1923 A. M. C. we are dealing in this action, to which the general principles of the law of bailments is not wholly applicable. Plaintiff parted with the possession and the right of possession of the barge; Hartmann-Blanchard Company had not only the use but the entire control of the barge. It became the special owner or owner pro hac vice. The captain became the servant of the charterer. (Anderson vs. Boyer, 156 N. Y. 93; Brooklyn Ash Removal Co., Inc. vs. Connell, 225 N. Y. 503.) The authority of the charterer to engage towage was unrestricted. It, therefore, had power to accept the terms tendered by the director-general which relieved the latter from liability for damage to the tow caused by the negligence of the tug. A tug is not a common carrier of the tow. The owners of a tug may restrict their liability by special agreement. No rule of public policy is involved. (Wells & Tucker vs. Steam Nav. Co., 2 N. Y. 204; The Margaret, 94 U. S. 494; Hartford Fire Ins. Co. vs. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 175 U. S. 91, 98, 99.) When the defendant gave notice on what terms it would furnish tug service, the charterer actually accepted such terms and entered into a special contract incorporating them when it ordered tow service without protest. (The Oceanica, 170 Fed. 893; Ten Eyck vs. Director-General, 267 Fed. 974; certiorari denied, 254 U. S. 646.) In McWilliams Bros., Inc. vs. Davis, 1923 A. M. C. 29, 285 Fed. 312, the same notice limiting liability was not agreed to by the charterer which by letter notified the director-general that it would not accept the terms stated. The Court properly held that a tug owner could not limit its liability by a general notice not agreed to. While the charterer had power to relieve the defendant from liability, it remained answerable for the negligence of any one to whom it intrusted the barge, even as an independent contractor. (Gannon vs. Consolidated Ice Co., 91 Fed. 539; White vs. Schoonmaker Connors Co., Inc., 265 Fed. 465.) The principles governing this decision are stated in the Ten Eyck Case, supra. The distinction made by the learned trial justice whose opinion was adopted by the Appellate Division (116 Misc. Rep. 502, sub nom. Graves vs. Hines, 202 App. Div. 842) is untenable. The railroad was relieved and the charterer was held liable to the owner for the damage done by the negligence of the railroad in the case cited for the reasons stated in this opinion, and not otherwise. 490. The judgments below should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts. HOGAN, CARDOZO, MCLAUGHLIN, CRANE and ANDREWS, JJ., concur; HISCOCK, Ch. J., absent. Judgments reversed, etc. THE GDANSK. ALFRED DI PESA, Libellant, vs. STEAMSHIP GDANSK. United States District Court, Southern District of New York, April 3, 1923. MARITIME LIENS-FOOD FOR PASSENGERS DETAINED AT QUARANTINE— IMMIGRATION ACT, 1917-ORDERED BY VESSEL. Where food and other necessaries for passengers detained at quarantine are furnished on request of the ship rather than on orders of governmental authorities, a maritime lien therefor arises against the vessel under the Immigration Act of 1917. The Athinai, 230 Fed. 1017, distinguished. LOOMIS & JONES (HOMER L. LOOMIS and OTTO C. STEGEMANN, Advocates), for Libellant. LOUIS MILLSAPS, for Abram L. Burbank, Receiver-claimant. On motion to dismiss libel on pleadings. AUGUSTUS N. HAND, D. J.: This case comes up on a motion to dismiss libellant's claim for $4,027.50 set forth in the libel as follows: "Fourth: That on or about the 17th day of March, 1921, the steamship Gdansk carrying 390 passengers arrived in the harbor of Boston, Massachusetts, and anchored at Gallups Island, the United States Quarantine Station in the said harbor of Boston. The said vessel was liable to detention in Quarantine about thirteen days, viz., from March 17, 1921, up to and including March 29, 1921, during which period libellant at the request of the vessel and her agents furnished certain supplies to, and performed certain labor and services for, said vessel as a caterer by providing subsistence and furnishing food to, and otherwise feeding, the said 390 passengers, and also various employees of the United States Government, to wit, the various doctors, nurses, guards, inter 1923 A. M. C. preters and helpers stationed at the said Quarantine Station which the vessel would have been obliged to feed and care for but for libellant's services, by virtue of which the vessel was enabled to avoid the said detention and the feeding of, and caring for, the said passengers, and was enabled to discharge the same and proceed on her way without further loss of time. "The said supplies were furnished and the said labor and services were rendered at an agreed charge of 50 cents per person per meal where the total number of persons was less than 500. The said supplies furnished and the said labor and services rendered were necessary and proper to the despatch of the said vessel and to the due performance of her obligations to her passengers, and were of the reasonable value of six thousand three hundred twentyseven and 50 100 dollars ($6,327.50) in which sum the said vessel became liable to the libellant." Judge Learned Hand dismissed a libel filed by the United States against the Gdansk for supplies furnished to immigrant passengers removed by the