Bowers Hydraulic Dredging Co. v. Federal Contracting Co.

Citations

• 153 F. 870
• 83 C.C.A. 52
• 1907 U.S. App. LEXIS 4467

Syllabus

<p>1. Shipping — Charters—Constetiction—Dbedses.</p> <p>Where a dredge charter provided that the dredge should be able to deposit on shore an average of 300 cubic yards of material per hour, the owner merely warranted the dredge’s capacity, and not that the dredge should in fact deposit that quantity of material.</p> <p>2. Same — Evidence.</p> <p>In a libel for the hire of a dredge, evidence held insufficient to show that the dredge did not pump 300 yards of material per hour, according .to its warranted capacity.</p> <p>3. Same — Charter—Construction.</p> <p>Where a dredge charter provided that it should be used as the charterer or his agents might direct in dredging material and putting the same ashore on the meadows adjoining the Passaic and Hackensack rivers, or at such, other localities as the charterer might direct, the charter did not cover dredging material not ordinarily found in such operations, and for which such a dredge as that chartered by reason of its peculiar construction was not adapted.</p> <p>4. Admiralty — Appeal-—-Evidence—Admission—Prejudice.</p> <p>Where, upon a proper construction of a dredge charter, it did not cover the dredging of material not ordinarily found in such dredging operations, and for which a dredge of that construction was not adapted, the charterer, in a libel for the hire of the dredge, was not prejudiced by the admission of representations made by one of its officers as to the character of the material which was to' be dredged.</p>