The Chelmsford

• Decision Date: 27 February 1888
• Citation: 34 F. 399
• Parties: THE CHELMSFORD. [1] v. THE CHELMSFORD. MAYO et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

34 F. 399

THE CHELMSFORD. ^[1]

MAYO et al. v. THE CHELMSFORD.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

February 27, 1888

Henry R. Edmunds and John C. Dodge & Sons, for libelants.

Driver & Coulston and Goodrich & Goodrich, for respondent.

BUTLER J.

In the years 1882 and 1883, the libelants, ship-chandlers in Boston furnished the respondent at various times, (the last being in December, 1883,) with necessary supplies, at the instance of her owner, Mr. Warner, when in the port of Boston. In the months of October and November, 1883, they furnished her other supplies to the value of $694.45, at the owner's instance, forwarding them to Portland, where she then was. In June of the same year, Quimby & Co. of Bangor, Me., furnished the ship (then at that port) with supplies of the value of $215.26, taking therefor a draft drawn by the master in their favor on the owner. This draft was transferred by indorsement to the libelants, who cashed it for Quimby & Co. After crediting several payments made, there remains a balance due on the accounts of $3,467.02, with interest from December 6 1883, to recover which the attachment was issued. In November, 1884, the claimant purchased the ship for $10,000 and took possession. Prior to the date when the indebtedness to libelants, or any part of it, was contracted, the purchaser had made advancements to the owner amounting to $9,700, or thereabout, and had taken a mortgage on the ship to secure payment. The consideration for the sale was this indebtedness, and an additional sum of $300. At the time libelant's claim arose, and for several years prior thereto, the home port of the vessel was Boston, and so continued until after her sale. The owner resided there, and still does. She was built at Quebec, was registered there and started out with the British flag, which she continued to carry. The owner went from Boston, where he had been located for some time to Quebec, to build her, and remained there until she was finished and started out to sea. About this latter fact there does not seem to be room for reasonable doubt. Mr. Atwood, of the libelant firm, testifies distinctly, on cross-examination, that he had known him there for 10 years; that he was living with his nieces, where he spent nine months or more of each year. There is no evidence that he had any other home within this period. When not there he was with the vessel, or in pursuit of other business. His own testimony is singularly unsatisfactory and unreliable. He starts out with a statement that his memory is very defective, and that in consequence little dependence should be placed upon what he says. His testimony, on its face, fully supports this statement. I would infer that he is wanting in intelligence, and that he testifies under a strong bias in favor of the libelants. Much that he says is difficult to understand. I conclude from his entire statement that he was born in England, and came to this country when quite young, locating in New York, where he resided with one MacKay. While there (how long he remained is very uncertain) he married MacKay's sister-in-law. He then went to Boston, where he lived for some time; how long is also uncertain. From there he moved to Quebec, and engaged in shipbuilding with MacKay, (who, I infer, had also moved there,) and continued in the business for some years. He withdrew from the partnership, and (his wife having died) visited England. After a time he returned to this country, and again located in Boston. Subsequently he went to Quebec to build the vessel in question, remaining only so long as was necessary to complete the work and start her to sea,-- a period of three or four months. He left Quebec with her, (or directly after,) visited England, France, and other places, and finally returned to Boston with the ship, where he has continued to reside ever since, being absent occasionally on business, probably as much as three months of the year. After his return to Boston, which occurred eight to ten years ago, he became part owner of several Boston vessels, and entered into numerous shipping enterprises. In some of these vessels, and in one or more of the enterprises, the libelants were interested with him; and, in addition thereto, he and they had considerable business intercourse. In the registration, mortgage, and bill of sale of the ship, the owner stated his residence as Boston. There cannot, therefore, I...