Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

but if no embarrassment is caused by such violation no liability follows.1

Sec. 156. Navigation of Hell Gate.-"When two steamers are approaching the narrows known as 'Hell Gate' on the East river at New York, side by side or nearly so, running in the same direction, the steamer on the right or star

keep in the middle of the river, hugs the shore, and to avoid colliding with vessels about the docks sheers out into mid-stream and collides with a vessel lawfully passing in the middle of the river, the former was held liable. The Bay State, 3 Blatch. 48; The City of Chester, 24 Fed. R. 91.

1 The Titan, 44 Fed. R. 510; 49 Fed. R. 479; The Emperor, 46 Fed. R. 143.

A vessel following another on flood-tide in the East river is required by good seamanship to keep a sufficient distance away, so as to be able to avoid the one leading in case she makes a stop. The Hackensack, 32 Fed. R. 800.

The statute of New York requiring vessels navigating the East river to keep in the middle of the river does not apply above the southerly end of Blackwell's Island, The Rosedale, 22 Fed. R. 737.

In the case of McCaldin v. The Amos C. Barstow, 50 Fed. R. 620, a vessel rounded the Battery and entered the East river six hundred or seven hundred feet from the ends of the piers, at a rate of speed of at least ten knots per hour. Collision ensuing, it was held at fault for failing to keep in the middle of the stream, and for going at immoderate speed in that situa

Where a state statute required vessels to keep on the right-hand side of a river, it was held that a colliding vessel was not in fault merely because it was in the wrong part of the river, if there was time and space to avoid the collision. The Britannia, 34 Fed. R. 546.

A vessel which kept close to the New York shore, coming up the East river, without justification, in violation of the statute requiring her to keep in the middle of the river, and crossed the bows of an approaching vessel, without an assent thereto on the part of the latter, was held liable for ensuing damages. The Rockaway, 38 Fed. R. 856.

The obligation to exhibit a flashlight in the North river under section 4234 was held applicable to all sailing-vessels, and not merely to those of which the collector or general officers of the customs have jurisdiction. The Saratoga, 37 Fed. R. 119.

A steamer was held at fault for attempting to pass another going in an opposite direction, starboard to starboard, instead of keeping in the middle of the river, and passing port to port as required by the inspectors' rules and the statute of New York. The Empire, 63 Fed. R. 476.

board hand of the other (when approaching from the west), when they shall have arrived abreast of the north end of Blackwell's Island, shall have the right of way, and the steamer on the left or port side shall check her way and drop astern. In like case, when two steamers are approaching from the east, and are abreast of Negro Point, the steamer on the right or starboard hand of the other shall have the right of way, and shall proceed on her course without interference, and the steamer on the port side of the other shall keep at a safe distance astern (not less than three lengths) until both steamers have passed through the difficult channel." 1

1 Rule VII, Supervising Inspect- no answer assumed that it was ors' Rules, 1895. under way, and took a course which would have avoided it had it been alone, but being in tow of a tug which was concealed from view of the steamer, collision followed. Held, that the steamer was not at fault. Carter v. The Morrisania, 3 Fed. R. 925.

Where two steamers passing through this channel exchange their signals, amounting to an agreement that the one astern might pass the other, held, that such agreement implies that the overtaking vessel will fulfill her statutory duty, and keep out of the way of the other, and that the latter will keep its course. The Dentz, 29 Fed. R. 525; The Plymouth Rock, 26 Fed. R. 40.

A vessel ascending the river at Hell Gate at ebb-tide has the right to presume that descending vessels will take the other passage, and that they will not take the east passage. The City of Springfield, 26 Fed. R. 158.

A steamer proceeding from Harlem to New York city met a sailing-vessel with her canvass up, apparently in motion, proceeding towards the Sound. Being early in the morning, before it was light, the steamer sounded its whistle to ascertain whether the vessel was under way or not, and receiving

Where a tug and tow met a steam yacht in the east channel of Hell Gate, and the tug omitted to change its course to conform to the given signals for passing, it was held that the yacht was not necessarily negligent in taking the east channel. The Peerless, 55 Fed. R. 342.

A steamboat bound west through Hell Gate on a flood-tide is not at fault for taking the east channel after giving one signal to an approaching tow. Union Insurance Co. v. The Bridgeport, 35 Fed. R. 222.

The supervising inspectors' rule virtually forbids one vessel to pass another at all while going around Negro Point near Hell Gate, and if a vessel attempts to pass another

The navigation of this narrow and difficult passage is so fraught with danger that a special rule has been prescribed by the inspectors for its navigation, which is strictly enforced in all matters of local navigation.

Sec. 157. Harbor navigation. The care required in the navigation of crowded harbors must be commensurate with the increased risk attending this species of navigation. What would be ordinary care at sea, where room is abundant, and where shipping is to be met with at rare intervals only, may be wholly insufficient in a harbor alive with craft of all sorts, and where room for maneuvering is limited. Especially is added vigilance required when entering at night or under circumstances where vision is obscured, and the vessel has not a clear and uninterrupted view of the movements of craft about the harbor. Navigating a harbor at night or in a thick fog is not of itself negligence; the only burden. imposed by such navigation being the added care and watchfulness required to avoid danger.'

