Schiaffino v. Two Hundred & Three Thousand Three Hundred & Ninety-Two Kilogrammes of Scrap-Iron

Citations

• 38 F. 148
• 1889 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46

Syllabus

<p>1. Shipping — Carriage of Goods — Bill of Lading — Shortage. When the hill' of lading states “weight unknown, ” in the absence of. proof of the weight shipped on a vessel, other than the recitals of the hill of lading, and a weighmaster’s certificate, the vessel cannot he held for shortage.</p> <p>2. Same — Separate Consignments — Duty of Master. A vessel shipped two consignments of scrap-iron; the master apprehended shortage in weight, but did not keep the lots distinct; and, discharging in the . .inverse order of receiving, delivered first to one consignee his exact weight, leaving a large shortage to fall on the other Held, that it was the master’s duty to have kept the lots separate, or else to take security before delivering the whole weight to the first consignee, that he would make good his propor- - tion of any deficiency in the whole bulk; and that the ship was liable, as for ' a misdelivery, in delivering to the first consignee more than his proportion of the whole weight shipped.</p> <p>3. Demurrage — Bill of Lading — Mistake of Cargo-Owner. A vessel’s bill of lading provided that her cargo should be discharged “as fast as the ship could deliver, ” and the cargo-owner fixed too early a day for her arrival at a substituted place of delivery, whereby the vessel was detained on arriving at the wharf. Held, that the cargo-owner was liable for de-murrage.</p>