anchors and cables. Sail was made on the ship and rockets fired for assistance. The steamer Resolute came up, and the master of the Undaunted then requested the steamer to proceed to the nearest harbour and bring off an anchor and cable. The steamer accordingly went to Ramsgate, and the master, as the best method of executing his order, engaged two luggers, and put on board of them a large anchor and cable. During the 21st, 22nd and 23rd December, the steamer and the luggers were engaged cruising in the neighbourhood of the Foreland, searching for the Undaunted, but without success, the Undaunted having run to the northward, as far as Lowestoft; she had in the meanwhile got ready her spare anchor. In the afternoon of the 23rd the steamer fell in with the Undaunted off the Foreland, -the weather having by this time moderated, and then, with the assistance of another steamer, towed the ship to Gravesend. The luggers with the anchor and chain followed, but were unable to come up with the Undaunted until she had reached Gravesend, when the master refused to accept the anchor and chain. The action was brought by the owners and crew of the steamer and the owners of the luggers for all these services. Value of the Undaunted, cargo and freight, 30,6187.; value of the steamer, 4,000l.; value of the luggers, 5007. and 3007. The Admiralty Advocate and Lushington for the salvors.The steamer is undoubtedly intitled to be remunerated for the whole of her services, as her towage was in the nature of salvage. The real question is whether the luggers are not likewise to be rewarded for their attempted services. It is submitted that they are; first, because the services were performed under an agreement of salvage; and secondly, because the crew of the luggers and the crew of the steamer are to be looked upon as one company of salvors, and the actual service of the steamer gives the Court power to award remuneration for the entire work performed: the E. U. (a) is on this point almost on all fours with the present case. Public policy and equity are in favour of the plaintiffs. Deane, Q.C., and Wambey, for the owners.-It is a well-known principle in this Court, that no efforts, however meritorious, are, if ineffectual, to be treated as salvage services. The mere contract with the master of the steamer, never beneficially performed, cannot intitle the crew of the luggers to sue as salvors. The case of the E. U. only goes to the effect of allowing the whole of the crew of a life-boat to recover for services beneficial and not (a) 1 Spinks, 63. 1860. June 21. 1860. June 21. Judgment. ing under an engagement salvage reward though their efforts are ineffectual. beneficial, when the beneficial service was rendered by a part only of the crew: it would be going too far to extend this principle, to allow the crews of two boats to recover, none of whom ever came near the ship in distress, and none of whom were ever engaged by the ship. The crew of the luggers and the steamer cannot be looked upon as only one company of salvors. Right Hon. DR. Lushington:-I cannot have any doubt as to the duty of the Court in this case. There is a broad distinction between salvors who volunteer to go out, and salvors Salvors work- who are employed by a ship in distress. Salvors who volunteer, go out at their own risk for the chance of earning reward, and are intitled to if they labour unsuccessfully, they are intitled to nothing: the effectual performance of salvage service is that which gives them a title to salvage remuneration. But if men are engaged by a ship in distress, whether generally or particularly, they are to be paid according to their efforts made, even though the labour and service may not prove beneficial to the vessel. Take the case of a vessel at anchor in a gale of wind, hailing a steamer to lie by and be ready to take her in tow, if required; the steamer does so, the ship rides out of the gale safely without the assistance of the steamer: I should undoubtedly hold in such a case that the steamer was intitled to salvage reward, the how much to be determined by the risk encountered by both vessels, the value of the property at hazard, and the other circumstances of the case. The engagement to render assistance to a vessel in distress, and the performance of that engagement, so far as necessary or so far as possible, establish a title to salvage reward. In the present case there was an engagement: the steamer was engaged to go on shore and bring off an anchor and cable to this ship, which had parted from both anchors in a tremendous gale off the Foreland, and was, in my opinion, in very great danger. The engagement, as usual in such cases, was not more specific than was necessary. The true effect of it was, “ You are to go and get me an anchor and cable, and do all that is necessary for this purpose." The steamer proceeds to the shore, and employs two luggers to take in the anchor and chain, as being by size and construction fitted to go alongside a large vessel in a seaway; in fact employs them as the best means of executing the The employ promised service. Now if it was necessary and proper to employ these luggers, their employment forms part of the original order, and their services must be paid for. I am of opinion that the luggers were most properly engaged by the master of the steamer; I am further of opinion that they did all in their power to reach the vessel in distress, they put out to sea immediately, ment of the luggers being necessary, came within the terms of the original order. and were for nearly three days knocking about the Foreland, and they were only disappointed of effecting their service by the act of God. The ship had driven as far as Lowestoft she was finally fallen in with by the steamer, and towed by her and another steamer to Gravesend: on the luggers arriving with the cable and anchor, the master of the vessel then refused to accept them. Looking to all the circumstances of the case, the risk of the ship, the long labour of the salvors, and the expense and loss of profits incurred, I shall give the Resolute 400l., and to each of the luggers 1007. Rothery, proctor for the salvors. Deacon for the owners. 