The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

V THE MA MARINE LAW. MAMNE INBUltANqB^-JIUIQJJQH VIM. OB JJD- T lisa. U. S, DM, Court, South. DM. of Nets York. Red Wing,Mills vs. tho Mercuntllo Insur¬ ance Company. Sidney Chubb, Esq., /or the llbellant. Messrs. Scuddci nml Ciirtoi for the Rceppnd- ems. On tho 11th of December, 187S, tho libel- lunts delivered to (lie Mctcliant's Trunspor- tntlon C'ompnuy, at Red Wing, Minnesota, 800banebjof flout to bo transported from Red Wing to Glasgow, Scotland, and re. cclvid what Is known ns n through bill of lading, entitled, "The Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company and the St'ite Line." On tho 10th of December tho'llbei. lants took out a certificate of insurance from the respondent's company to the amount of $2,800 upon the 800 barrels of Hour Insured, to be shipped "onbouidof the State Line at and from New York to Glasgow, Siot- landj' On the arrival of the flour at New York, one of the regular vessels of the State Line having been totally lost, and there be¬ ing an mcHiiiiiliiiioii of goods, the agents ot the State Line, Austin, Baldwin & Co., took to themselves an assignment of u <'hartei- party of the steamship Zanzibar from the agent of the New York Central Rnlliond Company, vt ho held the dinger of the Zan¬ zibar, and thereupon, on account of the State Line, Austin, Baldwin & Co. Toaded her with viheal and peas In bulk, and other cai- go, Including 400 barrels ol the flour Inqucs- tlin. The Zanzibar shortly after sailed fr6m ;New York and has never been heard from. Tin ilulin of the libelant's for those 400 ban els of llourA wiib adjjsted by the re¬ spondents' agetit* fii'I.oiuloii, ns a total loss pnjment, liowcvcrV was resisted on the ground that the policy never attached as re specta the Zanzibar, because, as alleged, she was not a vessel belonging to the JStnte Line, The through bill of lading contained amui g others, the following clauses: "■ # ♦ » » » . "Uth. It is fuither agreed that the said Merchants' Dlspnlch Transpprtatlon Coin- puny havo liberty tq forward the goods or piopcrty to port of destination by anj other steamer or stcitmslilp company than that named herein, and this contract Is executed and icconypllshed and the liability of the Metchauta' Dispatch Transportation Com¬ pany as common carriers thereunder term¬ inates on delivery of the goods or property to the steamer or steamship company's pier in New York, wlion the responslbllity-of , the BtejirnTinFcofiipany commences, and not bcloru. "7th. And It Is further agreed thnt the property shall be tiansporled Ironi the port of New York to the port of Glasgow by the said steamship compaii}, vv ith libel ly to ship bj an} other steamship or steamship coin. Viiuj " '1 lie charter-part) of the Znuzlbui Is dated December 18, 1878, and piovldes that the Zni /Ibar, classed as 100 A 1 1, in measure- mint 2,245 tons, should proceu. from Llver- punl to New Yoik an 1 theme biik with a cargo ol provisions ami grain or cotton, at a *picllleil nite of freight, to some one safe di¬ rect port In the Unllc.il Kingdom of Giont Bilialn and lielaml, etc. On the 28th ol Dccembci, the ship being then in New Yoik, all light, tide and Intciest In the chillier- partt was traiisierrul to Hie agt nt of the State Line. By the terns of the chaitor- pnit} the navigation of tho ship lemaiued eutlit'ly undiir the control and at the expense of hei owners, anil not ol the charterers Evidence was given lit the trial to the ef¬ fect that on vessels belonging to leguhu and known lines Of transportation, the rate of In¬ surance Is less than upon Independent ves¬ sels. Evidence was also'given by several agents of Insurance companies that they would not consldei a single vessel employed upon a single trip, like the Zanzibar to come within the description of the State Line, re¬ ferred to in the certificate of insurance Brown, J. I do not think that this case should tie determined with any reference to what the agents of the Insurance companies lu New York might consider us coming v> lih- in the description of the State Line. Tho merchants who shipped tho-o goods by a through bill of lading a thousand miles away In the Interior, and who deal with the Insur¬ ance ecopnny'! ng»ntBth*re, have a rlghtto rely upon the ordinary meaning and of the .terms used In the certificate of ance unless a more restricted mean proved to have been rocognlzed and lished bv general mercantile usage, e expressly brought lotheli notice; nei which was done. » ^ This Insurance was not updn any pa lar vessel. It wiib munlleslly intended as broad us the State Line, wlilch was in conjunction with the Transportation pany lu obtaining goods on a through lading. In my judgment, therefore State Line must be held to embrace n sels which were navigated under the p slon, control and management of tho Lino, whether the vessels were such isted on Ihe date when the certificate surance was issued, or were new vess troduced into that line afteiwards> on oluhV'hlhc goods might be shippe whether Ihe ve»6qls were owned or merely chnrleied by that line, either or after the dale uMhe certificate pro they were in Its possession and control can I deem It of any consequence t(|0 vcfrfol performed but a single voyage vided that upon tlie voyage upon whic sidled she waB In the possession and tho management and control of the Line. If so, she was, during that voy part of the Stale Line, and was one o vessels of the State Line, pro hac vice. If, on the other hand, tho vessel w carried the flour was not In the posse or under the management or control' o State Line, then the case would be o a carriage of tho goods by another ste to which the Slate Line hull trunsfeired The express conditions of the throug of lading gave the State Line the rig transfer the goods to any other steamsh company; and If the State Lino did transfer the carriage ol400 barrels, a p tills consignment, to any other vessel, cordance with this provision, It seems tlmUho'certificate of insurance would attach to the latter vessel. The existen this provision in tire through bill of l was notice to tho llbellants of the nec or watchfulness on their part lu resp any transler ot Ihe goods by tho State to any other steamer, and of ihe need o vision fur such a contingency In their l ance After the lose of the Zanzibar was su cd some correspondence between the p to this suit arose on that very point, which it Is clear that Ihe llbellants aware of this contingency in regard insurance, and of the necessity of an a by (he Insurance company lu order to them as respects any-other vessel to w Ihe flour or any pan of It might have- rausferrcd. Theteimsof the i barter of ihe Zan nfwhiclilhe agents of the Slale Line Ihe Iriiuslei, are such ns show clearly Ihe agent of the hta i Line did not ac the posscislnn <>i and control of the na tion of the latter vessel. Iivvnsa co of affteightment ouh, and by the u incut of It to the agents ot the Slale gave I belli the right onl> to lade tli with sin h and such goods. The poss and the it'sponslblllty mid coutiol o mitigation of the Zanzibar remained Hith hei general owners. And ll was such a cliarler-piirly that the 400 band 1 Ids In in} judgment wiib a transfer question were laden on board the Zai by the Male Lino. much of this Hour l<> another steamer w Ihe terms ol the provision ot I lie bill o ing The Stale Line hail no piu.sci.6 the Zanzibar and no control ovei her loaded tlie Hour on boaid ol her as an} chant might have done, at a specified r freight, (or whlc.li, under tho teims o charter-party, the vessel and her q con ti acted to deliver these goods at Gla On Ihe ground, theietore. that ncllh possession nor the control of the Zan upon this voyage was In Ihe Statu L must hold that the Zanzibar was not o the vessels of the State Line, even tem rily, or ;>io hac vice; that the certltio insuiaiico, tbeieliire, did not attach; that Ihe libel ini.sl be dismissed with January 0, 1881. . TJie work of taking up the old w whloh obstruct navigation In the ri Mobile, Ala., la now under way.