Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

the values of the ships, and not on the actual amounts contained in the statement; but, on the other hand, it is clear that the withdrawal of the claims for the four bonded whalers must cause a deduction of $36,000 from our allowance, this being the amount which we allowed in our First Report for those four vessels.

We will now point out the corrections which our First Report seems to us to require:1

In the first place, the claims made in respect of the Texana, captured by the Boston, and in respect of the Betsy Ames, captured by the Sallie. must undoubtedly be rejected, for the reasons stated at p. 2 of the British Counter Case. These were respectively $400 and $5,540. In our "First Report" we made no allowance in respect of the claim by the Texana, for other reasons therein named, but for the Betsy Ames we allowed the amount of claim less 12 per cent., or, in all, $4,875.

The allowance made in our First Report for the values of the vessels belonging to Class B requires an addition of $7,000. On referring namely to the foot-note at p. 20 of that Report, it will be found that we supposed there were five vessels mentioned but not claimed for in the Former Statement, whereas there were in fact only four, the vessel which we had erroneously included among the five being the Palmetto, of 175 tons. We have, therefore, to add an allowance for the value of this ves sel at our average rate, amounting to $7,000.

In the second place, a closer examination of the claims made for cargo in the Former Statement when compared with those in the Original List and in the Revised Statement has enabled us to discover the following cases of double claims for single losses, in addition to those commented on at page 27 of our First Report:

1. The Union Jack-George A Potter (p. 95 of the Former, and p. 111 of the "Revised Statement," "Alabama," Class C) advances a claim in respect of cargo of $34,526, whilst, at the same time the Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company claim in respect of cargo $32,014, so that the latter sum must, of course, be deducted from the allowances we made in our first report.

2. The Charter Oak-(p. 182 of Former, and p. 231 of "Revised Statement," Shenanadoah, Class C.)-Here the Manufacturers' Insurance Company claim $3,500 as insurers on cargo, and the Columbian Insurance Company likewise claim the same amount as re-insurers for the former company. This is, therefore, a double claim, and $3,500 must also be deducted from the allowances made on our First Report.

These deductions from allowances made under our First Report in respect of cargo make together $35,514, which amount, however, must be diminished by the 12 per cent. already taken off. We have therefore to deduct $31,253 in respect of cargo.

In the third place, we have, after considerable doubt, arrived at the conclusion, that it would perhaps be better to include in our "allow ances for freights" some part of the expenditure which was taken into account in our valuation of the vessels and their outfits.

There are also the following errata in our First Report:

P. 24.-Fourth paragraph from bottom, for "cargo of grain" read "
cargo of guano."
P. 24.-Third line from bottom, for "Mr. Rufus Green" read "C. R. Green."
P. 25.-Sixth line from bottom, for "Mr. Rufus Green " read "C. R. Green."
P. 27.—(Sea Bride,) for "R. Green and Co." read "Rufus Greene and Co."
P. 28.-Table showing amount of claims, &c. :

Alabama, (amount claimed,) for "$6,537,711" read "$6,537,620."
Chickamauga, (amount allowed,) for "$80,108" read "$80,118."
Georgia, (amount allowed,) for "$257,031" read "$221,031."

It will be remembered, that in the introductory part of our First Report we fully explained that, in our opinion, the claim of gross freight could not be allowed, and that adequate compensation would be granted, in respect of the claims for the losses of the vessels, their outfits and freights, if to the original values of the vessels were added all the expenses incurred by the owners for the purpose of the voyages up to the time of the capture, together with interest. We had, therefore, to estimate the values of the vessels and their outfits, including the expenses incurred for provisioning them and making them fit and able to leave port, and to add thereto the expenses incurred from the commencement of the voyages up to the time of capture, together with interest.

