$6885. Vessels in Harbors and Channels held to the Observance of the General Navigation Rules.-Vessels navigating harbors and channels are held to the observance of the general navigation rules. heretofore presented. Here, as elsewhere, a steam-vessel must, when safe and practicable, keep to that side of the channel which lies to her starboard side. Where the left-hand side of the channel is taken, extraordinary care must be exercised to avoid collision with vessels entitled to use that side of the fairway. A sailing-vessel, as against a steamer, is entitled to take the well-known channel. In the case of sailing-vessels, the ordinary rule that when two vessels are approaching each other on opposite tacks, both having the wind, the one on the port tack shall give way and pass to the right, does not apply when one is to the windward of the other and ahead of or before her in a narrow channel, so that the observance of the rule would probably produce a collision. It is not the duty of a sailing-vessel to remain in the wind, or "in stays," in order to avoid a steam-vessel. What the law requires of a sailing-vessel in a narrow channel is that she beat out her tack, and, having done so, that she come about with all possible dispatch upon the other, leaving to an approaching steam-vessel the responsibility of being in a position to enable her to do so without danger.

6

'The Baltimore, 34 Fed. Rep. 660; The Canisteo, 47 Fed. Rep. 908; The Dauntless, 121 Fed. Rep. 420; The Minnie, 31 Fed. Rep. 301; The New York, 53 Fed. Rep. 553; The Victory, 63 Fed. Rep. 631; s. c. aff'd, 68 Fed. Rep. 395 (channel rule applies to Chesapeake Bay, Hampton Roads, and Elizabeth River); The J. S. Neil, 3 McCrary (U. S.) 177. The passage known as the Swin between the Middle Lightship and the Middle Sands in the estuary of the Thames, is a narrow channel within the meaning of Article 21 of the Regulations of 1884, for preventing collisions at sea, requiring every steamship, when it is safe and practicable, to keep to the starboard side of the fairway: The Minnie, [1894] Prob. 336. Vessels approaching each other in narrow channels, or where their courses diverge as much as one or two points, are bound to keep to starboard and pass to the right, whatever the occasional effect of sinuosities of the channel: The Victory and the Plymothian, 168 U. S. 410; s. c. 42 L. ed. 519; 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 149. Navigation in the cen

ter of the channel rather than the right of the channel is justified where the vessel is a deep-draught vessel incapable of navigation on the starboard side: The Lisbonense, 53 Fed. Rep. 293.

The Alabama, 114 Fed. Rep. 214; The Curtin, 114 Fed. Rep. 214.

The Iron Chief, 63 Fed. Rep. 289. The man at the wheel of a tug approaching a sailing-vessel, who fails to keep a lookout and fails to see the position of a pilot yawl drifting aft alongside the vessel, and, upon discovering the danger of crushing the yawl, allows the tug to continue to approach the vessel, is guilty of such negligence as will make the owner of the tug liable for the crushing of pilots aboard the yawl between the tug and the vesse! while they are attempting to climb over the rail of the tug to avoid being crushed: The M. Moran, 53 Fed. Rep. 845.

The Ann Caroline, 2 Wall. (U. S.) 538. See also, The Mary Evelyn, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 348.

Whitney v. The Empire State, 1 Ben. (U. S.) 57.

§ 6886. Further of the Applicability of the General Rules.-Under these rules a steam-vessel must keep out of the way of a sailingvessel; and a like obligation is imposed upon a crossing vessel which has the other on her own starboard side. In all cases the vessel having the right of way must keep her course and speed;10 and the other vessel, if the circumstances of the case permit, must avoid crossing ahead of her;11 and if necessary to avoid a collision, she must slacken her speed, or stop, or reverse.12

§ 6887. The Rules in Their Application to Overtaking Vessels.— In order to avoid collision with a vessel ahead, the following vessel should keep at a sufficient distance to be able to avoid the leading vessel in case she makes an unexpected stop;1s and where the channel is narrow, such a vessel should not attempt to pass between passing vessels where she can keep in the wake of the vessel ahead with safety.14 Where it is sought to pass the leading vessel, the general navigation rules governing overtaking vessels control.15 In this manœuvre the overtaking vessel should take into consideration the conditions, such as the state of the tide, tending to render the movement dangerous.16

§ 6888. Channel Defined. The term "channel" has been defined as the portion of the bed of a river or canal which furnishes uninterruptedly through its course the deepest water.17

Navigation Act of 1897, Applicable to Harbors, Rivers and Inland Waters, art. 22. See The Massassagua, 124 Fed. Rep. 97.

