a lien which must exist in order to support a libel in rem. The ship and all things which pertain to it, are, in the law of admiralty, clothed with personality, so far as responsibility goes. Those who repair or loan upon her, or equip or man her and those who deal with her, and those who are injured by her, and those who save her, look to her. The reason of this is that she was often far distant from her home and owners, and commerce was vastly...