Summary

Pierce Butler Merritt Chapman Derrick Wrecking Company v…

Indeed, the circumstances disclosed by the petition rather tend to show that she did not need any assistance from plaintiff in error.
While salvage cannot be exacted for assistance forced upon a ship (The Bolivar v. The Chalmette, Fed. Cas. No. 1,611, 1 Woods, 397) , her request for or express acceptance of the service is not always essential to the validity of the claim.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Merritt Chapman Derrick Wrecking Company v…

Ammunition was stored in a building near the bulkhead, and the possibility of an explosion added to the danger. Plaintiff's steamers Commissioner and Chapman Brothers were powerful boats, specially built, equipped, and manned for salvage and fire-fighting service. The former from 7 until half after 9 in the evening, and the latter from about 7 in the evening until 7 in the morning, continuously fought the fire. They played heavy streams of water on the burning pier, where the fire threatened the Leviathan.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Merritt Chapman Derrick Wrecking Company v…

It is enough if, under the circumstances, any prudent man would have accepted. The Annapolis, In the Privy Council, Lushington, 355, 375. Plaintiff in error claims as a volunteer salvor, going at his own risk to the assistance of the ship on the change of reward in case of success, and not as one employed rendering service for pay according to his effort or the terms of his contract. The Sabine, 101 U.S. 384, 390, 25 L. Ed. 982. It did not communicate with or enter into the service of the Leviathan.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature