In case of doubt, engine to be slackened. brought her across the schooner's bows, and a collision ensued. Here the steamer was pronounced solely in fault. On behalf of the steamer, it was contended that the schooner ought, on seeing the steamer, to have put about; and it was clearly established that she had ample time to do so. But Dr. Lushington pronounced that she was perfectly right in continuing her course. "I conceive," said the learned Judge, "that very great inconvenience would arise, if vessels of her description, beating up the river, and being closehauled, should put about the moment a steamer is seen, and before it can be ascertained what course the steamer is likely to take." Again, it was urged on behalf of the steamer, that although, if it had been daylight, her proper course would confessedly have been to go astern of the schooner, yet, being in doubt, by reason of the darkness, as to the course which the latter vessel might be pursuing, since her light only was seen, the proper course for the steamer to pursue was to port her helm in compliance with the Trinity House rule. To this argument Dr. Lushington replied that, if the schooner's course was doubtful, the steamer's engines ought to have been eased and her course slackened until she had ascertained the schooner's actual position, after which her helm should have been altered according to circumstances (a). The same decision was come to in a very similar case, that of the Gazelle. This steamer, on a dark (a) James Watt, 2 W. Rob. 270. "giving way." misty night, saw the light of a sailing vessel on the larboard bow. The steamer's helm was immediately ported, and she shortly after ran into the vessel, which was a collier closehauled. Dr. Lushington, after pointing out that it was certainly the steamer's duty, under these circumstances, to give way, added :---"The simple question is this,-what is the Definition of meaning of the term 'give way?' I know of no rule that 'giving way' means putting the helm to port under all circumstances. On the contrary, I apprehend, and in many cases I have stated it, that it means, according to the circumstances, porting or starboarding the helm, as the exigency might require." He therefore put the question to the Trinity Masters, whether, under the circumstances, upon seeing the light, the master of the steamer should have eased his engines, stopped his engines, starboarded his helm, or ported his helm. With regard to the conduct of the closehauled vessel, she had put her helm to starboard, but it appeared doubtful whether this proceeding had affected her course so as to contribute to the collision; and with regard to this, the learned Judge told the Trinity Masters that unless such starboarding had contributed to the collision, they were to dismiss it from their minds. The Trinity Masters found that the Gazelle did not take the proper measures to avoid the collision, and absolved the sailing vessel from blame (a). The Trinity Rules, above referred to, profess to Rules laid (a) Gazelle, 10 Jur. 1065. down by first Merchant Shipping Act. Ꭰ These now superseded. In judging of the course to be pursued, be simply declaratory of existing nautical customs, "Whenever any ship, whether a steam or sail- As was said in the preceding chapter, this clause being now superseded by a later statute, it is unnecessary to enter with any minuteness into the decisions which were founded upon it. The manner in which some of those decisions have narrowed the application of the clause, so far as sailing ships are concerned, has been pointed out. Another important modification of the strict grammatical meaning of the clause was introduced be taken of that the other in the cases of the Mangerton and the Admiral account is to Boxer. The clause, it will be observed, is limited the likelihood to the case in which the vessels are approaching in vessel will such a manner as that, if both were to continue port helm. their respective courses, there would be a danger of collision. These decisions establish that, in judging of this danger, account is to be taken by those who direct the helm in one vessel, of the probability that the other vessel will, on seeing the former approaching, put the helm to port, in obedience to the statute. That is to say, if the vessels are meeting at night, or when for any reason there is an uncertainty as to the position or course of either vessel, each is to act on the presumption that the other will not continue her course, but port the helm. Thus, in the Mangerton's case, a ship which was running free was held to be in fault because, seeing a steamer's green or starboard light three or four points on her starboard bow, she held on her course, the master believing that, if the steamer did likewise, the vessels would have gone clear. He ought, it was said, to have expected that the steamer, on seeing his light, would have followed the rule and have ported; and should therefore have ported his own helm. "Both parties are bound to act on the presumption that the statute will be obeyed by the other; the confusion otherwise would be endless" (a). (a) Mangerton (Swab. 124); and see Admiral Boxer (Swab. 194). The cases of the Cleopatra (Swab. 135), and the Sylph (Swab. 236), illustrate the manner in which the steering of steamers at night Present statutory rules. We come now to the latest Regulations, which, so far as statutory Regulations have jurisdiction, supersede all other rules upon this subject. These are the Regulations issued in 1863, by the Board of Trade, in conformity with the terms of the Merchant Shipping Amendment Act; and are as follows: Art. 13.-" If two ships under steam are meet- ing so as to involve risk of collision, the Art. 15.—“If two ships, one of which is a is to be regulated by the position of the red and green lights of the vessels they see; but, in using these cases as authorities, it is to be borne in mind that they come under the statute now repealed (see c. 5, on "Lights,” s. 4). |