to bond or sold I claim. for such T4is, it seems" would taking of their own wrong or . . , , ,', A decree will be entered in 8.\lCol'dance with this opinion.
THE SEA.cAUCU8. 1
TaE EDWIN HAWLEY· . VAN HOBOKEN LAND
11. THE SEACAUCUS.
THE EDWIN HAWLEY.
(DiBtrict Oourt, 8. D. New York. February 11, 1888.)
COLLISION-COLORED LIGHTS-ASSUMING' POSITION IN WHICH LIGHTS SCURED.
The law that requires lights of a vessel to be visible for 10 points around the horizon is not complied with when a vessel voluntarily puts herself in a situation in which her lights will continue for some time obscured over a considerable part of, the area in which other veseels are liable to be moving. . .,
SAME-FERRy-BOAT AND TuGs-LIGHTe OBSCURED BY INTERVENING VEssELe -SPECIAL DISTINGUleHING LIGHTS. .
The S., bound to Hoboken, wae about one-third of the distanc6 from t1WNew YOl.'k shore, headed ,nearly up river, and moving about 11 knots an hour. A large Erie ferry-boat was a length ahead of her, and a little on her port bow. The emaIl tug H., bound for New York, and making about 10 knots, came suddenly, around theetern of the Erie boat, across the course of the S., and was run into and sunk by the lattef·. Neither vessel had observed the 'colored lightSbf the other until within a few seconds of the collision, and 'when it was unavoidable; the reason giVen by each being that the lights of the.otb.erwere'hidden by thlt Erie boat., Held"b()tb. in ,fault for navi, gating voluntarfly ata high rate of speed, in encha poeition, ae regard!;! the Erie boat;,that their lights were obscured to vessel!! on the other side; and as the eVidence indicated that the high, special distin'guishing lights of each might have been seell by the other over the Erie boat, held, that the failure to perceive them was a further £a\llt in each. .",
In Admiralty. Libel for damages. Two libels to recover damages sustained in consequence' of a collision, brought by Van Wie, owner of the steam-tug ljldwin Hawley, against the Seacaucus, and by the Hoboken Land & Improvement pany, owner oftheSeacaucus, against the Edwin Hawley. Oarytmter &: Mosher, for the Edwin Hawley. Abbett &: Fuller, for the Seacaucus. J.At about n..::" ,)Qat 6 lision occurred between the stelin.: North Moore street,New York, and trip from Bal'Clay street to Hoboken. ,
on October 21, 1887, a colHawley, bOund from Hoboken to the ferry-bOat Reacaucus, on her The night was aau, ..ut ;ciear,and
P. M. b&1'.
Reporte4 by Edward G."Benedict, ;Esq., of the New
good for seeing lights; the tide strong ebb; the wind fresh from the northwest. The Hawley, at the moment of collision, was headed nearly directly across the river towards the New York shore; the Seacaucus up river. The port bow and guard of the latter ran over the Hawley's starboard side; knocking off her pilot-house, and breaking a hole in her side, from which she shortly afterwards sank. The ferry-boat was somewhat damaged; she was crowded with passengers, but none were injured. The collision was about one-third across from the New shore. Each ascribed the collision to the fauItof the other, and the above cross.-libels were filp-d to recover their respective damages. On the Hawley there was no lookout, other than the pilot, who was at the wheel; on the Seacaucus there were two,-one at the bow, who, upon his own testimony, I must find was paying little attention; the other was on the upper deck, near the pilot-house. Neither boat, nor the lights of either, were seen by the other untifwithin a distance of only one or two lengths apart, the reason assigned on each side being that a large Erie ferry-boat had been previously going between the other two, so as to hide each from the other until a few seconds before the collision, when each came into view of the other. If, at that ,moment, the courseS of the Hawley and the Seacaucus were nearly at right angles, as the witnesses of the former state, and which is not very clearly negatived by t4e witnesses of the Seacaucus, collision was, in my judgment, ckarly Ullavoidable, since the Seacaucus was going at a speed of about 11 knotEi, through the water against the tide; the Hawley, at a speed of about 10 knots, crossing the tide. In that situation, I think, the best efforts of both combined would not have averted collision. There is no question that the regulation colored lights were properly burning on each. In addition to those the Hawley carried a white head-light forward, and a white staff-light apout 33 feet above the water. The Seacaucus, besides her side lights," carried a special distinguishing green light about 40 feet above the water, visible, as her pilot says, about half a mile off., Ag;the regulation lights of the two boats were not seen by the other, I must assume tp.e truth of what both sides affirm, that the Erie boat, for a con· siderable time, hid each from the other until just before the collision. There 'is,however, a singular contradiction; three witnesses on the part of the Hawley affirming that she came down on the westward side of the Erie boat, and rounded to the eastward under the latter's port quarter as she was sheering to the westward; while four witnesses on the part of the Seacaucus assert that the Hawley did not go to the westward of the Erie boat, but to the northward and eastward of her, along her starboard side, coming into view as she emerged from the Erie boat's starboard quarter. The Erie boat had left Chambers street for Pavonia ferry, on the J fll'Sey shore, some distance up the river, about the same time that the cus left Barclay street. After getting out a little in the river both boats hauled up on nearly parallel courses, heading nearly up river, but a little across. Both were going at about the same speed; the Seacaucus on!" length, or two lengths, astern of the Erie boat, which was larg.er and higher. The pilot of the Seacaucus testifies that the Erie boat pore
