Court
District Court, N. D. California
Decided
Judge
MORROW, District Judge
Posture
Libel in personam filed by seamen against vessel owner
Libelants (seamen) (1)
Joseph Petersen et al.
H. W. Hutton
v.
Respondent (owner of schooner Viking) (1)
J. F. Cunningham Co.
Andros & Frank
Other parties: Captain of the Viking — Master of the vessel, Milander — Trader at Kusaie
Overview
Decree entered for libelants for short allowances of bread and sugar under Rev. St. § 4568, awarding $183.75 total for bread shortage and $108.75 total for sugar shortage. Claims under § 4569 for failure to serve antiscorbutics disallowed.
Case summary
Five seamen filed a libel in personam against the owner of the schooner Viking to recover penalties under Revised Statutes sections 4568 and 4569 for shortages in provisions during a Pacific voyage. The vessel experienced delays due to running aground and adverse weather, prolonging the voyage from Kusaie to San Francisco to 59 days instead of the usual 40-45 days. The master reduced provisions, serving bread made of 1/3 flour and 2/3 copra (dried coconut) and substituting molasses for sugar. The court held that copra bread was not a proper substitute for ship bread and that sugar was reduced by more than one-third of the scheduled allowance, awarding penalties of 75 cents per day for 49 days (bread) and 29 days (sugar) to each libelant. The court denied recovery for failure to serve lime juice, sugar with lime juice, and vinegar under § 4569, holding that penalties under that section do not inure to the crew's benefit. The court also held that the prolonged voyage did not justify the reductions and that liability exists regardless of negligence if scheduled provisions are not furnished.
Abstract
Seamen filed a libel in personam against the vessel owner to recover penalties for shortages in provisions during a prolonged Pacific voyage due to delays from running aground and adverse weather. The court held that copra bread was not a proper substitute for ship bread, sugar was reduced beyond allowable limits, and the prolonged voyage did not justify the reductions, awarding penalties for bread and sugar shortages under the relevant statute. Claims for failure to serve lime juice, sugar with lime juice, and vinegar were denied as penalties under that provision do not benefit the crew.
Opinion of the court
Majority
opinionMORROW, District Judge
opinionMORROW, District Judge
- Copra bread not proper substitute for ship bread
- Penalties under § 4569 do not benefit crew
- 59-day voyage not so prolonged as to justify provisions reduction
- Liability exists under § 4568 regardless of negligence if scheduled provisions not furnished
Jurisdiction
not challengedSubject matter
Admiralty jurisdiction over maritime claims involving seamen's wages and provisions
Jurisdictional facts
- Libel in personam filed in District Court under admiralty jurisdiction
- Case involves penalties under Revised Statutes sections 4568 and 4569 governing seamen's provisions
Procedural posture
Posture at trial
Libel in personam filed by seamen against vessel owner
Posture on appeal
Not applicable - this is a trial court opinion
Preserved issues
- Shortage of bread and sugar under Rev. St. § 4568
- Failure to serve antiscorbutics under Rev. St. § 4569
Subsequent history
Petition for rehearing
not filed
Legal categories
Business
Case record
Full case name
PETERSEN et al. v. J. F. CUNNINGHAM CO.
Docket number
No. 11,253
Court
District Court, N. D. California
Trial court
District Court, N. D. California
Trial court judge
MORROW, District Judge
Decided
Opinion author
MORROW, District Judge
Opinion type
published
Precedential status
precedential
Judges on panel
MORROW, District Judge
Issues & holdings
4
Issues raised
4
affirmed
4
Holdings
1
Whether copra bread (1/3 flour, 2/3 dried coconut) constituted proper and equivalent substitute for ship bread under Rev. St. § 4568
affirmed
Standard of review
de novo
Disposition rationale
Court found copra bread was not proper substitute; bread shortage exceeded one-third of scheduled allowance
Preservation
Issue preserved for review
2
Whether sugar shortage with molasses substitute justified penalty under Rev. St. § 4568
affirmed
Standard of review
de novo
Disposition rationale
Court found sugar reduced by more than one-third of scheduled quantity
Preservation
Issue preserved for review
3
Whether failure to serve lime juice, sugar with lime juice, and vinegar entitled seamen to penalties under Rev. St. § 4569
affirmed
Standard of review
de novo
Disposition rationale
Court held penalties under § 4569 do not inure to crew's benefit; wrong statutory basis for recovery
Preservation
Issue preserved for review
4
Whether prolonged voyage (59 days vs. usual 40-45 days) justified reduction in provisions
affirmed
Standard of review
de novo
Disposition rationale
Court found delay not so great as to justify reduction; master should have been prepared for exigencies
Preservation
Issue preserved for review
