ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

such port work they cannot be used. But demurrage is an allowance for the time during which the ship would otherwise be on a voyage, and, as she does not stop her voyage for Sundays, every day should count. The same reasoning applies to dispatch money, which is an allowance made the charterer for loading in less time than that permitted by the charter.72

The term "working days" means a calendar day on which the law permits work to be done. It excludes Sundays and legal holidays, but does not credit the charterer with days when the weather is too bad to work."

In these latter days, a stipulation against strikes has been found quite convenient.74

Under lump-sum charters, a fruitful source of controversy is as to the spaces on the ship which the charterer may fill. He is entitled to all spaces where cargo can be put, except the spaces necessary for the crew, coal, tackle, apparel, provisions, and furniture. The variety in the build of vessels renders it impossible to lay down any general rule. A good example of such controversies is Crow v. Myers.75

The loading is largely governed by the custom of the port, except where inconsistent with the written contract.76

72 Muirfield (D. C.) 174 Fed. 75; Fargrove Nav. Co. v. Lavino & Co. (D. C.) 191 Fed. 525; Pool Shipping Co. v. Samuel, 200 Fed. 36, 118 C. C. A. 264.

73 Sorensen v. Keyser, 52 Fed. 163, 2 C. C. A. 650; Wood v. Keyser (D. C.) 84 Fed. 688; Id., 87 Fed. 1007, 31 C. C. A. 358. The proper language for the charterer to use in order to get the benefit of bad weather is "weather working days." Bennetts v. Brown, [1908] 1 K. B. 490.

74 Marshall v. McNear (D. C.) 121 Fed. 428; Pyman S. S. Co. v. Mexican Central R. Co., 169 Fed. 281, 94 C. C. A. 557; Hulthen v. [1903] A. C. 389.

Stewart, [1902] 2 K. B. 199; 75 (D. C.) 41 Fed. 806. See, also, Kaupanger (D. C.) 241 Fed. 702. But the vessel may carry only so much coal as is reasonably necessary for the voyage. Darling v. Raeburn, [1906] 1 K. B. 572; [1907] 1 K. B. 846.

76 Moore v. U. S., 196 U. S. 157, 25 Sup. Ct. 202, 49 L. Ed. 428.

EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS

UNDER CHARTER PARTIES

88. The master must sign the bills of lading and other necessary documents.

Most charter parties require the master to sign bills of lading as presented by the charterer for the different parts of the cargo as received on board, and drafts for the disbursements made by the charterers to pay the vessel's bills when in port, and for the difference between the charter party freight and the freight as per bills of lading. All these are important documents. The amount necessary to clear a single large ship runs up into the tens of thousands. As charterers with a large business may have several on the berth loading at once, the capital necessary for their use would be enormous. Hence these documents are needed by him and his shippers for obtaining discounts from his banker. Thus, a man who sees an opportunity to ship a housand bales of cotton to Liverpool, where he can sell it at an advance, can buy it on this side, engage freight room from some charterer who has a ship in port or expected, get a bill of lading for it to order, draw on his Liverpool consignee, attaching the bill of lading to the draft, and get his draft at once discounted at his bank.

Under the usage of trade, the freight is payable at the port of discharge, and is collected by the vessel owner. the charterer has sublet the room to different shippers for more than he has agreed to pay the owner for the use of his ship, the owner will owe him the difference. This is calculated at the loading port on the completion of the loading, and the master gives the charterer a draft on his owners for the amount. If the cargo has started from inland points, and the charterer has to pay accrued charges of previous carriers (for the last carrier pays the charges HUGHES, ADM. (2D ED.)—12

of the previous carriers), the draft may be very great; but, if it all starts from the loading port, so narrow are the margins of profit in modern trade that the draft is small. A recalcitrant captain may be compelled to sign these important papers."7

CESSER CLAUSE IN CHARTER PARTIES

89. Under the cesser clause, the settlement between ship and charterer must be made at the loading port, and the shipper looks to the ship alone, and not to the charterer.

A common provision in charter parties is the clause known as the "cesser" clause. Its usual language is "owner to have a lien on the cargo for freight, dead freight, and demurrage, charterer's liability to cease when cargo shipped.' It is strictly construed. It does not operate to release the ship, and it releases the charterer from liability for future occurrences alone, not for past occurrences.'

78

The object is to end the charterer's liability at the loading port and save him from a lawsuit at a distant point. To that end the bills of lading are given direct by the ship to the shipper, and all disputes as to demurrage, dead freight, etc., at the loading port, are settled before the vessel sails, while the lien given to the owner protects his freight or

$ 88. 77 Reynolds v. The Joseph, 2 Hughes, 58, Fed. Cas. No. 11,730. See, in general, as to these documents, Kruger v. Moel Tryvan S. S. Co., [1907] A. C. 272; London Transport Co. v. Trechman, [1904] 1 K. B. 635.

$ 89. 78 KISH v. CORY, L. R. 10 Q. B. 553; Iona, 80 Fed. 933, 26 C. C. A. 261; Schmidt v. Keyser, 88 Fed. 799, 32 C. C. A. 121; Crossman v. Burrill, 179 U. S. 100, 21 Sup. Ct. 38, 45 L. Ed. 106; Steamship Rutherglen Co. v. Howard Houlder & Partners, 203 Fed. 848, 122 C. C. A. 166; Elvers v. W. R. Grace & Co., 244 Fed. 705, 157 C. C. A. 153; Seguranca, 250 Fed. 19, 162 C. C. A. 191.

demurrage at the port of discharge. Hence, if the owner gives the shipper a clean bill of lading at the loading port, he cannot hold the goods for demurrage; for the shipper is not bound by the charter party. He must collect his demurrage, or reserve a lien for it, by proper language, in his bill of lading.79

79 Turner v. Haji, [1904] A. C. 826.

CHAPTER VIII

OF WATER CARRIAGE AS AFFECTED BY THE HARTER ACT OF FEBRUARY 13, 1893 (27 Stat. 445 [U. S. Comp. St.

90-91.

92.

93.

Policy of Act.

§§ 8029-8035])

Act Applicable Only between Vessel Owner and Shipper.
Vessels and Voyages to which Act is Applicable.

94. Relative Measure of Obligation as to Handling the Cargo

and Handling the Ship.

95. Necessity of Stipulation to Reduce Liability for Unseaworthi

ness.

POLICY OF ACT

90. The act materially modifies the law relating to the carriage of goods.

91. It forbids any stipulation against negligence in preparation for the voyage or in delivery, or unseaworthiness below the measure of due diligence.

The discussion in the preceding chapter has been as to the liability of carriers under the general decisions of the courts, independent of statute. As has been seen, stipulations against negligence are forbidden by the preponderance of American decisions, but allowed by the English decisions. As a large proportion of the foreign carrying trade is conducted in English vessels, the effect of the English decisions is to allow vessel owners to fritter away their liability by stipulation, and this placed American vessel owners at a disadvantage in the close competition between them. The Harter Act was a compromise between the shipping and carrying interests, and though it exempts carrying vessels from liability for many acts of negligence for which they were responsible formerly, and against which they could not stipulate, it at the same time works in favor of the shipper by forbidding many stipulations which under

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »