John Marshall Harlan II

“ The crucial point for present purposes is that both the majority and the dissenting opinions in Morales viewed the issue in terms of the seaworthiness of the ship: whether or not it should have had a forced ventilation system in the hold. ”

“ Petterson, 347 U.S. 396, 74 S.Ct. 601, 98 L.Ed. 798, [1] the shipowner has not been deemed an insurer of the condition of the cargo. His duty with respect to cargo has been to see that it is stowed in a manner that does not make the ship itself an unsafe place to work. See, e.g., Palazzolo v. Pan-Atlantic S.S.C.orp., 2 Cir., 211 F.2d 277; Curtis v. A. Garcia y Cia., 3 Cir., 241 F.2d 30; Rich v. Ellerman & Bucknall S.S.C.o., 2 Cir., 278 F.2d 704 ”

“ Two of the judges said, but only alternatively, that the finding could 'also be predicated on the latent defect in the cargo-crate.' 258 F.2d at 299. (Emphasis added.) ↑ I do not attach significance to the fact that in Ellerman the Court was asked in a petition for rehearing to reconsider whether cargo can itself be unseaworthy. Petitioners for rehearing lie within the broad discretion of the Court and are almost never granted. ”