Sacramento Navigation Co. v. Salz

Background

A river carrier owned a powerless barge and a steamer. The carrier accepted a load of barley to be carried “on board” the barge under a bill of lading that allowed reshipping and towing. While the barge was being towed by the steamer, the steamer’s negligence caused a collision with a ship at anchor, swamping the barge and destroying the cargo. The barley owner sued the carrier personally for the loss.

Reasoning

The Court framed the central question as whether the Harter Act’s phrase “vessel transporting” meant the barge alone or the combined tug-and-barge used to perform the transportation. The Court rejected the view that a separate implied towage contract made the barge alone the carrier. Reading the bill of lading and the circumstances together, the Court concluded the transportation necessarily required the tug and barge working as one instrumentality. The Court relied on prior decisions treating such combinations as one vessel and held the statutory words reasonably cover the tug-and-barge combination. Because the contract was one of carriage (not merely towage), the combined vessels were the transporting vessel under the statute.

Real world impact

The Court reversed the lower court’s decree for the cargo owner, ruling that the tug-and-barge combination is the transporting vessel under the Harter Act. Practically, carriers who use their own tugs with barges will be treated as using a single transporting vessel for liability rules, which affects how claims and defenses under the statute apply to losses during such combined operations.