Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/76

M'CONNOOHIE V. KEER. 61 �for the reasons above stated. And similarly in admiralty, until decree, or until other co-salvors have been bronght in as actual parties, I cannot doubt that the same unrestrained liberty of separate settlement exista, though the libel is nominally in behalf of all inter- ested, and that any such settlement, fairly made, must be upheld according to the intention of the parties to it, without any responsi- bility over for the moneys received in the settlement to others who were not parties to it, and were not bound by it, nor intended to be benefited by it. �The arbitrator in this case having excluded the claim to salvage, nothing remained to be compensated but the owner's individual claim for towage, and for this only the money was awarded and paid. Although the libel was filed for a larger compensation as salvage, in which others might share, the settlement was for the sm aller and separate interest of the owner for towage. And it was none the less so by reason of the arbitrator's error, if it was error, as I have held, that no others had any claim to compensation for the service stated in the libel. This error, and the settlement based upon it, cannot, by presumption of law, have worked any injury to the owners of the Colon, because, upon the'lower basis of compensation adopted by the arbitrator, the award to the owner is, by presumption of law, lower than his share would have been in an award of salvage compensation. If the award was, as now claimed, excessive in amount on the basis adopted, concerning which I express no opinion, that was one of the risks of the arbitration, and the court cannot cor- ,rectit. �The money in question having, therefore, been paid for the own- er's separate interest, and to his own exclusive use, and the amount paid having been adjusted upon that basis, I find no grounds for any legal or equitable daim upon it by the libellants, and the libel must, therefore, be dismissed, with costs. ��� �