CLASS A. There is one alteration in the "Revised Statement" of some importance which we have already referred to. In the claim in respect to the Altamaha, (which will be found commented on at page 19 of our first report as one manifestly extravagant,) in addition to the claim by the owner of $12,000 for the brig and her outfit, there was a claim in respect of the brig advanced by "an agent" amounting to $15,450. This latter claim has been withdrawn, so that the total claim in the "Revised Statement" is reduced by that amount, and the sum now claimed for the vessel and her outfit is $12,000, which is only $100 more than our allowance of $100 per ton would give. In the "Former Statement" the claims in this class were: $7,435,743 42, 360 595, 747 Therefore the total claim in the "Former Statement" amounted to $8,073, 810 But there have been withdrawn the claims for 4 out of the 208, 996 15, 450 $7,849, 364 Leaving therefore the amount of Which amount has to be compared with the corrected amount of the claims in Class A, contained in the "Revised Statement," that is to say, with................... Therefore the total amount of the aditional claims in Class A, contained in the Revised Statement, amounts to....... These additional claims consist of New Claims, that is claims in respect of vessels not mentioned in the Former Statement, amounting to. And Further Claims, that is, claims in respect of vessels which are mentioned in the Former Statement, viz: $8, 147, 363 $297,999 $30, 205 8,263 30, 789 150, 314 55, 200 23, 228 267, 794 Giving as before a total of... 297,999 I. As regards the Further Claims. In our First Report on Class A we fully provided for all losses sustained in respect of the vessels and outfits, their secured and prospective earnings (a, b, c.) We therefore see no reason why any allowance should be made on account of these Further Claims, but it may be worth while to observe that so far as they relate to the vessels, they can almost all be proved to arise from insurance companies and the owners simultaneously putting forward claims for the same sums; that the additional claims for prospective earnings are advanced by three vessels, the La Fayette, Catherine, General Williams, for the prospective earnings of which enormous sums were already claimed in the Former Statement," and which will be found specially referred to at pages 317 and 318 of this Report, as illustrating the remarkable extent to which the owners have increased their claims since the year 1866. The item of $55,200 for damages comprises claims for loss of time, wages, and occupation. These must, for reasons stated in our First Report, be disallowed, but it may nevertheless be useful to cite some instances in order to show the nature and extent of the claims advanced under this head. The Master of the Edward Carey claims $10,000 as damages for loss of time and occupation; the Mate of the Pearl and a Cooper on board the same vessel claim respectively $5,000 and $1,200 for loss of time; the Mate of the Levi Starbuck claims $9,000 for loss of time. As regards the claim of $23,228 for loss of personal effects, by far the greater part, namely, $18,346 is advanced in respect of losses occasioned by the captures made by the Shenandoah. It will be found in our First Report on Class A that we considered the claims for loss of personal effects occasioned by the captures made by the Shenandoah to be very extravagant, and that we consequently made a ratable allowance for these claims, while we passed those in respect of vessels captured by the other cruisers. We see no reason for allowing anything more for personal effects alleged to be lost by reason of captures by the Shenandoah; but to show the exorbitant nature of the additional claims of $18,346 we will mention that the Master of the Catherine claims $3,625; the First Mate of the Isaac Howland claims $3,227; and the Master of the Pearl claims $5,350. With respect to the further claims for personal effects in the cases of the other whalers we propose to pass them, with the exception of those by the Master and Mate of the Nye, (a vessel of 211 tons,) amounting together to $2,023. We think that $750 will be an ample allowance for these two claims. These considerations will give $3,609 as the total allowance in respect of the Further Claims for personal effects. II. As regards the New Claims, that is, claims in respect of vessels not mentioned in the "Revised Statement." These consist of four fishing. vessels, alleged to have been destroyed by the Tallahassee, viz: the Etta Caroline of 39 tons, (p. 280 of the "Revised Statement,") the Floral Wreath of 54 tons, (p. 281,) the Magnolia of 36 tons, (p. 285,) and the Pearl of 43 tons (p. 286,) and two fishing-vessels, the Ripple of 64 tons, (p. 210,) and the Archer of 62 tons, (p. 207,) the former of which is stated to have been destroyed by the Tacony, and the latter of which is alleged to have been detained by the same cruiser and to have lost her outfit. In respect of the first four fishing vessels destroyed by the Tallahassee the claims for the value of the vessels amounts to $16,200, and the claim for secured earnings to $900. We