COLLISION. T has been said by Lord Stowell that there are four I possibilities under which a collision may occur. 1st. It may happen without blame being imputable to either party, as where the loss is occasioned by a storm, &c., or by inevitable accident which ordinary skill and caution could not have prevented. In that case the misfortune must be borne by the party on whom it happens to light, the other not being responsible to him in any degree. 2nd. It may happen by the misconduct of the suffering party only, and then the rule is, that the sufferer must bear the whole loss himself. 3rd. It may have been the fault of the ship which ran the other down; and in this case the innocent party is entitled to entire compensation from the other. 66 Lastly. It may arise where both parties are to blame, where there has been a want of due diligence or skill on both sides. In such a case, in the Court of Admiralty, the loss is apportioned equally between them, unless the collision was occasioned by non-observance of any rule for the exhibition of lights, or for the use of fog-signals. But by the common law of England (as distinguished from the practice of the Court of Admiralty), if both vessels are equally to blame, then each bears his own loss; for, as a general rule, no one can maintain an action for a wrong in the courts of common law, if he himself directly contributed to the act which occasions the loss, or if he might have avoided it by the use of ordinary care and skill. If the plaintiff has been guilty of negligence which was only remotely connected with the accident, and not the direct cause of it, that fact will not relieve the defendant from his duty to use ordinary care, the want of which was the direct cause of the accident; and if such want of care was the cause of the accident, the plaintiff will be entitled to recover damages, although he may have been guilty of negligence in some collateral matter only remotely connected with the accident. A man is not at liberty to cast himself on an obstruction which has been made by the fault of another. He must use ordinary caution and diligence in taking care of himself; and if that diligence is wanting, he will be liable for the damages caused by his neglect. A strict look out is therefore always an imperative duty when a ship is under way, and the men entrusted with that duty must both know what their duty is, and be able to discharge it. If a collision is altogether accidental, and not the fault of either party, or if it is caused solely by the fault of the other ship, in these cases the loss is considered to be a peril of the sea, and the underwriters will be liable to make it good. By sec. 33 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1862, a ship in collision is bound to assist the other ship, or the ship neglecting to do so, will be considered wholly to blame for the collision. A ship doing damage, is, by law, considered to be under the management and control of the servants of her registered owners, unless the contrary is shown. The party doing damage is liable to pay the whole cost of repairs without deducting one-third new for old; that deduction is only made when compensation for damage is made by underwriters. LIMITATION OF SHIPOWNER'S LIABILITY WHEN By sec. 388 of the Merchant Shipping Act, the shipowner is relieved from responsibility for all damage caused by the fault or incapacity of any qualified pilot in charge of the ship within any district where the employment of such pilot is compulsory. To relieve the shipowner from liability, the pilotage must not only be compulsory on the shipowner, but the pilot must have been solely to blame; if the damage was caused by the insufficiency of the ship or her equipments, or by the incompetence of the crew, or by their not obeying the pilot's orders, or if the crew were partly to blame, the shipowner will be liable although a pilot is on board. If the pilotage is not compulsory, the owner will be liable for all damage, even if it is caused by the fault of the pilot. On the same principle the shipowner is not liable for damage caused by the fault of harbour-masters, when the ship is bound to obey their directions, but the burthen of proof, that the damage occurred from the pilot's or harbour-master's fault, lies on the shipowner. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY TO £8 PER TON. By the Merchant Shipping Act. 1862, the shipowner's liability is restricted to £15 a ton, when loss of life or personal injury occurs (either with or without damage to ships or goods), and to £8 a ton for damage to ships or goods, whether there be also loss of life or personal injury or not. In the case of sailing ships, the amount is to be calculated on the register tonnage, and in the case of steam-vessels on the gross tonnage. If several losses occur at one time, the shipowner only incurs one total liability, restricted to the above amount, but if two distinct losses occur on different occasions, the shipowner is liable to the above extent for each occasion. If one claimant sues and obtains a judgment before the others commence their suit, he thereby secures priority over the other claimants. If several claims are made which exceed the total amount for which the shipowner is liable, and which cannot otherwise be adjusted, the shipowner has the right to apply to the Court of Chancery to apportion the amount between the claimants. THE RULE OF THE ROAD AT SEA. The Merchant Shipping Act, 1862, contains rules for the prevention of collisions at sea* which slightly modify the old laws of the sea on the subject, and these rules having been adopted by all the chief maritime nations, may now be considered to be the law of the whole world. Under the new rules : 1. When ships are meeting with danger of collision, both are to port their helms; and 2. When two ships are crossing with danger of collision, *See copy of the rules at page 66. These rules are binding on all British vessels, and all foreign vessels navigating in British waters, and also on all foreign vessels belonging to States which have adopted the rules, in whatever waters they may be sailing. The rules have now been adopted by the following countries :-Austria, Argentine Republic, Belgium, Brazil, Bremen, Chili, Denmark, Republic of the Equator, France, Great Britain, Greece, Hamburgh, Hanover, The Hawaiian Islands, Hayti, Italy, Lubeck, Mecklen burg-Schwerin, Morocco, The Netherlands, Norway, Oldenburgh, Peru, Portugal, Prussia, Roman States, Russia, Schleswig, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, The United States, and Uruguay. with the wind on different sides, the ship with the wind on the port side is to keep out of the way of the other; but if the ship with the wind on the port side is closehauled, and the other going free, then the ship that is free is to get out of the way of the other; or, if they both have the wind on the same side, or one has the wind aft, then the ship to windward is to give way. Arranging the subject in the form in which the old. general law of the sea was usually stated, the law as it now stands may be stated as follows* : I. WHEN BOTH SHIPS HAVE THE WIND FREE. Ships meeting end on.-When two vessels are meeting end on, or nearly end on, so as to involve risk of collision, the helms of both must be put to port. Ships crossing.-If two ships, both having the wind free, are crossing each other's course (and not meeting end on), then, if they have the wind on different sides, the ship with the wind on the port side is to keep out of the way of the ship with the wind on the starboard side by going astern of her; to do so the helm must be put to starboard, if necessary; the other ship must keep her course. But if both ships have the wind on the same side, or if one of them has the wind aft, then the ship to windward is to keep out of the way of the ship which is to leeward. II. WHEN ONE OF THE SHIPS IS CLOSE-HAULED. Ships meeting end on.—If the vessels are meeting end on, or nearly end on, one of them being close-hauled and *The additions which have been made to the old law are shown by their being enclosed in brackets, thus [ 1 |