THE FRED JANSEN.
773
miss from my mind the conclusion that the deck-load of this steamer was lost on this occasion, not from stress of weather, but because as I have already said the vessel was overloaded, and had too much of her load on deck. A decree will therefore be entered finding the steamer at fault, and awarding damages to the libelant in the sum of 81,822.
THE FRED JANSEN.· LYNCH
et al.
'V. THE FRED JANSEN.
(District Court. S. D. New York. December 31, 1890.) CoLLISION-OVERTAKING VESSEIr-UNEXPECTED SHEER-TIDE-RIP-WIND.
As libelant's schooner T. was going west through the East river under sail, ,she was overtaken near Negro Point by a schooner in tow of a tug on a hawser some 850 feetlong. About the place of collision the T. passed out of slack water into a strong flood-tide, and, the wind at the same time failing, she was swung around by the tide some four to six points, and out into the stream, when she struck the other schooner. When the t\lg passed the T., the two vessels were on parallel courses, and about200 feet apart. Held that, under the circumstances, the pilot of the tug could not expect such a large swing on the part of the T., and, as there was no fault in his course, and no indication of danger when he passed the T., the tug could not be held in fault for the collision.
In Admiralty. Suit for damages caused by McOanhy &- Berier, for libelants. Goodrich, Deady &- Goodrich, for claimant. BROWN, J. The libelants' small schooner Titus, loaded with sand, in the forenoon of May 22, 1890/ while goil1 g west near Negro came into collision with the schooner W. O. Snow, on a hawser about 350 feet long, also going west, in tow of the tug Fred Jansen. The libei alleges that the Titus, being under sail, and the tide strong flood, was coming very close to the Ward's island shore, and that the Jansen and Snow overtook, and negligently ran upon and sunk, her. There is great differencein the estimates of the distance of the collision from the shore. The whole testimony and the circumstances together leave no doubt in my mind that the collision was at least 250 feet from the shore of Ward's island. There were several other vessels and tows near by: The Snow, in order to avoid the Titus, sheered to port, and thereby hit; and somewhat injured, another vessel,passing to the west on h{)r pori side. Abreast of the latter, and just beyond her, a schooner was tail end of a tow, going east. There is no probability that all these, ves7 sels would be hugging the northerly shore. Certainly the tow going east would naturally take the mid-channel to get the full benefit of the floodtide, ll.ndwould thus be about400 feet from the Ward's island since the channel there is fully 800 feet wide. Tliecollision was
a
IReported by Edward G. Benedict, Esq., of the New York bar.
FEDERAL REPQRTER,
vol. 44.
,,ably 300 than· 200 feet fr9m As the Titus Wll,f! previonsly, fIlQdQubt, going close aloPg the shore, it follows thatthEHlef.flndant's ac'count .the collision"through the swing of the Titus, towards midbe acceptp.d as the true one. This swing would follow naturally-, if not counteracted, upon, her going out of the slack, water near shore into the line of the strong flood-tide,-a line thut runs angling close up to Negro Point. The Titus' own witnesses show that just before collision she became unmanageable, and that her fore peak was dropped, and her wheel put hard to port, in order to counteract the effect of running into the flood-tide. ,i3ut, the wind dying away, she had not headway enough to tie kept under control, and was consE\quently carried around some fqur to six points, and out into the stream, and upon the Snow. With the wind dying away, I do not see how the Titus could have l\:voided this result, except by casting anchor. I am not satisfied that all this should have been so reasonably foreseen by the Jansen as to charge her with fault. When the latter passed the Titus, as both sidestestify, the two vessels were' ou about parallel courses; and the Jansen have been 200 feet outside of the Titus, if the latter was within 50 feet the shore. This was reasonable distaI).ce to pass; and, considering the position of theoth,er vessels in the river, the only thing the Jansen could do with her tow was either to go on. or to stop short, and drift with the tide till the Titus should drift to some place unknown, -a course less likely to avoid collision than going on. In truth, the pilot of the Jansen could not know the precise place where the Titus would strike the rip of the flood-tide, or what was her ability to counteract its effects by her sails, her speed, and her helm; and he was not chargeable with any such kriowledge. When the tug passed her, there was 1l0,iJ;ldication of trouble or danger. He might swingi,ng bythe Titus when she struck the tide, if that were not counteracted; but not, I think, her running so far. out into the stream. In the position of the vessels and tows in so peculiar a situation, I have no doubt it was the Jansen's duty to go on, relying on the ability of the Titus to take care of herself by 8ails, helm, or anchor when she should meet the tide. The a. 11. Northam, 37 Fed. Rep. 238. It was not until after the Jansen had passed that any danger was seen or suspected. Whim it was seen, the evidence of her witnesses shows that she slowed and stopped her engines. The breaking of the masts and upsetting of the Titus arOse from the peculiar and accidental manner of their fouling when they clime together. The Jansen, 350 feet away, had no knowledge of this, and could not see it. The headway and momentum of the Snow were sufficient to break the masts and upset the Titus, even though the hawser was slack, as the Jansen's witnesses say, it was. The Jansen not being in fault for thEl collision itself, I do not see how she is chargeable with any such knowledge of the peculiar manner of fouling as to charge her with fault for her management afterwards. The libel is dismissed; but, under the circumstances, without costs.
