Gilchrist v. Godman
| Decision Date | 05 April 1897 |
| Parties | GILCHRIST v. GODMAN et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Robert Rae, for libelant.
John C Richberg and Schuyler & Kremer, for respondents.
The libel is for services in connection with an attempt to save the schooner American Union, stranded about May 6, 1894, at Thompson's Harbor, on Lake Huron. The vessel was at the time of the stranding owned by the respondent Annetta S Godman, and insured for about two-thirds its value in the respondent insurance companies. The master of the vessel at the time was James P. Godman. When the vessel stranded, her master employed the libelants to come to her assistance with tugs, pumps, hawsers, lights, and other wrecking appliances calculated to take her off the beach. The libelants entered upon this undertaking, and continued therein until about the 18th of May, when it was supposed that the vessel had been saved. On the 19th a fresh wind came up, which had the effect of pounding her to pieces upon the shore, leaving no salvage except a few chains and other like things, not amounting to over $300 in value. While the libelants were engaged in their work, under employment of the master, an agent of underwriters was sent on their behalf to assist in the work. He came on the 13th of May, and remained for several days thereafter, participating actively in the superintendence of the work, giving directions, and approving what the master had already done. After the 19th of May, and when it was known that the vessel was totally lost, the owner served upon the underwriters notice of her total abandonment of the vessel.
It will be observed that the relation of the libelants to the vessel in distress was not that of salvors at large. They did not offer their help or impose their services. They were called from a distant port by the master and entered upon their work in pursuance of that call. Their claim for services had the vessel been saved, could not, under the terms of the employment and the customs on Lake Michigan, have been based upon any idea of a proportionate interest in the value of the vessel, growing out of their having been her salvors. Their relation was not that of men coming at a venture to a vessel in distress, but of regular wreckers and tug men, who were employed at a customary compensation to give assistance. In my judgment, no feature of salvors at large enters into this case,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Great Lakes Towing Co. v. Mill Transp. Co.
...limitation of their liability. Some of the facts here stated more fully appear from the report of the case in the court below. Gilchrist v. Godman (D.C.) 79 F. 970. these facts the Court of Appeals held that at the time when the services were rendered the underwriters were the owners of the......
-
Gilchrist v. Chicago Ins. Co.
...services, she claimed the benefit of the act of congress of June 26, 1884, § 18. After the district court filed its opinion in the case (79 F. 970), but before a decree was entered, that court, on motion of libelants, dismissed the libel as to the respondent Annetta S. Godman. A decree was ......
-
The Silver Star
...strain; and that the libelant should have compensation commensurate with the difficulty and extent of the work undertaken. In Gilchrist v. Godman (D.C.) 79 F. 970, Judge Grosscup dealt with a case involving wrecking In the case before him he holds that the relation of libelants to the vesse......
- Albany Steam Trap Co. v. Worthington