## Facts

- The British ship *Blackwall* caught fire while anchored in San Francisco harbor in the early morning of August 24, 1867.
- Municipal officials asked the steam tug *Goliah* to raise steam and transport city fire engines and firefighters to the burning vessel.
- After raising steam and loading two fire engines, the *Goliah* brought them alongside the *Blackwall* and remained fast to her while hoses delivered multiple water streams.
- The *Blackwall*’s crew had been unable to control the fire and had abandoned the ship shortly before the *Goliah* arrived; without prompt assistance, total loss of ship and cargo was imminent.
- The fire was brought under control and extinguished through the combined efforts of the *Goliah* (transport/platform) and the city firefighters (direct firefighting), saving ship and cargo.
- The *Goliah*’s master and owners (a corporate towing company) filed an in rem admiralty claim seeking a salvage award; the fire department did not file any claim.

## Issues

1. Whether transporting and supporting land-based fire engines to extinguish a fire aboard a vessel in harbor constitutes a maritime salvage service.
2. Whether a salvage libel may be filed in the name of the master and owners when the master disclaims a personal interest and the salving vessel is corporately owned.
3. Whether the tug’s owners’ salvage recovery may be increased because other participants in the rescue (municipal firefighters) did not assert salvage claims.
4. What salvage amount is proper given the respective contributions of the tug and the non-claiming firefighters.

## Decision

- The Court held the *Goliah*’s services constituted salvage because they were voluntary assistance that helped save ship and cargo from imminent destruction.
- The Court held a corporately owned vessel may be a salvor and a salvage libel may proceed in the name of the master and owners despite the master’s disclaimer of personal recovery.
- The Court held the tug’s owners did not forfeit salvage because the fire department did not appear; however, non-appearance by other salvors cannot increase the tug’s award.
- The Court reduced the award to one-twentieth (5%) of the value of the property saved, modifying the decree to reflect only the tug’s contribution.

## Legal Principles

- Salvage is compensation for voluntary assistance that saves maritime property, in whole or part, from impending peril or recovers it from actual loss.
- Services supporting firefighting on a vessel in harbor, including transport and platform assistance enabling suppression of a shipboard fire, can qualify as maritime salvage.
- A corporation may recover salvage as owner of the salving vessel; a salvage action may be brought in the name of the master and owners even if the master claims no personal share.
- Failure of one set of potential salvors to prosecute a salvage claim benefits the property owner, not other salvors; it does not enlarge remaining salvors’ recovery.
- In fixing salvage, courts consider: (1) labor expended; (2) promptitude, skill, and energy; (3) value of salvor’s property used and danger to it; (4) risk incurred; (5) value of property saved; and (6) degree of danger from which it was rescued.

## Conclusion

The Court treated the tug’s role in bringing and supporting municipal firefighting resources as a salvage service, articulated the six factors governing salvage awards, and reduced the recovery to 5% of the value saved because absent co-salvors’ unasserted claims could not increase the tug owners’ award.


The Blackwall, 77 U.S. 1 (1869)