This section is from the book "The Law Of Contracts", by Theophilus Parsons. Also available from Amazon: The law of contracts.
It is a general rule, that persons who are bound by their legal duty to render salvage services, cannot claim salvage compensation therefor. (s) Therefore the master or crew of the ship in peril, cannot claim such compensation. (t) And the only excep(l) The Clarisse, 1 Swabey, Adm. 120; The Minerva, 1 Spinks, Adm. 871; The Watt, 2 W. Rob. 70: Rowe v. Brig
-, 1 Mason, 872; The Amethyst,
Daveis, 20; Mason v. Ship Blaireau, 2 Cranch, 240.
(m) Montgomery v. The T. P. Leathers, 1 Newb. Adm. 421.
(n) The Coromandel, 1 Swabey, Adm. 205.
(o) The Barque Island City, 1 Black, 121; The Upnor, 2 Hagg. Adm. 3: The Bee, Ware, 332; Tyson v. Prior, 1 Gallis. 133; Clarke v. Brig Dodge Healy, 4 Wash. C. C. 651; The Sch. Emulous, 1 Sumner, 207; The John Perkins, U. S. C. C, Mass., 21 Law Rep. 04.
(p) The Barefoot, 1 Eng. L. & Eq. 661; Bearse v. Pigs of Copper, 1 Story, 314.
(q) The Samuel, 4 Eng. L. & Eq. 681.
(r) Marvin on Salvage, 143, note 1. See M'Donough v. Dannery, 3 Dall. 188. In an early case in Massachusetts it was held, that after the salvage was paid the property belonged to the government, to be held in trust till an owner should appear. Peabody v. Proceeds of 28 Bags of Cotton, U. S. D. C, Mass., 1820, 2 Am. Jurist, 119.
(s) The Neptune, 1 Hagg. Adm. 230.
(t) Miller v. Kelley, Abbott, Adm. 564; The John Perkins, U. S. C. C. Mass. 21 Law Rep. 87; The Steamer Acorn, tions to the rule appear to be where the contract of the seamen is at an end, (u) or where the service is so entirely out of the line of their ordinary duty, that it may be considered as not done under the contract. (v) It would obviously be unwise to tempt the sailors to let their ship and cargo incur extreme peril, that by extreme exertion they might recover salvage compensation.
Those who may claim salvage compensation for salvage services, may render these services against the will or even the resistance of the master or crew of the vessel in danger. But in such case it must be clearly shown, that their reluctance or resistance was wrongful, and that the interference of the salvors was necessary. (w) If a part of a crew leave their own ship, and go on board another, and save it, those of the crew who remain behind share, though not equally, in the salvage claim; their share of the claim resting on the increase of their labor or exposure, by reason of the diminution of their numbers; and their share is greater if they were willing to go, than if they remained from an unwillingness to encounter efforts or perils for which others volunteered. (x)
A passenger on board a saving ship may render and claim for salvage services; (y) but it is said that the passengers, generally, at least, are so bound to render assistance to the ship they are in, that they cannot claim salvage compensation therefor. (z) This rule, if it be one, must be open to many exceptions. (a) same court, 21 Law Rep. 99; Beane v. The Mayurka, 2 Curtis, C. C. 72; Meaner v. Suffolk Bank, 1 Law Rep. 249; The Holder Borden, Sprague, 144.
(u) Where a ship is abandoned at sea by most of her crew, the contract of those who remain is considered at an end. Mason 1;. Ship Blaireau, 2 Cranch, 240; The Sch. Triumph, Sprague, 428; The Florence, 20 Eng. L. & Eq. 607. See Taylor v. Ship Cato, 1 Pet. Adm. 48. In Montgomery v. The T. P. Leathers, 1 Newb. Adm. 421, it was held, that where a steamboat, which was on fire, was surrendered by the captain to the master of another boat, the contract of a pilot was dissolved, and he might be a salvor.
(v) In The Mary Hale, Marvin on Salvage, 161, the vessel was wrecked, and the mate and four seamen crossed the Gulf Stream in an open boat, a distance of one hundred and eighty miles, to procure assistance to take off the passengers and cargo. They succeeded in accomplishing their purpose, and it was held that they were entitled to salvage, on the ground that their services exceeded the duty they owed to the ship.
(w) See The Jonge Bastiaan, 5 Rob. Adm. 322; The Bee, Ware, 332; Clarke v. Brig Dodge Healy, 4 Wash. C. C. 661.
(x) The Mountaineer, 2 W. Rob. 7; The Centurion, Ware, 488; The Baltimore, 2 Dods. 132 ; The Roe, 1 Swabey, Adm. 84; The Janet Mitchell, 1 Swabey, Adm. Ill; The Ship Henry Ewbank, 1 Sumner, 400.
