REPORTER, vol. 38.
will not account for the collision, and, in my opinion, in no way tended to produce it. My conclusion, therefore is that the collision in question was caused by the fault of the Switzerland in not holding her course as she was bound to do. The libel against the Gascogne is accordingly dismissed, and in the action against the Switzerland let a decree in favor of the libelant be entered with au order of reference.
(Diltriot (Jourt, 8. D. NettJ York. June 4, 1889.)
·CoLLISION-BETWEEN BTEAHEBS.,...FAlLURE TO ANSWER SIGNAL.....DUTY TO CnOSSING COURSE.
The st'eam-lighter r., going up the East river near the New York shore, dock, with the ferry-boat R., bOund from ; came in collision, near Hunter's Point to the Seventh·Street slip, and having the right of way. The . ,R. three times gave a of one whistle, when off Thirteenth street, Twelfth no answer until off Eleventh street, when street, and Eleventh street; and she received a signal of two whIstles from the r., which attempted to go near the shore. and the two collided, port bow to, port bow. Heta, both in fanH: the I. for crossing the R, 'll .course,. and keeping to the left, near the shore, without feason; 'the R. for not backing sooner, under inspector's rule 8, or as soon as the l:s intent was made known. ".
In Admiralty. Cross-libels for damages by collision.
BROWN, J. The above are oross-libels, brought by the owners of the lighter International and the terry-boat Rockaway, to recover their respective damages through a collision that occurred betwe.en them a little before 8 o'clockA. M., on March 16,1886, about 100 feet off'the foot of Eighth street. The Rockaway was bound down river from Hunter's Point to her slip at Seventh street; the International was bound up river from pier 9 to Port Morris. The morning being foggy, she kept close along the New York shore. But I find that for 10 minutes before this collision, and from the time the Rockaway left Hunter's Point, the fog had cleared, so as not to cause any embarrassment to navigation. The International maintained her place, however, close along the shore, with'out justification and in violation 'of the state statute that required her to go in mid-river. This course was also an embarrassment to the Rockaway in approaching herslip; and, the International having persisted in this course by a signal of two whistles to cross the bows of the Rockawa.y as ,she approached her slip, and without any assenting response, she must be held in fault. The Rockaway, however, does not satisfy me that she is free from blame in not stopping earlier than she did. When the Inter-
national was off Third or Fourth street, and the Rockaway some 600. feet off Thirteenth street, the latter gave a signal of one whistle.to which she got no answer. She repeated it when off Twelfth street, with no an. swer; and again when off Eleventh street, when for the first time she received an answer of two whistles, indicating that the International meant to cross her bows, and keep in shore, towards which she was already somewhat heading. By this time the Rockaway had already drawn in about a point towards the New York shore, and was heading about for her slip. The Rockaway thereafter stopped and backed, and gave one long whistle, and kept her course. She passed along the Ninth-Street pier only about 100 feet distant from it, heading inwards towards her Seventh-Street slip; and' the collision off Eighth street was about on a line with the end of the longer Ninth-Street pier. The Rockaway claims to have been stopped in the water at the time of the collision, and that the International could have passed clear, to the westward, had she not put her wheel to port, as is alleged, just before the collision, WhICh brought her port bow against the port bow of the Rockaway. The witnesses of the International deny any porting, and claim that the change of the stem was the effect of her propeller in backing. The case, as respects the fault of the Rockaway, is essentially the same 'as those of The Columbia, 25 Fed. Rep. 844; The Fanwood, 28 Fed. Rep. 373; and The Baltimore and CatskiU, 34 Fed. Rep. 660, affirmed ante, 367. The intent of the International to cross the line of the Rockaway's course, and to put herself on the Rockaway's starboard side, was shown in the clearest possible way. This was plain from the