McCrea v. United States
Headline: Seaman’s wage suit against a government-owned ship upheld in part; Court denied double wages and extra pay where consul refused discharge and sailor’s actions blocked timely payment.
Holding: The Court affirmed the lower courts: the seaman cannot recover the one-month consular wage or double wages because the consul refused discharge and the master's delay was not 'without sufficient cause.'
- Seamen cannot get extra consular pay unless a consul discharges and certifies their claim.
- Leaving a ship without contact can prevent recovery of double wages.
- Master’s reasonable delay to consult a consul may avoid penalties for late payment.
Summary
Background
A seaman sued the United States as owner and operator of the S. S. American Shipper after a voyage from New York to London and back. He sought recovery for lost clothing, unpaid wages, one month’s extra pay under a consular-discharge rule, and double wages for late payment. The case arose after the seaman demanded discharge and pay in London, the American consul refused to discharge him, and the seaman left the ship without leaving a contact address.
Reasoning
The Court reviewed two main statutory claims. First, the one-month extra pay depends on a consul’s favorable finding and certificate; because the consul refused to discharge the seaman, there was no recovery under that rule. Second, the statute for double wages applies only when a master “refuses or neglects” to pay wages "without sufficient cause." The Court relied on earlier decisions saying that phrase requires arbitrary or unreasonable delay. Here the master set a time to meet the seaman and to consult the consul; the seaman then failed to keep appointments and left without giving an address, preventing payment within the statutory period. That conduct defeated a claim of unreasonable delay and double wages.
Real world impact
The decision means seamen must follow the consul-based process to win extra consular pay and should not abandon a ship or fail to provide contact information if they want statutory penalties for late pay. It also confirms that reasonable delays to consult a consul or resolve legal questions can defeat claims for double wages. The Court did not decide whether the government is liable for statutory penalties as owner of a vessel because the seaman failed on the merits.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?