(y) Bond v. Brig Cora, 2 Wash. C. C. 80; McGinnis v. Steamboat Pontiac, 1 Newb. Adm. 130, 6 McLean, 359; The Hope, 8 Hagg. Adm. 428.
(z) The Branston, 2 Hagg. Adm. 3, note.
(a) See Newman v. Walters, 3 B. & P. 612; The Two Friends, 1 Rob. Adm. 285; Clayton v. Ship Harmony, 1 Pet Adm. 70.
A pilot cannot claim as salvor, for any exertions or services rendered as pilot, and within the line of his duty. (b)1
The owner of the saving vessel shares largely in the salvage claim, because his vessel usually incurs some peril by the rendering of the services, (c) and always by the deviation annuls its insurance, (d) unless that deviation be for the purpose of saving life. (e)
* There may be two or more different sets of salvors. But salvors of property derelict acquire, by taking possession thereof, a vested interest in the property, which is only lost by their abandonment of it. (f) Salvors saved by other salvors do not lose their claim; (g) and a second set has no right to interfere with the first set, without a belief, on reasonable grounds, that their assistance or interference is necessary to save the property from destruction. (h) If they render their assistance unnecessarily, and without request, their services inure to the benefit of the first salvors. (i) Where there are two or more sets of salvors, all having a just claim, the salvage compensation is divided among all, in such proportions as the admiralty court deems proper. (j)
(b) The Cumberland, 9 Jurist, 191; The Johannes, 6 Notes of Cases, 288; The City of Edinburgh, 2 Hagg. Adm. 333; The Jonge Andries, 1 Swabey, Adm. 229, 303. In England, pilotage is defined to be "the conducting a vessel into port in the ordinary and common course of navigation," and it is not simple pilotage "when a vessel from real danger, or from what may afterwards turn out to be an unfounded alarm, is seeking a port of safety, out of the course of her intended voyage." The Elizabeth, 8 Jurist, 365; The Persia, 1 Spinks, Adm. 166; The Industry, 3 Hagg Adm. 208; The Hedwig, 1 Spinks, 19. The decisions in this country are conflicting. See Sch. Wave v. Hyer, 2 Paine, C. C. 131; Dulany v. 81oop Peragio, Bee, 212; Dexter v. Bark Richmond, 4 Law Rep. 20; Callagan v. Hallett, 1 Caines, 104; Love v. Hinckley, Abbott, Adm. 436; Hand v. The Elvira, Gilpin, 60; The Brig Susan, Sprague, 499; Hobart v. Drogan, 10 Pet. 108; Lea v. Ship Alexander, 2 Paine, C. C. 466; Hope v. Brig Dido, id. 248.
(c) The San Bernado, 1 Rob. Adm. 178; The Roe, 1 Swabey, Adm. 84; Evans v. Ship Charles, 1 Newb. Adm. 329; The Nathaniel Hooper, 8 Sumner, 542.
(d) See Bond v. Brig Cora, 2 Wash. C. C. 80; The Nathaniel Hooper, 3 Sumner, 678; Barrels of Oil, Sprague, 91. But in The Deveron, 1 W. Rob. 180, Dr. Lushington held, that in apportioning the remuneration in salvage cases every vessel was to be considered as uninsured, on account of the inconvenience of considering in each case whether a vessel had forfeited its insurance. See also The Orbona, 1 Spinks, Adm. 161.
(e) Crocker v. Jackson, Sprague, 141. (f) The Dantzic Packet, 3 Hagg.
Adm. 383; The Glory, 2 Eng. L. & Eq. 551; The Samuel, 4 Eng. L. & Eq. 581.
(g) The Ship Henry Ewbank, 1 Sumner, 400; The Jonge Bastiaan, 6 Rob. Adm. 322; The Watt, 2 W. Rob. 70.
(h) Hand v. The Elvira, Gilpin, 60; The Maria, Edw. Adm. 175; The Samuel, 4 Eng. L. & Eq. 581; The Amethyst, Daveis, 20.
(i) The Blenden Hall, 1 Dods. 414; The Fleece, 3 W. Rob. 278; The Mary, 2 Wheat. 123.
(j) The Barque Island City, 1 Black, 121; The Jonge Bastiaan, 5 Rob. Adm. 322; Cowell v. The Brothers, Bee, 186; The Samuel, 4 Eng. L. & Eq. 581.
1 But a pilot may be remunerated for salvage services when the services were such as he was not bound to render, as where a vessel was drifting in a storm upon the
All the salvors may join in one libel. They may have separate libels if the rights of the parties are adverse to each other; (k) but if different libels are filed unnecessarily, the cost of such needless libels will not be charged on the proceeds. (l)
 
Continue to: