The Richard Winslow
| Citation | 71 F. 426 |
| Decision Date | 06 January 1896 |
| Docket Number | 260. |
| Parties | THE RICHARD WINSLOW. v. THE RICHARD WINSLOW. NORTON et al. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit) |
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Chas E. Kremer, for appellants.
George D. Van Dyke, for appellee.
Before WOODS, JENKINS, and SHOWALTER, Circuit Judges.
JENKINS Circuit Judge, after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the court.
The contract here was dual in character. It contemplated a carriage by sea from the port of Chicago to the port of Buffalo, and thereafter storage of the cargo in the vessel at the port of Buffalo until the opening of navigation. Such contracts have become frequent upon the Great Lakes with respect to the forwarding of the crops; the ship being thereby assured of a cargo just before the close of navigation, and the shipper obtaining cheap or free storage during the closed season of navigation, and being also thereby enabled to reach the seaboard immediately upon the opening of navigation. The question presented is whether this contract with respect to the storage of the corn at the harbor of Buffalo during the closed season of navigation can be deemed a maritime contract, and so within the admiralty jurisdiction. Long ago Judge Story took issue with the common-law courts of England, which sought to restrict the admiralty jurisdiction to causes of action arising 'from things done upon the sea,' and asserted the true limitation of that jurisdiction to be 'to things pertaining to the sea. ' De Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gall. 398, Fed. Cas. No. 3,776. For many years his position was vigorously assailed, even by the justices of the supreme court; Mr. Justice Campbell in The Magnolia, 20 How 335, decided in 1857, speaking of it as a 'broad pretension for the admiralty, under which the legal profession and this court staggered for thirty years before being able to maintain it. ' Finally, in 1870, in Insurance Co. v. Dunham, 11 Wall. 1, by the unanimous concurrence of the judges, the position of Judge Story was fully sustained, and the court declared the true criterion of admiralty jurisdiction with respect to contracts 'is the nature and subject-matter of the contract as whether it was a maritime contract having reference to maritime service or maritime transactions. ' A maritime contract must therefore concern transportation by sea. It must relate to navigation and commerce on navigable waters. Unquestionably there was here a contract for carriage by sea and that contract was maritime in its nature. But there was joined with it a contract with respect to the cargo after the completion of the voyage that was in no respect maritime in its nature. If as Judge, now Mr. Justice, Brown observes...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore-McCormack Lines v. INTERN. TERMINAL OPERATING
...or can be said to constitute "a mere incident to maritime transportation", Pillsbury Flour, supra, at 440, quoting, The Richard Winslow, 71 F. 426, 428 (7th Cir. 1896); Marubeni-Iida, supra, at 419; Oliver J. Olson & Co. v. Marine Terminals Corporation, 215 F.Supp. 490, 492 (N.D. Cal.1962),......
-
In re Hydraulic Steam Dredge No. 1
...covered and protected. In a like case, and on the same ground, this circuit court of appeals, in the late case of The Richard Winslow, 18 C.C.A. 344, 71 F. 426, declined in admiralty in respect of a similar contract. In both of these cases the contract was in connection with a contract for ......
-
The C. Vanderbilt
...court, in The Murphy Tugs, 28 F. 429.' To the same effect are The Richard Winslow, 67 F. 259, affirmed by the circuit court (7th Cir.) 18 C.C.A. 344, 71 F. 426, wherein it was 'A maritime contract must therefore concern transportation by sea. It must relate to navigation and to maritime emp......
-
American Stevedores v. Porello United States v. Lauro
...the cases raising such doubts are concerned only with contracts for the performance of partly non-maritime activities. See The Richard Winslow, 7 Cir., 71 F. 426; Pillsbury Flour Mills Co. v. Interlake S.S. Co., 2 Cir., 40 F.2d 439. To sever a contract provision for indemnity for damages ar......