LUGGAGE ON THE PENQUIN.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 650, 29 October 1909, Page 8

LUGGAGE ON THE PENQUIN.

IS - THE UNION' S.S.", COMPANY : -LIABLE?. A. case ; arising out of tho wreck of the. Penguin came before the Magistrate's. Coiirt .yesterday. Grorge Edward Perkins,, of Greymoutli, -proceeded against the .Union Steam Ship, Company. •to v recover <£29,185. lGd. for various articles of luggage lost .on.the voyage.,,' "j ',; . •The statement of, claim was to the effect that, .on ; or about" February < 12, the Union: Corafeany agreed {.to carry plaintiff; with tain'luggage and other goods,*'for reward, from Picton- Jo Wellington. In the course of the v voyage/the' Penguin was wrecked; through the negligence and unakilfulness of -the. officers and crew', employed by the Union Company, and thereby' sucV-luggage and. were 1 last William, Henry Green and Bobert ; Alex- " ander Ellison. also, proceeded against''the' Union .Company/on! similar groiinds,;claiming JB2? and; appeared;; on; behalf the plaintiffs; .'aid' Mr. P. -l£vi 'for -the defendants. /It was .Agreed -that , the cases/be heart'; together.: - : / V The plaintiff Ellison stated in evidence that he .was a commeroial traveller, and had* been a jJasSeiiger' on the Penguin when she was lof>t iHo had a commercial traveller's reduced-fare, ticket,' and tad- luggage.,with-him.-;worth XGI ;7s.': He .had made demand -for that sum, but the Union Company repudiated-liability. • The' plaintiff Green deposed ; that he :had an ordinary'passenger's tioket. The goods whi«>ihe lost were chiefly samples/ One item' of bis daim' waa for a caV to 1 . take him from.lsland. 'Bay; to Wellington : on. the morning' after. tho [-wreck, 1 He also: 'claimed for/ a gold watch, which'had/been -totally destroyed. NoVevidence was called for the-.defence.'-/'argument was .heard at. great'.-length. Mr. lervi said - that the comjpany-snbstantiallj. relied for its defence on'.'Seotion; 293,. of the Shipping, and Seamen Act, 1908. nThis section was a part of the-American Statute known as. the'Harter Act. There was nothing like it in' English law, although .the-Shipping'and. Seamen Act was mainly a copy of the Imperial Merchant Shipping Act. This section provides:

." If the owner/ of any ship ■ (transporting merchandise or property to or from any port ,in New Zealand) exorcises due diligence to make the ship in all respects seaworthy and properly manned,-equipped, and-supplied, neither the ship, her owners, charterers, nor agent, shall become or be held responsible for damage' or .loss resulting from, faults or errors in navigation,. ,or,.in the.,management of the ship, nor shall ;.the. shipi her owiiers, - charterers, agents, or, master, be held liable for loss arising from dangers 'of' the sea, or. other navigable waters, ,ara;'ojE-; God, or publio enemies, or «the inherentdefect' quality, or vice of the thing carried, etc.'

. Mr. I/eri- v contended that this" section was a/.clear' defence in the present action.•' 'It might; be contended that the • section did not cover cases of negligence but,; in his opinion, this. was, exactly what it did'do. Otherwise, Why'werethe words "faults.or errors of navigation*" included in ' the . clause. :■ .'Counsel fuirther.'coßtended that, as a passenger did not pay freiilit and'only took his luggage?'it was reasonable that he "vtobk hie risks " ■ unless he did pay freight. " He also urged, with regard to. Green's claim, that; a commercial traveller who shipped merchandise had;no claim unless he paid freight for it. Mr: Treadwell that the exemption in the section of' the Act did not extend' to passengers' luggage, and that the artic-lfcs carried in a travcllftT's hand-bag could not be regarded as " merchandise" for.' the meaning of that . term involved the ," saleability" of the goods in question, and, similarly commercial travellers' samples could-not be regarded ai " merchandise.• Further,, the, station .-'did not give any relief from responsibility and liability; in-cases; of If.- tne negligente of the company was clearly proved, there.could be'no doubt as to its liability under, the Barter ■ Aot.' - The only question arising was;'as to negligence in the /management,'.of the vessel whereby the accident was caused.. Thej;e.could be"no exemption'j from.inegligence unless-it wis . fully expressed. ' Mr. Levi replied'and his Worship intimated that he would delivero-jtodgment- next Tuesday 'morning. -

Three witnesses—a Frenchman, a Dutchman, and ;ani Irishman—lvero-asked for their-defini-tions as to what constituted a gentleman.' "A gentleman," said; the Frenchman, "is a man that has five counts in -his family." "Ho," said-the Dutchman. //'A'gentleman'-is a man that never gives pain to Ms fellow-ercaturcs." "A-gentleman," sdd Pat., "is a' man that asks you to oome m,...that gets, out th© whisky and tells , you to help yoursglf, and walks, away to tjie you're doing it!" At the mart, Palmerston North, to-morrow, at /noon sharp,- mr.. Harry's Palmer ■<■ will tall;-»by taction, nua, produce, - Mo.. •