Article by Honorable Peter Beer
The sinking of the White Star linear Titanic on April 15, 1912, was followed by a series of emotionally packed inquiries. In the United States, a congressional committee headed by Senator Smith was the principal American forum. These committee hearings resulted in Congress focusing serious attention on the need for national legislative action with respect to the various aspects of safety at sea. Close on the heels of these congressional inquiries was a growing concern for our merchant marine, which was precipitated by the outbreak of war in Europe in 1914. Congressional and nationwide attention centered on protection of the sea lanes and of the men who manned American flag vessels in dangerous waters.
In March of 1915, Congress undertook the first legislative step toward promoting the safety and welfare of American seamen in the merchant marine. In this legislation, Congress addressed the issue of safety at sea by setting forth guidelines with respect to matters such as the required living space on vessels and the cubic capacity of lifeboats. This legislation presaged more detailed legislative enactments which addressed the seaman's physical well-being and the protection of life and limb aboard American flag vessels. The 1915 Act did not, however, fully explicate the method or the jurisdictional basis by which an injured seaman might seek relief in a United States court for personal injury suffered in the course of his duties. This type of legislation awaited the conclusion of the First World War.
On June 5, 1920, the Sixty-Sixth Congress passed ‘[a]n Act [t]o provide for the promotion and maintenance of the American merchant marine, to repeal certain emergency legislation, and to provide for the disposition, regulation and use of property acquired thereunder, and for other purposes.’ Various subheadings of this Act are entitled ‘Recording of Sales, Conveyances, and Mortgages of Vessels of the United States'; ‘Foreclosure of Preferred Mortgages'; ‘Definitions'; ‘Transfer of Mortgaged Vessels and Assignment of Vessel Mortgages'; and ‘Maritime Liens for Necessaries.’ At the very end of the Act, under the subtitle ‘Miscellaneous Provisions,’ is section 33, which provides the following:
Any seaman who shall suffer personal injury in the course of his employment may, at his election, maintain an action for damages at law, with the right of trial by jury, and in such action all statutes of the United States modifying or extending the common-law right or remedy in cases of personal injury to railway employees shall apply; and in case of the death of any seaman as a result of any such personal injury the personal representative of such seaman may maintain an action for damages at law with the right of trial by jury, and in such action all statutes of the United States conferring or regulating the right of action for death in the case of railway employees shall be applicable. Jurisdiction in such actions shall be under the court of the district in which the defendant employer resides or in which his principal office is located.
Interestingly, no legislative attempt was made to define the term ‘seaman’ either in the definitional provisions of the Act or in the report of the hearings held in conjunction with the passage of the legislation. The drafters of this substantial and far-reaching piece of legislation apparently anticipated no difficulty on the part of those who would apply the Act and who would need to define this term. To the Congress in those post-World War I days, the term ‘seaman’ appeared to have only a straightforward, unambiguous meaning. At the very least, it seems that the legislators felt that any minor adjustments could be left to the courts.
About the Author
Honorable Peter Beer. Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Citation
61 Tul. L. Rev. 379 (1986)