"Navigation Act of 1897, Applicable to Harbors, Rivers and Inland Waters, art. 19. See The Greenpoint, 31 Fed. Rep. 231; The Sammy, 35 Fed. Rep. 327.

10 Navigation Act of 1897, Applicable to Harbors, Rivers, and Inland Waters, art. 21. See The Buena Ventura, 117 Fed. Rep. 988; The Mercedes, 117 Fed. Rep. 988.

11 Navigation Act of 1897, Applicable to Harbors, Rivers and Inland Waters, art. 22. See The Sammy, 35 Fed. Rep. 327. A tug starting out from her pier on the East River is at fault for a collision with a propeller coming up the river against the tide, where she fails seasonably to observe such propeller, and neglects to keep her head to the tide while crossing the latter's bows, when she could have seen the propeller in

time to reverse and stop her headway before reaching the point of intersection of their courses, and it is necessary for her to keep her head well against the tide in order to cross the latter's bows safely, but because of her master's reliance on the propeller's coöperation by going to port, the tug fails so to do: The Amos Ć. Barstow, 66 Fed. Rep. 366; s. c. 13 C. C. A. 515; aff'g s. c. 50 Fed. Rep. 620.

12 Navigation Act of 1897, Applicable to Harbors, Rivers and Inland Waters, art. 23.

13 The Hackensack, 32 Fed. Rep. 800.

14 The William Orr, 54 Fed. Rep. 904.

15 See ante, § 6822, et seq.

16 The Fred Jansen, 49 Fed. Rep. 254; s. c. 1 C. C. A. 238; rev'g s. c. 44 Fed. Rep. 773; Standard Oil Co. v. Garden City, 38 Fed. Rep. 860. 1 The Sarah, 52 Fed. Rep. 233.

6889. Right of Way.-A vessel descending a channel is entitled to the right of way over an ascending vessel.18 But the vessel having the right of way may not invite a collision;19 and she will be imputable with negligence where she proceeds in her course after it is apparent that the vessel not entitled to precedence intends to force her way contrary to the rules.20

$6890. Speed of Vessels.-Vessels navigating narrow channels and crowded harbors should move at a moderate speed and under complete control.21 Where the steering apparatus will not respond the vessel should be stopped at once.22 It has been held that the test of a safe speed is whether it is such as allows the vessel to comply with the duty imposed upon it to avoid collision with other vessels in a situation in which she may reasonably expect to find them.23 A moderate speed

in fogs is such a speed as will permit the steamer suddenly and effectually to avoid a collision by slackening speed or by stopping and reversing within the distance at which the approaching vessel can be seen.2 .24 Vessels have been held liable for collisions on account of excessive speed under the following circumstances:-Where a vessel steamed around the wharves lining a harbor at such speed that in turning a point she could not keep out of the way of a steamer coming up the harbor from the other direction;25 where a fast steamboat on her regular run down the North River to Coney Island was making for the landing near the Hoboken Ferry, and came at full speed close to the piers and struck a ferry-boat just coming out of her slip, the steamboat having knowledge of the slip and the presence of the ferryboat;20 where a vessel moved at a speed of six or seven miles an hour, aided by a tidal force of two miles, and was unable to stop before a collision;27 and where a steamer three hundred feet long ran at a speed of fifteen miles an hour on a river in a dark night without sufficient lookouts.28

§ 6891. Speed must be Moderate to Avoid Danger from Suction and Swells.-Steamers plying in rivers and harbors should not proIceed at so high a rate of speed that other vessels will be endangered by suction and displacement waves.29 This does not require that the

24 The City of New York, 35 Fed. Rep. 609; The Aliancia, 39 Fed. Rep. 476. A steamer moving in a narrow channel against the tide at the rate of five and one-third miles an hour in a dense fog, with her whistle blowing feebly and imperfectly, was held liable for a collision with another steamer moving with the tide at the rate of four and three-fourths miles an hour: The Luray, 24 Fed. Rep. 751.

28 The Luckenbach, 67 Fed. Rep. 619; s. c. 1 C. C. A. 489; aff'g s. c. 50 Fed. Rep. 129.

23

The D. R. Martin, 10 Ben. (U. S.) 532.

The Victory and The Plymothian, 168 U. S. 410; s. c. 42 L. ed. 519; 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 149.

