## Facts

- The whaling ship *Richmond*, nearly full of oil and whalebone, struck rocks near Behring’s Straits in August 1849 and became disabled close to shore.
- Nearby whaling ships (*Elizabeth Frith* and *Panama*) were positioned to rescue the *Richmond*’s crew and remove a large part of the cargo.
- The salvors claimed the *Richmond*’s master “sold” them the cargo in an emergency, asserting the transaction was an unavoidable, necessity-driven disposition.
- The salvors transported the cargo from Behring’s Straits to the Sandwich Islands and then to New York, where they sold it as their own based on the alleged purchase.
- The *Richmond*’s owners filed an admiralty libel asserting the sale was invalid because it was extracted under coercive conditions and that the salvors were entitled only to salvage compensation.
- The district court dismissed the libel, effectively sustaining the sales.
- The circuit court reversed, declared the sales invalid, and awarded salvors one-half of the net New York proceeds (with the other half to the owners, plus interest), treating the matter as salvage.
- The salvors appealed to the Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether a vessel master may validly sell cargo in extremis where the purported “necessity” arises from salvors’ control over rescue and safety.
2. Whether an alleged purchase obtained under such conditions should be treated as salvage rather than a binding sale.
3. How to measure salvage compensation for derelict or nearly derelict property carried to safety and then onward to market.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court.
- The Court held the purported sale was invalid; the master’s limited emergency power to sell did not justify a bargain extracted as the “price of safety.”
- The Court treated the transaction as salvage of derelict (or nearly derelict) property and rejected rigid percentage rules for salvage awards.
- The Court upheld awarding salvors one-half of the net proceeds as salvage and allowed freight on the owners’ half for carriage from the Sandwich Islands to New York, reasoning the salvage service was complete once the goods reached a port of safety.

## Legal Principles

- A master’s power to sell vessel or cargo exists only in cases of genuine “absolute necessity” and cannot validate transfers compelled by coercion tied to rescue of life and property.
- When a “sale” is obtained from a distressed vessel under conditions where rescue is leveraged to exact ownership, admiralty may disregard the contract form and award salvage instead.
- Salvage awards are set by equitable assessment of the circumstances (peril, risk, labor, value saved, and effort), not by fixed fractions such as “always one-third” or “never more than one-half.”
- Salvage service is ordinarily complete when the salved property is brought to a port of safety; subsequent carriage may be compensated as freight rather than salvage.

## Conclusion

The Court voided a forced “purchase” of cargo made under life-and-death pressure and treated the salvors’ conduct as salvage, granting a generous salvage share and freight while preserving the owners’ property rights against coercive bargains at sea.


Post v. Jones, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 150 (1857)