Government to Ellis Island. In The Athinai (1916), 230 Fed. 1017, a similar decision was rendered by the District Court, S. D. N. Y. where the State Health Officer of the Port of New York libelled a steamer for the maintenance of passengers removed by order of the Health Officer from the steamer because cerebro-spinal meningitis had broken out on board. The passengers were removed by State authority. The place at which the passengers were temporarily landed was about four miles from the end of the voyage. In the present case the libel alleges that the supplies were furnished not by order of public authority but at the request of the vessel and her agents. The vessel is stated to have been thus relieved of caring for the passengers herself and to have been thus "enabled to discharge the same and proceed on her way without further loss of time." I think the claimant is right in distinguishing Platt vs. The Georgia (1887), 34 Fed. 79, where the services related to maintenance and cure of sick sailors. These were the subject of a maritime lien wherever performed. The services in the City of Mexico (1886), 28 Fed. 239, were for passengers who remained on the ship. In view of the decision in The Athinai, supra, it must be held 490. The judgments below should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts. HOGAN, CARDOZO, MCLAUGHLIN, CRANE and ANDREWS, JJ., concur; HISCOCK, Ch. J., absent. Judgments reversed, etc. THE GDANSK. ALFRED DI PESA, Libellant, vs. STEAMSHIP GDANSK. United States District Court, Southern District of New York, April 3, 1923. MARITIME LIENS FOOD FOR PASSENGERS DETAINED AT QUARANTINE— IMMIGRATION ACT, 1917-ORDERED BY VESSEL. Where food and other necessaries for passengers detained at quarantine are furnished on request of the ship rather than on orders of governmental authorities, a maritime lien therefor arises against the vessel under the Immigration Act of 1917. The Athinai, 230 Fed. 1017, distinguished. LOOMIS & JONES (HOMER L. LOOMIS and OTTO C. STEGEMANN, Advocates), for Libellant. LOUIS MILLSAPS, for Abram L. Burbank, Receiver-claimant. On motion to dismiss libel on pleadings. AUGUSTUS N. HAND, D. J.: This case comes up on a motion to dismiss libellant's claim for $4,027.50 set forth in the libel as follows: "Fourth: That on or about the 17th day of March, 1921, the steamship Gdansk carrying 390 passengers arrived in the harbor of Boston, Massachusetts, and anchored at Gallups Island, the United States Quarantine Station in the said harbor of Boston. The said vessel was liable to detention in Quarantine about thirteen days, viz., from March 17, 1921, up to and including March 29, 1921, during which period libellant at the request of the vessel and her agents furnished certain supplies to, and performed certain labor and services for, said vessel as a caterer by providing subsistence and furnishing food to, and otherwise feeding, the said 390 passengers, and also various employees of the United States Government, to wit, the various doctors, nurses, guards, inter 1923 A. M. C. preters and helpers stationed at the said Quarantine Station which the vessel would have been obliged to feed and care for but for libellant's services, by virtue of which the vessel was enabled to avoid the said detention and the feeding of, and caring for, the said passengers, and was enabled to discharge the same and proceed on her way without further loss of time. "The said supplies were furnished and the said labor and services were rendered at an agreed charge of 50 cents per person per meal where the total number of persons was less than 500. The said supplies furnished and the said labor and services rendered were necessary and proper to the despatch of the said vessel and to the due performance of her obligations to her passengers, and were of the reasonable value of six thousand three hundred twentyseven and 50/100 dollars ($6,327.50) in which sum the said vessel became liable to the libellant." Judge Learned Hand dismissed a libel filed by the United States against the Gdansk for supplies furnished to immigrant passengers removed by the Government to Ellis Island. In The Athinai (1916), 230 Fed. 1017, a similar decision was rendered by the District Court, S. D. N. Y. where the State Health Officer of the Port of New York libelled a steamer for the maintenance of passengers removed by order of the Health Officer from the steamer because cerebro-spinal meningitis had broken out on board. The passengers were removed by State authority. The place at which the passengers were temporarily landed was about four miles from the end of the voyage. In the present case the libel alleges that the supplies were furnished not by order of public authority but at the request of the vessel and her agents. The vessel is stated to have been thus relieved of caring for the passengers herself and to have been thus "enabled to discharge the same and proceed on her way without further loss of time." I think the claimant is right in distinguishing Platt vs. The Georgia (1887), 34 Fed. 79, where the services related to maintenance and cure of sick sailors. These were the subject of a maritime lien wherever performed. The services in the City of Mexico (1886), 28 Fed. 239, were for passengers who remained on the ship. In view of the decision in The Athinai, supra, it must be held |