International's signal . when the Rockaway was off Eleventh street, and the International off Seventh street, or a little below;i. at least 1,000 feet distant. Even before that the Rockaway was in fault for not checking her speed in accordance with the requirement of the inspectoJ."s rule 3,·when she got no answer to ,two different signals given to the International. This \Vas di· rectly affirmed by Mr. Justice BLATCHFORD in the case of The Columbia, $upra,845. But on hearing the two blasts from the International, ing that she meant to go to the left, in answer to the Rockaway's third signal, the danger of cClllision was manifest, and the Rockaway was bound under rule 21 at once to stop and reverse, or else to pass to the left, which she might in fact have done without difficulty or danger. Though the International was in jimIt in heing where she was, the Rock. away had no right to run into collision, when there was no difficulty in avoiding it in either of the ways mentioned. As the collision occurred off Eighth street, it is very certain that the Rockaway did not reverse for a considerable time after she got the two whistles from the tional. She was then about 800 feet from the of collision; while she could stop, as the testimony shows, in going half that distance, (the -captain says, in much less than that.) The testimony indicates that she did not back till below Tenth street, probably when near Ninth street. 'The duty of the vessel having the s9-called "right of way" to stop and back in time, under such circumstances, has been often decided in other .cases besides those above mentioned. The Seuff, 32 Fed. Rep. 237; The
J. S. Darcy, 29 Fed. Rep. 644-; The Non Parflille, 33 Fed. Rep. 524; PM Alaska, 27 Fed. Rep. 704, affirmed 83 Fed. Rep. 107; The 4urania, 29 Fed. Rep. 98, 124; PM Tasmania, L. R. 14 Prob. Div. 53. The damages must therefore be divided.
ft.. . TH:E DREW
(Diatriot Oo1lrt, 8. D. New York. April 18,1889.)
. The steam-tug C., in coming down the narrow channel-way above ,Point, North river, with a tow upon a hawser. exchanged a signal of one WhIStle with the passenger steamer D;, coming up the river from below. The D. kept to the extreme right of the channel-way, so that she touched the mud, and. was still. or nearly!!o.: .when she collided with the libela.nts' boat on the port side of the last tier of the tow: Held, that the D. was WIthout fault, the passage not being so difHcnlt or dangerous as to forbid her entering it, had the tow kept in the middle or on the side of the channel. as the signals reql1irelt: (2) that .the· C. was j.n fault for sheering to port, after her signal, "nd that this was not excused by the presence of another steam canal-boat 'ahead, Which the O. desired to pass to the left, as she should have slackened her speed, and not have'attempted to pass the other in that situation.
.:In Admiralty. LibeUor collision·. · Hyland&: ZabriBlcie, for 1ibelants. W. P. Prentice, for the Drew. Owen, ,Gray &: Sturgea, for the Camelia.
BROWN, J. Shortly after day-break on the of June 12, 1888, as the libelants' canal-boat Jaines Ash, one of a fleet of eight boats in tow oBhe steam-tugCameliaupon a hawser, was going down the North river, she came into collision with the side-wheel passenger steamer Drew, on her trip from New York to Albany, ,in the n'arrow channel above FourMile Point,on the east side of the channel-way, about 600 or 800 feet above the buoy at the southerly end of the middle ground. The Ash was the outside boat on the port side of the third or last tier of the toW'. 'fhe steamer's guard ran over the Ash's port quarter,struck her cabin, and inflicted some damage, for which this libel was filed. The tide was :flood, and the morning clear. The Camelia was proceeding with her tow at the rate of about two or three knots per hour. A signal of one whistle was exchanged between her and the Drew when the'latter was off FourMile Point, from one-third toone-half mile distant from the Camelia, which waa then about in the middle of the narrow channel-way. Some minutes before that, the Camelis had given a signal of one whistle toa.steampanal-boat, havingin poat,along-side, which was going down ashol'tdistance ahead ofthe at 'a little slower speed" indicating that the Camelia desired to pass her to the westward; .Getting no reply. she then two whistles, and hauled somewhat