Holdings of the court
Copra bread as substitute for ship bread
Bread composed of one-third flour and two-thirds copra is not a proper and equivalent substitute for ship bread under Rev. St. § 4568
No substitute for bread contemplated in statutory schedule; copra bread not sufficiently nourishing; following precedent from The Hermon and The Mary Paulina
unanimousbinding precedent
Penalties for failure to serve antiscorbutics
Penalties under Rev. St. § 4569 for failure to serve lime juice, sugar, and vinegar do not inure to the benefit of the crew
§ 4569 differs from § 4568; former imposes penalties on master only, not recoverable as additional wages by crew; following The Henee, 46 Fed. 805
unanimousbinding precedent
Justification for provisions reduction due to prolonged voyage
Voyage prolonged from usual 45 days to 59 days does not justify master in reducing scheduled allowance of provisions
Master must prepare for exigencies of sailing; delay not so extraordinary as to create necessity; distinguishing Ferrera v. The Talent where voyage doubled in length
unanimousbinding precedent
Liability for provisions shortages
Mere failure to furnish scheduled allowance is actionable under § 4568 regardless of negligence or inadvertence
Statute is imperative; recovery allowed unless master shows provisions could not be procured or were unavoidably lost and proper substitutes supplied
unanimousbinding precedent
Error analysis
- Libelants sought penalties under § 4568 for violations of § 4569 (antiscorbutics) — procedural · error foundCourt corrected error by disallowing claims under § 4569 · harmless
Statutory interpretation
2Statute
Rev. St. § 4568
Question
Whether penalties apply when provisions reduced and whether proper substitutes supplied
Court's reading
Penalties apply unless master shows provisions could not be procured or were unavoidably lost and proper substitutes supplied; court has discretion in amount up to $1 per day
Canons applied
Plain meaningStatutory purpose to benefit seamen
Statute
Rev. St. § 4569
Question
Whether penalties inure to crew's benefit
Court's reading
Penalties under § 4569 do not inure to crew's benefit; differ from § 4568 which specifically provides recoverable wages
Canons applied
Plain meaningComparison with related statutes
Burden of proof
Prosecution burden
Libelants must show failure to furnish scheduled provisions under § 4568
Defence burden
Respondent must show provisions could not be procured or were unavoidably lost and proper substitutes supplied
Burden met
true
Standards of review
- Interpretation of statutory requirements under Rev. St. §§ 4568 and 4569 — de novo Court interprets statutory requirements without deference
- Factual findings regarding provisions shortages and substitutes — clearly erroneous Court makes factual determinations based on testimony and evidence
Timeline
6
Events
81
Days, incident to ruling
—
Span
factual eventcited in opinion
Viking first left Kusaie to return to San Francisco but ran on reef
Caused 18-day delay for repairs, contributing to provisions shortage
factual eventcited in opinion
Viking departed Kusaie second time after repairs completed
Beginning of voyage segment where provisions shortage occurred
factual eventcited in opinion
Log book entry noting shortage of bread and flour
Documentary evidence of provisions shortage
factual eventcited in opinion
Log book entry noting 'getting short of everything'
Further evidence of provisions shortage
factual eventcited in opinion
Viking encountered bark J. A. Falkenberg and obtained provisions including flour
Temporary relief from provisions shortage
factual eventcited in opinion
Viking arrived in San Francisco
End of voyage where provisions shortages occurred
Facts & evidence
Incident
Date
Location
Pacific Ocean voyage from San Francisco to Fanning Islands and return
Key facts
9 facts- Five seamen (libelants) shipped on schooner Viking for round trip to Fanning Islands
- Voyage provisioned at San Francisco for 12-month maximum duration
- Vessel ran aground near Kusaie, requiring 18 days for repairs
- Adverse winds prolonged voyage by approximately 20 days
- Total voyage from Kusaie to San Francisco took 59 days instead of usual 40-45 days
- Master reduced provisions 10 days after leaving Kusaie
- Bread composed of 1/3 flour and 2/3 copra (dried coconut) served as substitute
- Sugar supply insufficient, molasses substituted
- No lime juice, sugar with lime juice, or vinegar served as required by statute
Disputed questions
- Whether copra bread was proper substitute for ship bread
- Whether master made sufficient effort to procure provisions at Kusaie
- Whether prolonged voyage justified reduction in provisions
- Whether limes available on board constituted compliance with antiscorbutic requirements
Procedural history
3 steps- Libel filed seeking penalties under Rev. St. §§ 4568 and 4569
- Trial held with testimony from crew, captain, and passengers
- Court issued opinion determining liability and damages