It will be found, on reference to page 20 of our First Report, that we considered the price of $40 per ton to be a "liberal estimate of the average market price on which the value of vessels at the commencement of their voyages might be safely based," and we therefore took that price of $40 per ton as representing the average value of ships and their outfits, together with the expenses necessary for rendering them fit and able to leave port. These expenses we estimated on the average at $3 per ton, leaving for what may be called the "naked value" of the ship and her outfit a sum of $37 per ton; a sum which we considered, and still consider to be, on the average, amply sufficient. The expenses to which we have just referred would, no doubt, depend in each particular case to a considerable extent on the length of the voyage, the employment of the ship, on her carrying general cargoes, or carrying a given specific cargo, on her being loaded or being in ballast, and on other similar circumstances; but we were and still are of opinion that such expenditure will on the whole be fully covered by the average allowance of $3 per ton on all the vessels. It should, moreover, be observed that we have also left ourselves a considerable margin, inasmuch as we have made no exception in the cases of those vessels for which freight is not claimed (probably because it has been received from English underwriters) and which therefore clearly are not entitled to this allowance.

As the estimate of $40 per ton of the vessels includes the allowance of $3 per ton for the expenses of making them fit and able to leave port, it follows from the principle stated at the commencement of these observations, that we had only to add for the vessels claiming freight an allowance in respect of the expenditure incurred from the commencement of the voyage until the capture, together with interest, and it is this amount which we put down in our First Report as the "allowance for freight." Although this was for several reasons convenient, it has, no doubt, the effect of concealing the fact that the allowance actually made in respect of the claims for gross freight not only comprised the last-mentioned amount, but also the other allowance of $3 per ton, and we think that, as the form in which the claims are presented renders it almost necessary to award a separate allowance in lieu of freight, it may, on the whole, be better to make it include, not only what we termed in our First Report "the allowance for freight," but also the $3 per ton for the expenses of making the vessels fit and able to leave port, and therefore to deduct this latter amount from our estimate of the values of the vessels, which, as we have already said, included these expenses.1

This alteration is, however, a matter of comparatively small importance, since it of course only affects the distribution and not the amount

1 Strictly speaking, the allowance in lieu of freight includes also an amount equivalent to the wear and tear of the vessel up to the time of capture, inasmuch as we have allowed the original value of the vessel at the commencement of the voyage.

of our former allowances, and is only made for the purpose of showing, somewhat more clearly, what we did actually allow in our First Report in lieu of the claims for freight.

We now proceed to combine the allowances in respect of the claims contained in the Former Statement with those in respect of the additional claims contained in the Revised Statement, in order to ascertain the compensation for all the losses mentioned in the latter Statement. The allowances made in our First Report, as altered in amount and arrangement according to the foregoing considerations, are fully exhibited in Table No. 2, but are briefly summarized in the following form:

[blocks in formation]

To these allowances we have now to add the allowances we have ascertained in our Present Report for the additional claims contained in the Revised Statement; and the result, which is fully exhibited in Table No. 3, is briefly seen also from the following table, and gives the total allowances we propose for all the claims contained in the Revised Statement.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

We now proceed to give a summary of the results we have arrived at in respect of all the claims contained in the Revised Statement: The aggregate amount claimed in that Statement is ... But this amount includes a claim for increased insurance premiums, amounting to.

And also a claim styled "Miscellaneous," amounting to..
For reasons stated at page 1 of this Report these last two
claims must be rejected, and there are certain errors in the
figures pointed out at pages 4 and 5 of this Report, which
on the whole necessitates a deduction of

$25,547, 161

$5,808, 066

479, 033

176, 324

6, 463, 423

Leaving as the amount of claim to which our allowances apply..... 19,083,738

The manner in which this amount is distributed over the various claims is exhibited in the following table :

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

sea.

I. AS TO THE VESSELS AND OUTFITS.

For the reasons stated in our First Report we have, with scarcely any exception, valued the whalers at $100, the fishing-vessels at $50, and the other vessels at $40 per ton at the commencement of their voyages, including therefore the expenses necessary for making them ready for We have also shown that in the cases of the whalers captured by the Shenandoah it is, with the exception of two or three cases, clear, from the very admissions of the owners, that they are advancing claims for the same losses simultaneously with the insurance companies, and that, in a great majority of the other cases, a similar course has, to a very great extent, been adopted. These considerations, together with the circumstance of the owners having considerably overvalued their property, will sufficiently account for the reduction in the amount of our allowances as contrasted with the amount of the claims for vessels and outfits.