28 The Oregon, 158 U. S. 186; s. c. 39 L. ed. 943; 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 804.

29 The City of Brockton, 37 Fed. Rep. 897; The Columbia, 55 Fed. Rep. 766; The Connecticut, 45 Fed. Rep. 374; De Lelle v. The Atlanta, 34 Fed. Rep. 918: The Minnie, 31 Fed. Rep. 301; The Monmouth, 44 Fed. Rep. 813; The New Hampshire, 88 Fed. Rep. 306; The Rhode Is

land, 24 Fed. Rep. 295; The Rotherfield, 123 Fed. Rep. 460 (log raft broken up); The Massachusetts, 10 Ben. (U. S.) 177 (moored canal-boat swamped by swell). A steamboat going down river at about ten or twelve miles an hour passed a canal-boat tied to a dock at a distance of 150 feet. The river was filled with ice, which the rapid movement of the steamer displaced and pushed against the canal-boat, sinking her. Those in charge of the steamer had prior thereto been warned that it was dangerous to speed fast at the place in question. It was held that the question of negligence in passing the canal-boat at such speed was for the jury: O'Reil ly v. New Brunswick &c. S. S. Co., 26 Misc. (N. Y.) 195; s. c. 55 N. Y. Supp. 1133. Where a steamer ascending the Hudson River against the tide, and a descending steamboat and tow, both moving slowly, passed port to port in the channel, which was about 250 to 300 feet wide, opposite to where a canal-boat lay along the shore taking in cargo, and the suction and swell caused the

rate should be so slow as to avoid all dangers to vessels from this source: it is rather the duty so to control the vessel as to avoid the infiction of unnecessary damage.30 Vessels likely to be affected in this way should be navigated so as to minimize the danger.31 Masters of old and weak boats should notify passing vessels of the need of special caution in dealing with them.32 In an action for damages for an injury resulting from this cause, it is no defense that the displacement waves did not render navigation more perilous than would a high wind; nor that the vessel was moving at a speed customarily adopted by vessels of her character. The evidence to substantiate the claim of injury from suction must be clear. In one case it was held that the contention that a vessel one hundred and eighty-five feet long, without a cargo, and of an average draught of seven feet, would by suction have drawn or diverted from her course in a narrow channel a loaded steamer two hundred and seventy feet long, with an average draught of nearly fifteen feet, and going at the same speed, was highly improbable.34

33

$6892. Navigation with Reference to Slips and Wharves.-Vessels navigating harbors in the vicinity of wharves and slips should proceed at a moderate rate of speed,35 and avoid unnecessarily embar

latter to strike the bottom, causing damage, the ascending steamer, having been notified of the presence of the canal-boat by the signals of a steam-tug lying near, is alone liable for the accident, as it was her duty to wait below the landing until the descending steamboat had passed, or else stop her wheel entirely while passing the canal-boat: The New York, 34 Fed. Rep. 757. The St. Paul, a large ocean steamship, with a displacement of some 13.000 tons, when approaching New York harbor, met and passed a tug having two scows in tow on a hawser, and her swell caused the rear scow to dump her deck load of building stone. She passed the tows at a distance of 150 to 200 feet, and her half speed of twelve knots was slowed; and, according to the testimony of the captain and pilot, her engines were stopped when about opposite the tug, but such testimony was contradicted, and the fact was not established. It was held that as such testimony showed that, in the judgment of her officers, it was practicable and proper for her to stop her engines, the fact that she did act do so rendered her in fault,

and liable for the damage caused; no fault being shown on the part of the tug: The St. Paul, 124 Fed. Rep. 103; The Municipal, 124 Fed. Rep. 103.

30 Bell v. New York S. S. Co., 54 App. Div. (N. Y.) 526; The Daniel Drew, 13 Blatchf. (U. S.) 527.

31 The Drew, 22 Fed. Rep. 852.

32 De Lelle v. Atlanta, 34 Fed. Rep. 918; The Howard, 30 Fed. Rep. 280; The N. B. Starbuck, 29 Fed. Rep. 797; The Niagara, 20 Fed. Rep. 152; The Reba, 22 Fed. Rep. 546; The Syracuse, 18 Fed. Rep. 828; The C. R. Stone, 9 Ben. (U. S.) 182.

33 The Majestic, 48 Fed. Rep. 730; s. c. 1 U. S. App. 16; 1 C. C. A. 87.

34 The Alexander Folsom, 52 Fed. Rep. 403; s. c. 6 U. S. App. 153; 3 C. C. A. 165.

The Active, 22 Fed. Rep. 175; The American Eagle, 29 Fed. Rep. 302; The Charles H. Senff, 53 Fed. Rep. 669; The Chicago, 101 Fed. Rep. 143; The City of Augusta, 102 Fed. Rep. 991; The Eddie Harrison, 65 Fed. Rep. 253; The Edwin H. Webster, 22 Fed. Rep. 171; The Gibson, 35 Fed. Rep. 333; The Illinois. 65 Fed. Rep. 123; The R. H. Williams, 46 Fed. Rep. 414; The Break