Evidence in the record
Direct
- Testimony from libelants (seamen) regarding provisions shortages
- Testimony from captain regarding efforts to procure provisions
- Log book entries showing shortages
Physical
- Shipping articles specifying provisions schedule
- Log book with entries regarding provisions
Testimonial
- Testimony from cook regarding provisions on board
- Testimony from mate regarding provisions list
- Testimony from passenger regarding food quality
Documentary
- Shipping articles
- Log book entries
- Revised Statutes sections 4568 and 4569
Circumstantial
- Duration of voyage compared to usual length
- Availability of provisions at Kusaie based on testimony
Challenged
- Evidence type: Testimony regarding copra bread as substitute · Challenge basis: Proper and equivalent substitute under Rev. St. § 4568 · Trial court ruling: excluded · Reasoning: Copra bread not proper substitute for ship bread · Challenged on appeal: false · Appellate outcome: not applicable
Jury
Verdict
Not applicable - bench trial in admiralty
Sentencing
Sentence imposed
Penalties awarded: $183.75 total for bread shortage, $108.75 total for sugar shortage
Sentence type
discretionary
Sentencing date
1896-11-14
Objects of relevance
Schooner Viking (vessel on which voyage occurred)Copra (dried coconut used in bread substitute)Shipping articles (contract specifying provisions schedule)
Policy considerations
- Protection of seamen's health and prevention of famine at sea
- Need for masters to prepare for exigencies of sailing voyages
- Humanitarian concerns in maritime law
Authorities
Cited authorities (6)
The Henee, 46 Fed. 805
followedquotedprecedentPenalties under § 4569 do not inure to crew's benefit
Broux v. The Ivy, 62 Fed. 600
followedquotedprecedentSurplus of other provisions does not make up for want of bread
The Hermon, 1 Low. 515, Fed. Cas. No. 6,411
distinguishedprecedentFlour cooked into bread may substitute for ship bread
The Mary Paulina, 1 Spr. 45, Fed. Cas. No. 9,224
followedprecedentNo overabundance of meat can substitute for bread
Ferrera v. The Talent, Fed. Cas. No. 4,745
distinguishedprecedentVoyage doubling in length justifies reduction
The Mary, 1 Ware, 465, Fed. Cas. No. 9,191
followedquotedprecedentStatutory interpretation and policy behind provisions laws
Related cases (6)
The Henee, 46 Fed. 805
precedentCited for holding that penalties under § 4569 do not benefit crew
Broux v. The Ivy, 62 Fed. 600
precedentCited for principle that surplus of other provisions does not make up for want of bread
The Hermon, 1 Low. 515, Fed. Cas. No. 6,411
precedentCited for allowing flour cooked into bread as substitute for ship bread
The Mary Paulina, 1 Spr. 45, Fed. Cas. No. 9,224
precedentCited for holding no overabundance of meat can substitute for bread
Ferrera v. The Talent, Fed. Cas. No. 4,745
precedentDistinguished - voyage there doubled in length, justifying reduction
The Mary, 1 Ware, 465, Fed. Cas. No. 9,191
precedentCited for statutory interpretation and policy behind provisions laws
Statutes
- Rev. St. § 4568 (penalties for provisions reductions)
- Rev. St. § 4569 (requirements for antiscorbutics)
Standards & doctrines
- De novo review of statutory interpretation
- Clearly erroneous standard for factual findings
Legal principles applied
- Statutory penalties under Rev. St. § 4568 inure to crew's benefit
- Master must show impossibility to avoid liability for provisions shortages
Notable quotes
“The statute was enacted for the benefit of our merchant seamen. It was designed to prevent famine on board vessels at sea, and to preserve the health of the crew.”majority — Discussing purpose of Rev. St. § 4568Emphasizes humanitarian purpose of maritime provisions laws
“The text of the law is imperative, and it is framed in the spirit of wisdom and humanity; and the interests of commerce, as well as humanity, require that it should be carried into effect.”majority — Quoting Judge Ware in The Mary regarding enforcement of provisions lawsHighlights mandatory nature of statutory requirements
Index terms73
Summary terms
Legal mechanisms
Various actions
Various actors
Legal concepts
Legal outcomes
Legal issues
Legal procedures
Legal remedies
Legal evidence
Legal arguments
Legal defenses
Legal penalties
Legal procedural steps
Geo locations
Judges
Attorneys
Procedural terms
Substantive offenses
Entities and documentation
Legal actions
Action type
affirmed
Target
Libelants' claims for bread and sugar shortages under Rev. St. § 4568
Context
Court awarded penalties for bread and sugar shortages, finding copra bread not proper substitute and sugar reduced by more than one-third
Scope
full
Action type
denied
Target
Libelants' claims for antiscorbutic violations under Rev. St. § 4569
Context
Court held penalties under § 4569 do not inure to crew's benefit; wrong statutory basis for recovery
Scope
full
Living organisms
Physical materials
Search facets
Parties
Judges
Morrow
Courts
Locations
Statutes cited