Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/636

€28 fSPEBAL BEPOSTEB. �in respect to the contenta and value of the box in making a claim in this suit which he knew to be far beyond its real value. He claims that the case was worth $8,000, the con- tents being chiefly valuable photographie negatives, books and pictures, with household goods, bedding, etc. A great deal of evidence bas been taken bearing upon this issue. The libellant has sworn to the contents of the box, and he ia corroborated to a considerable extent by other testimony. �In respect to the value of the negatives, which constitute the chief part in value, it appears that the libellant had sold out to one Cooper the models from which the negatives were taken, and had, by his agreement with Cooper, disentitled himself to make profitable use of at least some of the negatives in this country. The proper valuation of the negatives, considering the agreement with Cooper, may be very difficult to ascer- tain, but I am not satisfied that the valuation put upon them by the libellant is so extravagant and purposely so exaggerated as to make the present claim fraudulent. �The circumstances chiefly relied on by the claimants as sustaining this defence seem to me of very little weight, and, npon the whole testimony I think they have failed to estab- lisli the fraud set up in the answer. �2. Another defence is that by the bill of lading the limita- tion of liability is fixed at £100. It is enough to say that this limitation is no answer if negligence be proved. Lock- wood V. R. Co. 17 Wall. 357. �3. Unreasonable delay of the consignee, after notice by public advertisement of the time and place of discharge, ac- cording to the alleged custom of the port, is also relied upon as a defence. The point made is that after a reasonable time was afforded to the consignee to take away his goods upon their being unladen, the liability of the ship in- rem ceased; that even if there was negligence afterwards, for which the ship- owners migbt be responsible in a new relation of warehouse- men, the ship is not so liable. And it is insisted that the consignee should have corne for bis goods during the day, Tuesday, and that his delay beyond 5 o'clock on that day was unreasonable, and discharged the ship from ail liability. ��� �