Parsons v. Empire Transp. Co.

Citations

• 111 F. 202
• 49 C.C.A. 302
• 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4373

Syllabus

<p>1. Shipping—Loss of Cargo-—Unseawortiiiness of Barge.</p> <p>A barge held unseaworthy, from the maimer of her construction, for a voyage between St. Michael and Nome, Alaska, in October, and her owner for that reason not entitled to exemption, under section 3 of the Harter act, from liability for the loss of cargo taken on board for such a voyage.</p> <p>2. Same—Limitation of Liability—Loss through Negligence.</p> <p>A corporation engaged in the transportation of cargo and passengers between Seattle and Alaskan points maintained a line of steamers to St. Michael, which was the Alaskan headquarters of its fleet, and there transshipped to other steamers and barges, which were run by the company between that port and Dawson and other points on the Yukon river. Its general manager was located at San Francisco, and he sent a superintendent to take charge of all the company’s business at St. Michael. Such superintendent being compelled to return, by reason of illness, in July, left in charge his assistant, who was incompetent for the position by reason of his inexperience in such matters, which was known to the general manay \\ but who was permitted to remain in charge during the remainder of the season. About October 1st lie contracted on behalf of the company to take a cargo to Nome, and loaded the same on a river barge, which was wholly unfit for such a voyage at that season, and which sank in a storm before having started, through the additional negligence of the agent in not having it taken to a safe place. Meld that, whether such agent in fact had authority to accept such cargo, he had ostensible authority, and the company was bound by his action, and responsible for his negligence and incompetence, and was not entitled to a limitation of liability for the loss under Rev. St. §§ 4283-4285, which were not intended to relieve shipowners from personal liability for their own willful or negligent acts:</p>