II. AS TO THE FREIGHTS AND EARNINGS.

It is easy to prove that the amounts at which they are stated are, beyond a doubt, most extravagant, and that they in many cases involve double claims for single losses. We have also explained at length, in the introductory part of our first report, the various grounds on which, independently of its exaggerated amount, this claim for gross freights and gross earnings is utterly incapable of being supported, and why it should in our opinion be rejected; and in lieu thereof, such an allowance be made as would, as far as is legitimate or possible, satisfy the principle of restitutio in integrum, by placing the claimants almost in the same position as if they had not embarked in the unsuccessful adventure; an allowance which is far more liberal than that which has been awarded by the courts of America in similar cases. This allowance we have

estimated at $842,436, which, when added to our allowance for vessels and outfits and expenses incurred in making the ships fit and able to leave port, amounts to $4,315,121, and will in our opinion fairly cover all losses in respect of the vessels, their outfits, earnings, and claims for freights.

III. AS TO THE CARGOES.

As regards the claims for "cargoes," it will be seen from the introductory part of our First Report that the form in which these claims are

presented has rendered it impossible to ascertain, except in comparatively few cases, to what extent they involve double claims for single losses, as well as profits and the freight payable at the port of discharge; and we there fully stated the reasons why we entertain no doubt that if, from the total amount claimed for cargoes, profits, commissions, and insurances thereon, 12 per cent. be deducted, the result so obtained will, in all probability, exceed the real value of the goods at the port of shipment, together with interest from the time of loading until capture. We also explained that, by awarding this compensation, and thereby placing the owners in the same position in which they would have been, if, instead of embarking their capital in the shipment of the goods, they had invested it at the ordinary rate of interest, we were adopting a mode of compensation, not only consistent with well-recognized principles of jurisprudence, but also more liberal than that which has ever been applied by the courts of the United States.

In some cases, distinctly specified in our Reports, we have been able to discover that the owners and the insurance companies are simultaneously advancing claims for the same losses. In these cases we have, of course, deducted one of such double claims, and these deductions, together with those in respect of one or two claims which we have specially noticed and given our reasons for rejecting, amounted to about $340,000. After taking off 12 per cent. from the residue of the total claim, we thus arrived at the sum of $4,084,478 as the allowance for the cargoes. But although we have provisionally estimated the loss at this amount, we think it right to repeat that in our opinion this estimate will be found to be excessive, not only for the reasons stated in our First Report, but also because the additional claim of $473,830, advanced for cargo in the "Revised Statement," is open to very considerable suspicion on account of the peculiar circumstances, fully stated at pages 11 and 12 of this Report.

IV.—AS TO CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES AND PERSONAL EFFECTS.

As regards the claims for damages, we have in almost all cases rejected them, because they are in effect claims in respect of indirect losses, or for damages of too remote and contingent a character to entitle the claimants to compensation.

As regards the claims for personal effects, we have generally specified the cases in which we consider them excessive, and have come to the conclusion that the sum of $155,750 will cover any loss for personal effects which can be proved to have been sustained.

V.-RESULT.

The ultimate result at which we have arrived is the following: The total amount of the claims we have been considering, that is, all the claims contained in the "Revised Statement," exclusive of those for increased war premiums and the claims styled "miscellaneous," (all of which are "indirect claims,") and after correcting certain errors of calculation, and withdrawing those for the Sallie and Boston, is $19,077,798. We are of opinion that the sum of $8,623,795 will be amply sufficient to meet all the losses embraced in these claims.

The following arrangement shows the amount of the claims connected with each cruiser, after adjusting the several corrections, on which we have reported; and also the corresponding estimates we have made as

« AnteriorContinuar »