The Paola R.
| Decision Date | 17 June 1887 |
| Citation | 32 F. 174 |
| Parties | THE PAOLA R. [1] v. THE PAOLA R. ZEIGLER |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana |
B Frank Jonas and I. O. Nixon, Jr., for libelant.
E. H Farrar and E. B. Kruttschnitt, for claimant.
Compressing cotton for shipment by vessel or railroad is land business. The demand of the libelant in this case is, in effect, to establish a maritime lien for the compressing of cotton, when the compressing was performed inland, and before any contract of affreightment, binding on the ship, was made. The statement of the case shows that there can be no lien for such compressing. But the libelant says that in the port of New Orleans the custom and usage was and is that bills of lading of cotton are made, and rates are fixed, with reference to the delivery to the ship of uncompressed cotton and that when compressed cotton is delivered to a ship the ship repays the cost of compressing. Concede such a custom and it can have no greater effect than an express contract to the same purport between the master and the shipper. Such an express contract would be, in substance, an agreement to make a rebate on the freight of compress cotton, and to pay such rebate before the freight is earned, or, in other words, the ship, in consideration of freight to be earned, agrees to pay down a cash amount.
Maritime liens are stricti juris, (see Vandewater v. Mills, 19 How. 82,) and do not arise on all contracts made by the owners to result in profit to the ship. Many examples might be given. It is only where the contract to result in benefit to the ship is a maritime contract that a lien on the ship arises. Whether a contract is or not a maritime contract depends on its subject-matter, i.e., whether it provides for maritime services, maritime transactions, or maritime casualties. Insurance Co. v. Dunham, 11 Wall. 1. In the present case the contract has reference to obtaining of a cargo, and is to be performed before the voyage is commenced, and without reference to the result.
A policy of insurance on a ship is a maritime contract, (Insurance Co. v. Dunham, supra,) but no lien results for a premium, (The John T. Moore, 3 Woods, 61.) There is no lien for commissions on advances, nor for obtaining freights. The J. C. Williams, 15 F. 558. In Ferris v. Jewett, 1 Fed.Rep. 111, a lien was denied a shipping broker for services in obtaining a crew. A shipping broker has no lien for services in procuring a charter-party. The Thames, 10 F. 848. The services of a solicitor of freight are not maritime in character, and create no lien on the vessel. The Crystal Stream, 25 F. 575.
In The Thames, supra, Judge BROWN says:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Braithwaite v. Jordan
...admiralty jurisdiction. The Virginia, 2 Paine, 115. The damages recoverable have nothing essentially maritime in their composition. The Paola, 32 F. 174. The undertaking question did not take the place of the Eclipse. It is not a stipulation for value in admiralty to stand in the place of t......
-
The Humboldt
... ... and the ground for claiming a lien is correspondingly less ... The authorities cited which seem to resemble most nearly the ... case under consideration are The Thames, 10 F. 848; The J. C ... Williams, 15 F. 558; The Crystal Stream, 25 F. 575; The Paola ... R., 32 F. 174; Doolittle v. Knobeloch, 39 F. 40 ... These cases all deny the right to claim a lien for ... commissions of a ship's agent or broker. The cases cited ... by counsel for the libelant, in which liens were sustained, ... were all based upon services which were considered to be ... ...
-
The Main
...the subject-matter of the contract, and not the object. See 21 Amer.Law Reg. (N.S.)p. 1; Leland v. The Medora, 2 Woodb.& M. 109; The Paola R., 32 F. 174. We conclude that principle and the weight of authority the services rendered by a stevedore to a ship in taking in and stowing and in dis......
-
Jeffcott v. Aetna Ins. Co.
...settled the issue. See The Dolphin, D.C.E.D.Mich., 7 Fed.Cas. page 862, No. 3,973; The Guiding Star, D.C.S.D.Ohio, 9 F. 521; The Paola R., C.C.E.D.La., 32 F. 174; Kerr v. Union Marine Ins. Co., D.C.S.D.N.Y., 124 F. 835, reversed on other grounds, 2 Cir., 130 F. 415, certiorari denied 194 U.......