from theSeacaucus say that she 1vasrunning a little on their s'taroiJard bow. They continued going upon ileal'lyparallel cClursesuntil:the Erie boat·hitdreached the proper place totnake for the Jersey shore, when she swung for towards the westward,llndvery;shortly thereafter the Hawley and the Seacaucu8 were for the first titrnedisclosed to each other?sview. The testimony of the pilot of the Hawi.l\:iy, as he is not otherwise discredited, must ·be' 'taken as the cOUrse of his own boat. He shaped his course, as he testifies; to the westward fr6m the time he saw the Erie boat half a mile distant l and passed her upon her westward or pOrt side; I adopt' this view,( therefore, though· it would make little difference, as to the question of the fault ofeither, upon which side of the Erie boat he went. . 'The caUses of the collision rest'eqUally, as it seems tome, with both vessels; The acts of each,which brought the colli!'ion about, are almost precisely analogous. The Seacaucus was going within a couple of hundred feet of the Erie boat,amuch larger-one, so close that her own colored lights were thereby kept obscured over a considerable space of the river to the northward and westward. '1'he tug likewise camedowrt on the opposite side of the ferry-boat, and rounded her stern suddenly, and within 40 feet of it, so that the collision could not be avoided. Both were navigating 80 near to the large Erie boat that their lights were obscured·to vessels on the other side, and both were going at a high rate of speed. This mode of navigation was voluntary on the part oreach; each is therefore chargeable with the risk incident to it. The tug had abundant room for keeping off from the Erie boat, so as not to endanger any other boat that might be found near her when she turned and crossed under the Erie boat's stern. The Seacaucus could just as easily have gone at a reasonable distance away from the Erie boat. The law that requites the colored lights to be visible for 10 points atoundthe horizon is not complied with when a vessel voluntarily puts herself in a situation iIi which her lights will continue for some time obscured over a considerable part of the area in which: other vessels are liable to be moving. The C. F. Young, 25 Fed. Rep. 457,461; The Howard, 30 Fed. Rep. Upon the testimony I must· find also that the special distinguishing lights authorized by the inspectors to be carried on each of these vessels, in addition to the ordinary colotedlights,ahd which were carried by each, were visible; and might,a1i\:lshould, have been' seen by each. The navigation of the boats so closet6 the larger Erie boat, which must have been known to hide their own colored lights from apart ofthe field 'in which, by law, fhey were requitbd i to be visible, made,it incumbent upon each vessel to observe carefully wh'at lights might ha:vebeen seen over the Erie boat. Ha.d sufficientatl,ention, been given, each, I am would have seen the speCial 'alld' distinguishing light ofthe other,Rrid thus would have been apprised df the other's near presence. Both vessels, therefore, are chargeable with similar faults, and the damages and oosts of each must be divided, with a reference to ascertain the damages, 'ifnotagreed upon. '
'& little dn:his port bow;,
THE MARTELLO. 1
(Diltriet Oourt, S. D. NeUJ York.
COLLISION-Foa-RATE OP SPEED-STEAMER NEAR PORT OP NEW YORK.
For steamer whose full speed is twelve knots. and which is near the eri· trance to the harbor of New York, in a thick fog, a speed of about. five knots is not the "moderate speed" required by article 18 of the new international rules: and she is bound to stop at once on hearing a fog·horn near, and nearly ahead.
A sQilingvessel in a fog. and in a situation where manr other vessels are likely to be met. is bound tQ moderate her speed to the lhmts of fair steerage· way. Held, in. this case, that four knots was immoderate speed in a sail·ves· sel approaching New York barbor in a thick fog. 8. BAME-BETWElllN STEAlil AND BAIL-'-'Foa-"MoDERATE SPEED "-BIGNAL WIDS' In the midst ofa thick fog the steamer M., outward b'ound :from New York. and a few miles outside of Bandy Hook, was steaming about five knots an hour, he'aded E. S. E. Thebarkentine W., headed nortb. and bound into the port of New York, was sailing about four knots, with the wind E. by N. Tbe fog·horriof the W. wail first heard by tbe steamer off her starboard bow, and afterwards, and as soon all the barkentine came in sight. w'hicb was at a ,. distance of.fItom 250 to 700 feet, according to the steamer's witnesses, t1le steamerwas stopped and backed. Tbe sailingvesselhad abouttbree·fourths of her canvas set; she made no effort to slacken her speed or do anythinl\' to avoid collision, at any time, though the whistles of the steamer were heard comingnell.rer. The barkentinewas struck by the steamer on her. port bow. Held, both in fault, for the rate at which they were moving in the fop:, under the special circumstance of the immediate vicinity of the entrance to New York harbor, where other vessels were to be expected. Held, further, that the barkentine was in additional fault for failure to check her speed on hear· ing the whistles. of the and the steamer in additional fault for not stoppmg as soon as the salling vessel's horn was heard; but not in fault for not indicating her course by Whistles.
In Admiralty. Libels for damages.
Fo8ter &:' Tlwmpson, for the Martello. Goodrich, Deady &:' Goodrich, for the Willey.
BROWN, J. On the 8th of May, 1887, the steamer Martello of the Wilson line, 370 feet long, and 2,439 net tons, bound from New York to Hull, came into collision, a little before 8 o'clock in the morning, a a few miles op'tside of Sandy Hook, with the barkentine F. A. Willey, bound fromPepsacola into the harbor of New York. At the time of the collision, ,a, thick fog preva.iled. The wind was about east by north, and the bllrkentine headed north, on her starboard tack. The steamer was heading' E. S. E., and struck the barkentine on her port bow, crushing in he!; timbers, and briD;ging up against the keel and bowsprit,
JReported by Edward G. Benedict, Esq., of the New York bar.