propose to allow this last claim of $900 and the claim of $2,700, the alleged value of the Magnolia and Pearl,' and, estimating the value of the Etta Caroline and Floral Wreath at the rate of $50 per ton, in accordance with our First Report on Class A, to allow for their values $4,650, so that our proposed allowances in respect of the four fishing-vessels destroyed by the Tallahassee amount altogether to $8,250, whereas the claim amounts to $17,100. As regards the Ripple and the Archer, the two fishing-vessels captured by the Tacony, the claim in the "Revised Statement" in respect of the former for vessel and catchings on board is $8,805, that in respect This vessel Pearl is a different vessel from that referred to above; the claim in respect of the former, which is a small fishing-vessel, is at page 286, and the claim in respect of the latter, which is a bark, is at p. 259. of the Archer for outfits lost is $2,500, and for loss of time $1,800, so that the total claim in respect of these two fishing-vessels is $13,105. In accordance with our First Report on Class A we propose to allow for the value of the Ripple and her outfit at the rate of $50 per ton (giving $3,200,) and for the outfit of the Archer at the rate of $20 per ton (giving $1,240,) and for the catchings of the Ripple, and the detention of the Archer, we propose to allow the sum of $900 each. We thus find that the total amount to be allowed for the Ripple and the Archer will be $6,240. The result, therefore, is that for the New Claims, amounting to $30,205, we propose to allow $14,490. Adding to that amount the sum of $3,609, the above-mentioned allowance for the Further Claims, we find that our allowance for all the additional claims in Class A, comprised in the "Revised Statement,” is $18,099. The above results may be exhibited in the following form: We will now proceed to report on such claims comprised in the "Revised Statement" as are to be referred to Class B, that is to say, the class of vessels loaded with given specific cargoes; and we begin by noticing an exceptional case in which a somewhat important reduction is made in the claim. It will be found at page 22 of our First Report that we selected the Avon as a case illustrating the extravagant nature of some of the demands under this Class B. She was a vessel of 900 tons, and the total claim in respect of ship and freight in the "Former State ment" amounted to $130,000. We allowed for the vessel $36,000, and for the freight $25,000; so that the total allowance was $61,000. In the "Revised Statement," the claim has been reduced from the aforementioned sum of $130,000 to $63,000, being only $2,000 more than our allowance. In the "Former Statement" the claims in this class amounted to But the claim in respect of the Avon has been reduced by.... Leaving, therefore, the amount of.... to be compared with the corrected amount of claims in Class B, contained in the Revised Statement, amounting to... Therefore, the total amount of the additional claims in the Revised Statement is.. And it consists of: $2,867, 619 $2,800, 619 3, 107, 141 306, 522 (a) Additional claims for value of vessels, (including insurances)..$161, 642 (b) Additional claims for value of freights, (including insurances).. 39, 233 (e) Additional claims for value of cargoes, (including insurances).. 87,706 $306, 522 (d) Additional claims for damages.. (e) Additional claims for personal effects.... 7,183 10,758 As regards the item (a,) the additional claims for the vessels, it consists of $40,000 claimed by owners or insurance companies over and above their claims in the "Former Statement;" of $17,442 for vessels not mentioned in the "Former Statement;" of $104,200 for vessels the value of which was not claimed for in the "Former Statement," although claims in respect of their cargoes, or other matters connected with them, were advanced. The first-mentioned part of the claim, amounting to $40,000, must, of course, be rejected, as the estimate of $40 per ton which we made in our First Report will, in our opinion, afford an adequate allowance for the value of the vessels. The second-mentioned part of the claim, amounting to $17,442, is for the Otter Rock, (page 123,) the Arcade, (page 266,) and the E. F. Lewis, (page 279.) Although in none of these cases any tonnage is given or other means afforded to arrive at a judgment of the values, nevertheless, inasmuch as it would not be prudent or proper, for the purposes of our Present Report, to reject these claims altogether, we have estimated the value of the vessels by making a deduction proportionate to what we found in our First Report on Class B, to represent the overvalu ation of all the vessels. The deduction so arrived at amounts to $6,842, leaving as the allowance to be made, $10,800. As regards the last-mentioned portion of the claim for $104,200, it will be found, in the note at page 20 of our First Report, that in Class B there were five vessels the values of which were not claimed. In the "Revised Statement," claims are now advanced for three of these vessels, viz, the M. L. Potter, of 400 tons, (page 122,) the Windward, of 160 tons, (page 204,) and the Lamont