BENHAM V. THE NIAGARA. '
BENHAM
et al. v.
THE NIAGARA.
(D18i1rkt Court, N. D. Ohio, E.D. January 17:,1891.) L COLLISION-TuGS WITH 'l'OWS-BROKEN RAFT IN RIVER.
The steamer N. was proceeding down the St. Clair river, having in tow a raft of telegraph poles, some 800 feet long and 400 feet wide, properly constructed for navigation in such river, when two schooners collided with tae raft and so broke it up that it spread out to the width of nearly 600 feet, and in some'places occupied' the whole of the channel. The N., however, went her wav without attempting to repair the raft, and in the night-time she sighted the tug B. with a tow, just below South-East bend. The master of the N. looked back on his starboard side, and saw what he called "a hole" between the raft and the bank, and he thereupon gave two blasts of the whistle for the B. to pass to starboard, which she proceeded to do after answering. Before the B. could do anything to prevent collision, after discovering th!:loharacter of tbe raft, it struck one of the schooners of the B.'e tow, and. damaged her. HeW, that the N. was in fault because her master did not acquaint himself with the dangerous character of the raft and give the danger signal to the B., or hold the raft for repairs at some place where other vessels might pass safely,
9.
SAME-NOTIOE TO PASSING VESSEL.
The fact that vessels going down the river had warned the B. that there was such a dangerous raft in the river before she met it was not sufficient notice to her to disregard the N.'s invitation to pass, where such vessels.hlld not described the raft in question so as to enable the B. to distingUish it from any oUler she encounter.
In Admiralty. GO'Ulder « Lee, for libelants. Henry H. Swan and H. M. Gillett, for respondents. RICKS, J. The libel filed in this cause on the 20th day of November, 1889, charges that on the 26th day of August, 1888, the schooner H., c. Richards, properly equipped and skillfully handled, in tow of the steamer Britannic, was proceeding on a voyage from Lake Erie up through the St. Clair river. Said Britannic had in tow, in the orde!: named, and attached by tow lines of the ordinary length. the schooners Woolson and Richards, and at the time of the collision, hereafter described, had proceeded as far as a point in the St. Clair river near and below South-East bend; and while so proceeding, in the night seasoo, the Britannic exchanged with the tug Niagara, then approaching from above and descending the river, passing signals of two blasts, with the appropriate signal for passing to starboard, which signals were exchmaged at a proper and appropriate distance, and the said tow and said tug approached each other with no notice to those on the tow that any circumstance existed to make the passage dangerous. The libel further avers that the Britannic and said tow duly starboarded their helms, and made over to and kept the port-hand side of the. channel, and were in proper position to pass. It further alleges that when the Niagara was passing said tow it was discovered that she had in tow a raft of unusual shape and size, which was occupying substantially. the whole channel,and was comiUK down the channel, towed by the Niagara. with good head.. way. The helms of the tow were thereupon starboarded, and they kept in just as close as they could on the port bank, and the Britannic checke<l down. It further alleges that there was a dock which made out a little from the shore .ahead and on the port bow of the Britannic) and tho