The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Late Decisions in Maritime Law Legal Tips for Shipowners and Officers Specially Compiled for Marine Review By Harry Bowne Skillman Attorney at Law HOUGH it manifestly is the duty of a master (or owner) to furnish proper medical attention and neces- sities to the seamen over whom he has charge, whether they request it or not, where a seaman himself does not consider himself sick, and makes no complaint whatever, this obligation cannot be held so extensive as to re- quire inquiry as to latent ailments.— Willey v. Alaska Packers’ association, So (2d). 987. * * * fate law imposes upon owners of ships the duty of using due care to ascertain and consider the nature and characteristics of goods offered for shipment, and to exercise due care in their handling, including the adop- tion of such methods as their nature require.—WILLFARO, 9 F. (2d) 940. * * * HARTER party providing for whole vessel, or sufficient room for cargo of 530 to 600 metric tons, does not obligate the charterer to pay freight on 600 tons, where only 537 tons were shipped.—GENEVA, 9 F. (2d) 942. * * * ALVAGE awards, it was declared in FLORENCE LUCKENBACH, 9 F. (2d) 1008, are not made by fixed rule, and of necessity they vary with the circumstances of each case. The promptitude of salvors’ services, their skill and energy, and the risk to which they exposed themselves, the value of the property employed by the sal- vors in rendering the services, and the danger to which this property was exposed, together with the de- gree of success achieved by them,. the value of the property saved, and the danger from which this property was rescued, must be considered in making an award. a ok * ERE excess of damage over what is usual under the circumstances is not prima facie evidence of negli- gence in stowage.—BENCLEUCH, 10 F. (2d) 49. * oe oe DMISSION in bills of lading that lemons were received “in ap- parent good order and condition,” goes no further than to create prima facie proof that to the eye the boxes were secure and sufficient, and that the lemons, so far as visible, were not damaged. It does not prove that the fruit was inherently sound.—BEN- CLEUCH, 10 F. (2d) 49. oe * a VV HERE charterer agreed to re- _turn scow in as good order and condition as when received, less ordi- nary wear and tear, it will be re- 40 sponsible for damage caused by sink- ing at wharf, unless it was due to negligence of captain.—Schoonmaker- Conners Co. Inc., v. Rosoff Engineering Co. Inc., 10 F. (2d) 64. ok By ok HRASE “customs and usages at the ports of loading and discharg- ing to be observed, unless otherwise expressed,” in charter clause allowing charterers a certain number of days for loading, referred to customs and usages as to allowance of Sundays, holidays, bad weather days, etc. and not to other clauses of the contract. —wWilkrus v. Trafikaktiebolaget Gran- gesberg Okelosund, 10 F. (2d) 129. rn eee EAMAN, who, before commence- ment of voyage, refused to consent to provision inserted in articles after he had signed, was not subject to discharge at first port of call because of such refusal, STEEL TRADER, 110 F. (2d) 248; where so discharged, the seaman was en- titled to wages to the end of the voyage. Bo ok ok ONTENTIONS that range lights on river bank are designed to peremptorily fix the course of vessels and direct their movements, acting as semaphores do on a railroad, and that vessels must steer in exact accord with them, cannot be sustained, declared the court in the case of LE Coq, 10 F, (2d) 246. “These range lights,” said the court, correspond with the channel range markers, similarly lo- cated, used by day as an aid to navigation, and merely indicate the deepest channel courses in the river. The navigation of a ship in any part of the navigable water in the river, without reference to the range lights or markers, is not unlawful, nor evi- dence of negligence per se. On the other hand, the anchoring of craft of any kind in or near such fairway is not unlawful, nor evidence of. negli- gence per se.” t sk * EAMAN eannot recover costs of cure when, having received atten- tion at a marine hospital, he has ex- pended nothing in his cure. But ex- penses actually incurred for treat- ment beyond that which was. given him without cost at such a_ hospital are recoverable, unless the seaman has rejected the hospital service when available. The rule of law which gives a seaman the right to recover his costs of cure and maintenance extends to the master.—BaALsa, 10 F. (2d) 408. * ok Bd NDER inland rules, a E steamer passing a motorboat is bound MARINE REVIEW—June, 1927 it was decided in- and the to keep out of the way, motorboat may keep her course and speed, according to the case of ROBERT FULTON, 10 F. (2d) 424. The court also said that the fact that suction of an overtaking vessel is a frequent cause of collision, especially if she is larger than the overtaken vessel and the channel is narrow and_ shallow, is well known. oe ke ok UG, undertaking to tow two deck lighters, was not an insurer, and the mere loss of the tow raised no presumption of fault against the tug. While it was true that the lighter in question in the case of MORNING Star, 10 F. (2d) 588, was not of a type used for towing at sea, ex- cept when being towed from one port to another, the tug was only bound to bring to the performance of its duty reasonable skill and care, and such consideration as the special cir- cumstances of the case demanded. a oe oe ERIL of the sea means something so catastrophic as to triumph over those safeguards by which skillful and vigilant seamen usually bring ship and cargo to port in safety.— City OF DUNKIRK, 10 F. (2d) 609. * * * AST vessel coming to anchor in anchorage grounds is bound to allow ample berth space to a_ vessel already at anchor.—William Lyall Shipbuilding Co. v. United States, 10 F. (2d) 620. ok * ok ESSEL without cargo in her hold, and with hatch covers on and bolted, is as seaworthy in the general sense without a covering tarpaulin as she is with one. That protection, it was said in EpITH, 10 F. (2d) 684, is put on solely for cargo purposes, or at least to keep dry whatever may be in the hold. The act of placing and fastening a tarpaulin is a part of the care of cargo. The furnishing of proper dunnage is a part of stow- age, it was decided, and failure to provide dunnage where _ reasonably necessary is a fault in stowage. ae ok ok HERE owner failed to deliver ship according to charter, meas- ure of damages is difference between contract price and market price of substitute tonnage.—Pendleton Bros., Inc., v. Pearce, 10 F. (2d) 692. oe * ae es LEASING a pier or wharf, the lessor may reserve the right to charge wharfage against vessels not owned or chartered by the lessee. —M. L. C. No. 10, 10 F. (2d) 699.