The Philadelphia

• Decision Date: 19 August 1896
• Docket Number: 152,153,,154
• Citation: 75 F. 684
• Parties: THE PHILADELPHIA. v. MURPHY (two cases). THE BALTIMORE. PARMENTER SAME v. LAMPER et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

75 F. 684

THE PHILADELPHIA. THE BALTIMORE. PARMENTER v. MURPHY (two cases).

SAME v. LAMPER et al.

Nos. 152, 153,, 154

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

August 19, 1896

Eugene P. Carver and Edward E. Blodgett, for appellant.

Frederic Dodge and Edward S. Dodge, for appellees.

Before COLT and PUTNAM, Circuit Judges, and WEBB, District Judge.

PUTNAM Circuit Judge.

These three cases are submitted to us on a common record. They are appeals taken by the owner of the vessels from decrees on libels against two coasting steamers, making short trips out of Boston, for ordinary supplies of coal and water. The assignments of errors are the same in all. The only alleged errors which we have occasion to consider are the third fourth, and fifth, as follows:

'Third. That the court should have found that the goods declared on were not furnished on the credit of the vessel, but solely upon the credit of the charterers. Fourth. That the court should have found that the libelant had notice that the vessel was under charter, and the supplies were furnished at the expense of the charterer. Fifth. That the court should have found that the goods were furnished solely upon the order of the charterers, and not upon the order of the master or owners of the vessel.'

If we found any of these in favor of the owner of the steamers libeled, we would be required to consider some questions of law consequent on such findings. As we find them all in favor of the libelants, we do not perceive that any question of law arises.

The appellant has also pressed on us two other propositions,-- one of laches on the part of the libelants, and the other a claim that there is no proof that the coal furnished the Philadelphia in one of the suits ever went aboard the steamer. These objections were not taken in the district court, nor are they especially covered by any assignment of errors; and therefore they cannot be considered by us, under the rules which we have many times stated.

The learned judge of the district court found that the supplies in all of the suits, were furnished on the credit of the respective vessels, and that the libelants had no notice that the vessels were under charters in which it was agreed that the supplies should be furnished at the expense of the charterers. He also found that the supplies were furnished partly on the orders of the master, and partly on the orders of the charterers. It will be noticed that the fourth alleged error is not stated so precisely as the finding in the opinion of the court below, but it undoubtedly had reference to that finding, and was intended to be based on it. The issues which we have stated, as they exist here, raise only pure questions of fact; and the determination of them involves only the weighing of testimony of witnesses which was apparently contradictory, and was supported on the one side or the other, more or less, by the surrounding circumstances, It is not within the range of possibilities that other suits will arise in which the testimony and the circumstances will be substantially the same, so that there would be no advantage in loading our opinion and the reports with a discussion of the details of the evidence.

We are entirely satisfied that all the supplies were furnished on the credit of the respective vessels, in the sense in which that expression is commonly used in proceedings of this character. We are also satisfied that the owner of the vessels has not established that any of the libelants had the notice spoken of in the opinion of the learned judge of the district court, or in the assignments of errors touching the matter. Therefore, inasmuch as the steamers were 'foreign' vessels, in the sense in which that word is used in this connection, and as the supplies were the reasonable hand to hand quantities of coal and water needed for their use in short coastwise trips, and were actually consumed aboard, no question of law would arise if all the supplies...