In entering harbors and in approaching the vicinity of docks, slips and other mooring places, prudence requires a moderate rate of speed and the greatest watchfulness and care that the vessel is under absolute control.3

on the north side of the channel, she must go to starboard in compliance with rule 8. Milliken v. The C. H. Northam, 37 Fed. R. 238.

1 The Allegheny, 9 Wall. 522; The Corsica, 9 Wall. 630; The City of Paris, 9 Wall. 634; Culbertson v. The Southern Belle, 18 How. 584.

2 The Sylph, 4 Blatch. 24; Ward v. The A. Rossiter, 6 McLean, 63; Ward v. The Dousman, 6 McLean, 231; The Scioto, 2 Ware, 360 (Dav. 359); The Wesley A. Gove, 27 Fed. R. 311.

The D. R. Martin, 10 Ben. 532; The Howard, 30 Fed. R. 280; The Allegheny, 9 Wall. 522; The City

of Paris, 9 Wall. 634; The Badger State, 15 Fed. R. 346.

A steamer running at the rate of nine miles an hour in a dense fog in the vicinity of Chicago harbor was in fault for excessive speed. The Peshtigo, 25 Fed. R. 488.

The sailing rules prescribed by congress in 1885 held to yield in part to local regulations and customs. The James Bowen, 52 Fed. R. 510.

Vessels of moderate size moving at moderate speed in the harbor of New York in clear weather were held not guilty of culpable negligence in passing each other at a

Sec. 158. Local ordinances.-State laws or municipal ordinances may be made regulating the navigation of harbors; and such regulations, when not in conflict with the laws of congress, must be observed with the same degree of respect that are due the latter. Port regulations prescribing anchorage grounds, and all matters of a public nature, are strictly within the province of state or municipal control, and are enforceable like any other law.1

distance of one hundred feet. The for failing to stop and reverse as St. Johns, 34 Fed. R. 763.

Where a ferry-boat ran in a harbor on a dark night in a situation where vessels were accustomed to anchor, using a defective compass, it was held to be such negligence as to render it liable. Lenox v. Winisimmet Co., 1 Spra. 160.

Where a steamer navigating the waters of a harbor passed a slip at a distance of about nine hundred feet, out of which another steamer was emerging, the latter being on the starboard hand of the other, and in full view of it, it was held that the nineteenth rule was clearly applicable and the former vessel was required to keep out of the way. Greenman v. The Narragansett, 4 Fed. R. 244.

Where a vessel navigated a harbor in a dense fog at half its usual speed, and failed to observe the whistle of an approaching boat proceeding at about the same rate, both were held liable, the former

soon as the signal of the other indicated a nearness rendering risk of collision. The Stamford, 27 Fed. R. 227.

Before emerging from slips it is the duty of vessels to give sufficient signals to warn passing vessels of such emergence, and the greatest caution is required, both in the matter of speed and observance of others, to guard against collision. The Edmund Levy, 8 Ben. 144; The Nevada, 17 Blatch. 122.

1The James Gray v. The John Fraser, 21 How. 184.

Where a ship is required by local statutes to obey the direction of a harbor-master, and in following such directions in entering a dock or slip collision ensues, the vessel is not responsible where the directions of the harbor-master are strictly followed. The Belbao, Lush. 149.

CHAPTER XI.

MISCELLANEOUS COLLISIONS.

Sec. 159. Ferry-boats. The law applicable to the navigation of ferry-boats is the same that governs the conduct of other craft. A ferry-boat is bound to observe the usual rules of navigation for vessels in like situations, and is not entitled to any exemption from liability for failure to observe such regulations by reason of its occupation.' They have no prior rights over other classes of water-craft, and in entering or emerging from their docks and in their general navigation are subject to the same rules that govern other vessels; and where so situated that collision is liable to ensue by emerging from their slip, they are required like other vessels to wait within until the danger has passed, notwithstanding its schedule time for leaving has arrived.3

Where ferry-boats, by reason of their frequent navigation of the same waters, and for mutual convenience, observe a custom as to right of way or other details of navigation not in harmony with the general rules, as between each other they may be held to the observance of such agreement or custom where the same is fully established to the satisfaction of the court; but as between themselves and third par

1 The Baltimore, 34 Fed. R. 660; The E. C. Scranton, 3 Blatch. 50; The America, 10 Blatch. 155.

2 The Manhassett, 34 Fed. R. 408; The Pavonia, 23 Fed. R. 204; Hamilton v. The John King, 49 Fed. R. 469.

3 The Columbus, 1 Abb. Adm. 384; Case v. The Susquehanna, 35 Fed. R. 325; The Hudson City, 38 Fed. R. 446; The Venetian, 29 Fed.

R. 460; The Hackensack, 5 Fed. R. 121.

4 The Pavonia, 26 Fed. R. 106.

Where a ferry-boat on the East river, having occasion to go in the vicinity of piers appropriated by law to the special use of canalboats, attempted to pass between tugs lying off those piers, waiting for their tows, at a distance of two or three hundred feet, it was held

« EdellinenJatka »