Reports of Cases Relating to Maritime Law Volume 4; Containing All the Decisions of the Courts of Law and Equity in the United Kingdom, and Selections from the More Important Decisions in the Colonies and the United States (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1883 Excerpt: ...because it would seem that the figures must have been arranged, so far as this particular lot is concerned, in suoh a manner that the only persons who have any interest in the receipt of these bills of lading are the shipowners, and therefore there is no necessity to invent, what might otherwise be invented without difficulty, a supposed trusteeship. I say there would be no difficulty in inventing, because if it should turn out that the shipowners received the lump freight it would then be a matter of arrangement between them and the defendants that they should pay it over. I wish to add that I have no misgiving as to the decision in Golvin v. Newberry (1 01. & F. 283). It seems to me to have been rightly decided. I do not think that because a bill of lading is signed by the captain as agent for the ship, a contract is made between the shipowner and the freighter, the freighter having previously arranged with the charterer that the charterer shall carry his goods. I should think that the remedy which the freighter would have would bo against the charterer with whom he had entered into the contract of affreightment, and that he would not gain any additional remedy by having taken a bill of lading from the shipowner. It is sometimes said that a bill of lading contains in it a contract, ard such is the language of the Bills of Lading Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. 111). This statement may in many instances be correct, but to say that a bill of lading contains a contract which supersedes, adds to, or varies the previous contract contained in the oharter-party, is a proposition to which I am entirely unable to assent. Ct. Of Apr. Wagstaff And Others V. Anderson And Others. ct. Of App. I am not satisfied that if this had been a contract of carriage between the cha...