Dupont, of 195 tons, (page 285.) Accordingly, for the values of these vessels of an aggregate tonnage of 755 tons, we now make an allowance at our ordinary rate of $40 per ton, amounting to $30,200, and, adding this to the afore-mentioned sum of $10,800, we find that there should be allowed, in respect of the claim of $161,642 for the value of the vessels, (a,) the sum of $41,000. As regards the item (b,) viz: the additional claim of $39,233 for freights and insurances thereon, it is divisible into $8,477 claimed by owners or insurance companies for freights over and above their claims in the "Former Statement;" of $1,256 for freights in respect of vessels, not comprised in the "Former Statement;" of $29,500 claimed for freights of vessels (for the first time) in the "Revised Statement," although other claims connected with those ships were advanced in the Former State ment. The first-mentioned part of this claim, $8,477, must be rejected, since we have already made allowance in our former report for losses in respect of freight. The secondly-mentioned part of the claim, $1,256, we propose to pass, as it does not appear to us to be very excessive. The last-mentioned part of the claim, $29,500, is made up of $6,000 in respect of the M. L. Potter, $5,000 in respect of the I. Littlefield, and $18,500 in respect of the Gildersleeve, for which, in the Former Statement, no claims were advanced; and, consequently, no allowance has yet been made. We have shown in our First Report that the claims for gross freight cannot be admitted, and we propose, instead thereof, to make, in accordance with the principles stated in our First Report, the ample allowance of $6,000. As regards item (c,) viz: the additional claim of $87,706 for cargo and insurances thereon, the amount of the insurances being $72,197. The same difficulties which we explained in our First Report of course present themselves here also in respect of the cargoes; and, although (as we shall show when discussing the additional claims under Class C) there are many reasons for inferring from the additional claims made in the Revised Statement that our deduction of 12 per cent. will probably prove to be very inadequate, we think it better for the purpose of this provisional estimate to abide by the rule we have hitherto adopted. As regards item (d,) viz: the claim of $7,183 for damages, it is presented in respect of one ship, (the Emily Fisher, page 222,) the tonnage of which is not given, and it is described as a claim for partial destruction of the vessel, for loss of freight, for loss paid owners of cargo, and for loss (paid expenses, &c.) on vessel. The ship is described in the "Revised Statement" as having been captured by the "Retribution," and run ashore on the Acklin Islands, where she was partially destroyed; whereas in the "Former Statement" no mention whatever was made of her having been run ashore, nor was any reference made to any claim advanced for damage to the ship, although a particular description was given of the injury sustained by the cargo. Considering the peculiar form in which the claim is presented, and that if the ship had in fact sustained injury for which the owners had not already received compensation, those owners, who are stated to reside in New York, would in all probability have advanced claims at an earlier moment than the 15th April last, we are of opinion that this claim should be entirely rejected; and it appears to us that the propriety of this view is much confirmed by the fact that a considerable portion of the additional claim is alleged to be for loss paid to owners of cargo, and that the latter claim for loss of cargo $9,352.26, while the insurers on cargo claim exactly the same amount. Finally, as regards item (e,) viz: the claim of $10,758 for personal effects, we propose, as in our First Report, to go through the different cases, and to state when we think that any deduction should be made; merely premising that, in estimating the deduction, we have taken into account the tonnage and character of the vessel, the form in which each claim is presented, as well as other circumstances which, in certain cases, appear to us material, but which it is not necessary to point out specifically. Lafayette. Here the claim by the mate for $766, which is more than that advanced by the Captain, appears to us excessive. We propose that it should be reduced by. M. L. Potter.-We propose no reduction. Aron. In this case the Master, in addition to his former claim, which (as will be seen on reference to our First Report, page 24) appeared to us exorbitant, has advanced a claim of $200. We propose that this should be rejected. This will require a deduction of...... Southern Cros8.-We propose no deduction. Susan. Here the Mate claims for loss of personal effects and wages, $452. For reasons fully stated in our First Report the claim for wages must be disallowed, and we purpose to allow in respect of the loss of effects, $200, making a deduction of... Atlantic. In this case the Master claims for loss of freight, stores, personal effects, Spokane. We do not propose that any deduction should be made. $366 200 225 720 4,941 |