1860. June 21. THE ENCHANTRESS. Salvage Apportionment-17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 498- Upon application to the Court under the 498th section of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, for an apportionment of salvage, the Court will decree an equitable apportionment, unless an equitable agreement be proved, or an equitable tender has been made. An agreement between salvors and the agent of the salving ship to leave the amount of their reward to his determination, held inequitable and void. Personal services to be always favourably regarded as the subject of salvage reward. THIS THIS was an action for the distribution of salvage brought by the masters of three fishing-luggers, of Lowestoft, against Gabriel Virgo Daniel, of Lowestoft, the agent for the owners of the steamtug Powerful, and against the owners, master, and crew of the Powerful. The petition pleaded that, on the 6th November, 1859, the plaintiffs were engaged by Daniel, who was harbour-master of Lowestoft, to go on board the Powerful steamtug, and assist her in going to the rescue of the steamer Enchantress, then in great distress off the harbour of Lowestoft; that they did so, and were of great service in enabling the Powerful to reach the Enchant June 22. 1860. June 22. Judgment. ress by the shortest route across the sands, and take her in tow; that an agreement at the time was entered into between those on board the Powerful and the crew of the Pakefield life-boat, which was also rendering services to the Enchantress, that the salvage should be divided in equal moieties between them; that 7507. had been paid by the owners of the Enchantress to Daniel as salvage money for the entire services. The petition also alleged that the plaintiff's would not accept the tender of 147. 17s. 6d. made to them by the defendants, and prayed the Court to award the plaintiffs an equitable proportion of the 3751. The answer alleged that the original engagement of the plaintiffs took place as follows:-"That the said Gabriel Virgo Daniel went down into the fish-market, and seeing the plaintiffs doing nothing, offered them to go off in the tug to the steamer, saying, 'Mind you, if you go, you must leave it to me to make you such remuneration as I shall think proper: now you understand this before you go, so that there may be no mistake.' To which they at once assented, and ran down towards the harbour to be in time to get on board the tug." It also alleged that the plaintiffs had called upon Mr. Daniel in his office, and had expressed their content with his assurance that they should get as much as the crew of the Pakefield life-boat should dole, and that it was not until the Pakefield men had doled, and their shares were ascertained to be 41. 17s. 6d. per man, that the plaintiff's expressed dissatisfaction, and refused to accept such sum. These averments were denied in the reply. The affidavits on these points were contradictory. In one of the affidavits brought in for the plaintiffs, it appeared that at Pakefield all the landsmen present at the launching of the boat, as well as a second and third boat's crew, were admitted to participate equally with the life-boat and her crew, with the exception of a small sum allowed to the life-boat for being the first boat, and that their moiety of the salvage was therefore divided into a great number of shares. Deane, Q.C., for plaintiffs. Twiss, Q.C., for defendants. Right Hon. DR. LUSHINGTON:-In this case the plaintiffs are three masters of fishing-luggers belonging to the port of Lowestoft, who apply to the Court to allot them their share of 3751. salvage money paid to the defendants. The defendants have received from the owners of the ship salved 375l., to be shared between them and the plaintiffs, and they have tendered the plaintiff's 141. 12s. 6d., or at the rate of 4l. 17s. 6d. to each man. 1860. June 22. in the case of The jurisdiction of the Court to apportion salvage money now The Court will rests on the 498th section of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854: apportion, save "Whenever the aggregate amount of salvage payable in respect an equitable of salvage services rendered in the United Kingdom has been agreement, or an equitable finally ascertained, and exceeds 2007., and whenever the aggre- tender. gate amount of salvage payable in respect of salvage services rendered elsewhere has been finally ascertained, whatever such amount may be, then if any delay or dispute arises as to the apportionment thereof, any Court having Admiralty jurisdiction. may cause the same to be apportioned amongst the persons intitled thereto in such manner as it thinks just; and may for that purpose, if it thinks fit, appoint any person to carry such apportionment into effect, and may compel any person in whose hands or under whose control such amount may be to distribute the same or to bring the same into Court, to be there dealt with as the Court may direct, and may for the purposes aforesaid issue such monitions or other processes as it thinks fit." I conceive a duty is hereby imposed upon me to decree, upon application made, what in my judgment is an equitable apportionment of salvage, unless I am barred by one of two circumstances,— either an equitable agreement between the parties, or an equitable tender. I will consider the present case in both ways. First, then, The alleged was there an equitable agreement made between the parties? agreement was not equitable, Mr. Daniel, who no doubt was acting as the agent of the owners and therefore of the Powerful, deposes that he engaged the services of the invalid. plaintiffs, on the express understanding that they were to be intitled only to such remuneration as he should think proper. The plaintiffs deny this, but I will assume the fact to have been as Mr. Daniel deposes, that this agreement was really entered into between the parties. The question still remains, was this a just, an equitable agreement—an agreement such as the Court can sanction and enforce? The plaintiffs were undertaking a service open to many contingencies, but a service certainly requiring skill and experience, and probably accompanied with danger; for the distressed ship was six miles from the shore, in the midst of most dangerous sands, with a gale of wind blowing, and requiring the assistance of a steamer and boats. Can it be just that men, Can it be just that men, undertaking a |