## Facts

- A Norwegian steamship, *Jason*, carried general cargo from Cuba to New York, including 12,000 bags of sugar owned by Arbuckle Brothers and partly insured.
- The vessel stranded off Cuba on July 30, 1904, due to negligent navigation, but was seaworthy and properly manned, equipped, and supplied at the voyage’s start.
- To refloat the ship, the master ordered a jettison of sugar and other extraordinary sacrifices and expenditures, including employing salvors; the ship was refloated on August 9, 1904.
- The ship was repaired enough to proceed, completed the voyage, and delivered the remaining cargo in New York.
- Delivery was conditioned on execution of a general average bond; adjusters assessed contributions.
- Arbuckle Brothers refused to pay assessed general average, asserting general average was unavailable because the casualty was caused by navigational negligence.
- The bill of lading contained a clause requiring cargo to contribute in general average if the shipowner exercised due diligence to make the vessel seaworthy and properly manned, equipped, and supplied, even if loss resulted from negligent navigation.
- Cross-libels were filed: the shipowner sought general average contribution from cargo interests; cargo interests sought contribution from the shipowner for sacrificed cargo.
- The case reached the Supreme Court on certified questions from the court of appeals.

## Issues

1. Whether a bill-of-lading clause requiring cargo to contribute in general average after a casualty caused by negligent navigation is valid under the Harter Act when the shipowner exercised due diligence to provide a seaworthy, properly manned, equipped, and supplied vessel.
2. If such a clause is valid, whether cargo owners may recover general average contribution from the shipowner for sacrificed cargo while refusing to contribute to the shipowner’s general average sacrifices and extraordinary expenditures.

## Decision

- The Court held the general average clause valid under the Harter Act where due diligence to make the vessel seaworthy and properly manned, equipped, and supplied is shown.
- The shipowner could collect general average contribution from cargo interests for post-stranding sacrifices and extraordinary expenditures made for the common safety.
- Cargo interests also had a right to general average contribution from the shipowner for cargo sacrificed for the common safety under the same circumstances.
- Cargo interests could not recover contribution for their sacrificed cargo without also contributing their proportionate share to the shipowner’s general average sacrifices and expenses.
- The Court distinguished prior precedent that denied recovery of general average by a negligent shipowner absent an express contractual provision.

## Legal Principles

- A bill-of-lading provision may validly allocate general average contribution after negligent navigation when the carrier satisfies the Harter Act due-diligence obligation regarding seaworthiness and proper manning, equipment, and supplies.
- General average rests on proportional sharing: extraordinary sacrifices and expenses incurred for the common benefit of ship, cargo, and freight are borne ratably by all interests.
- General average contribution is reciprocal; a cargo interest cannot claim contribution for its own general average loss while denying contribution owed for other general average sacrifices and expenditures arising from the same common purpose.
- A negligent-navigation casualty does not, by itself, bar general average contribution where (i) statutory due diligence as to seaworthiness is established and (ii) an enforceable contract clause governs contribution.

## Conclusion

The Court approved enforcement of a bill-of-lading general average clause requiring cargo contribution following a navigationally negligent stranding when the carrier exercised due diligence to provide a seaworthy, properly manned vessel, and it reaffirmed that general average is mutual: all interests that benefit must contribute proportionately, and none may selectively accept contribution while refusing it.


The Jason, 225 U.S. 32 (1912)