(Collision.)

30. Where it appeared that the collision was the effect of mere accident, or that overriding necessity which the law designates by the term vis major, action dismissed, with costs. The Sarah Ann, 1 Stuart, 294.

31. In order to support an action for damages in a case of collision, it is necessary distinctly to prove that the collision arose from the fault of the persons on board of the vessel charged as the wrong-doers; or from the fault of the persons on board of that vessel, and of those on board of the injured vessel. ibid.

32. Where both parties are mutually blamable in not taking measures to prevent accidents, the rule is to apportion equally the damages between the parties according to maritime law as administered in the Admiralty Court. ibid.

33. Two steamers were going from Montreal to Quebec, and when opposite the city of Quebec, the one took the course usual on such occasions, and passed down below the lowermost wharf at the mouth of the river St. Charles, when she turned to stem the tide and come to the wharf at which she was to land her passengers; and the other did not descend so low, but made a short and unusual turn, with the intention of passing across the course of the former, and ahead of her after she had turned and was coming against the tide. Held: That the collision complained of resulted from a rash and hazardous attempt on the part of those on board of the steamer which made such short and unusual turn to cross the course of the other, contrary to the usual practice and custom of the river, and the rules of good seamanship, for the purpose of being earlier at her wharf. The Crescent; The Rowland Hill, ibid, 289.

34. Manœuvres of this dangerous kind, which might, in a crowded port like that of Quebec, result in the most serious loss of property and of life, ought to be discountenanced. ibid.

35. In this case the objectionable manoeuvre appeared to have proceeded from a spirit of eager competition and from miscalculation, and not from any attempt to injure the competing vessel. ibid.

36. The settled nautical rule is, that if two sailing vessels, both upon a wind, are so approaching each other, the one on the starboard and the other on the port tack, as that there will be a danger of collision if each continue her course, it is the duty of the vessel on the port tack immediately to give way, and the vessel on the port tack is to bear away so early and effectually as to prevent all

(Collision.)

chance of a collision occurring. The Roslin Castle; The Glencairn, 1 Stuart, 303.

37. The Court pronounced for damages against a vessel sailing down the river St. Lawrence, on her homeward voyage to Liverpool, running foul of another coming up in tow of a steamer, the night at the time being reasonably clear, and sufficiently so for lights to be seen at a moderate distance. The Niagara; The Elizabeth, ibid, 308.

38. There is no rule of law preventing vessels from entering or leaving the harbor of Quebec at any hour, or obliging them to keep any particular track or part of the channel in so doing. ibid.

39. On this occasion the outgoing vessel had the wind large, and as steamers are to be considered in the light of vessels navigating with a fair wind, the steamer and the outgoing vessel were considered in this respect as on an equality. ibid.

40. Vessels in tow, with a head wind and no sails, and fast to the steamer, so that she could only sheer to a certain distance on either side of the course in which she was towed by the steamer, is powerless to a very great extent. ibid.

41. The general rule is, that when two vessels are approaching each other, both having the wind large, and are approaching each other, so that if each continued her course there would be danger of collision, each shall port helm, so as to leave the other on the starboard hand in passing. ibid.

42. But it is not necessary that, because two vessels are proceeding in opposite directions, there being plenty of room, the one vessel should cross the course of the other in order to pass her on the starboard. ibid.

43. If a vessel take every precaution against approaching danger, it is not sufficient to subject her to damage for injury to another by collision, that in the moment of danger those on board such vessel did not use every means that might appear proper to a cool spectator, there must be gross negligence. ibid.

44. If the collision arose solely from the misconduct of those on board the steam-tug, both the other vessels are exempt from responsibility, and the action on the part of each must be dismissed, leaving them to their recourse against the steamer. ibid.

45. The law in such case is, that the tow is not responsible for an accident arising from the mistake or misconduct of the tug. ibid.

(Collision.)

46. Upon points submitted for the professional opinion of assessors, their opinion should be as definite as in a complicated case of this nature it is possible it should be. ibid.

47. In certain cases the Court will direct the questions to be reconsidered, and more definitely answered. ibid.

48. If there was no proper and sufficient lookout, and if the proper means were not adopted for avoiding collision after the time when the other vessel's lights were seen, her having taken the most seamanlike and proper course when the collision was all but inevitable, does not exempt a vessel from liability. ibid.

49. Although there may be a rule of the sea, yet one who has the management of a ship is not allowed to follow that rule to the injury of the vessel of another, when he could avoid the injury by pursuing a different course. ibid.

50. The harbor master has authority to station all ships or vessels which come to the harbor of Quebec, or haul into any wharf within the same, and to regulate the mooring and fastening, and shifting and removal of such ships or vessels.

The New York Packet, ibid, 325.

51. Where berths had been assigned or confirmed by the harbor master to several vessels in a dock in Quebec harbor, and the harbor master expressly directed the vessel proceeded against to remain in the position she then occupied for the night, warning the master at the same time of the damage which would be incurred if he attempted to haul further in, because there was not room enough in the dock; and the master hauled his vessel forward, and as the water fell in the dock, and the space between the wharves at the water level diminished, the vessels became tightly jammed together, so that it was impossible to move them; and as the water continued to fall the pressure became so great that one of the other vessels was completely crushed, and another was suspended between the crushed vessel and the wharf, and thrown nearly on her beam ends, thereby receiving great damage, the owner of the vessel so contravening the harbor master's orders, condemned in damages and costs. ibid.

52. By the Merchant Shipping Act (17 & 18 Vict., c. 104, ss. 296, 297) and the Steam Navigation Act (14 & 15 Vict. c. 79), as well as by the rule of the Trinity House of Quebec, when a steamer meets a sailing vessel going free, and there is danger of collision, it

(Collision.)

is the duty of each vessel to put her helm to port and pass to the right, unless the circumstances are such as to render the following of the rule impracticable or dangerous. The Inga, 1 Stuart, 335.

53. No sufficient excuse being found for not following this rule, a sailing vessel condemned in damages and costs for putting her helm to starboard, and passing to the left of a steam tow-boat, thereby causing collision with the vessel in tow, the steamer and her tow coming down the channel, nearly or exactly upon a line with the course of the sailing vessel. ibid.

54. See as to conflict of English and American law, how to ibid.

steer.

55. As to liability of steamboat for collision between vessels, one of which is towed by the steamboat. The John Counter, 1 Stuart, 344.

56. Cases may occur in which an accident may arise from the fault of the tow, without any error or mismanagement on the part of the tug, and in such case the tow alone must be answerable for the consequences. ibid.

57. Cases may also occur in which both are in fault, and in such cases both vessels would be liable to the injured vessel, whatever might be their responsibility inter se. ibid.

58. The Court will not enter into the discussion as to the precise point, whether on the starboard side or otherwise, in which one vessel lies to the other at the time of being discovered. ibid.

59. Where two ships, close hauled, on opposite tacks, meet, and there would be danger of collision if each continued her course, the one on the port tack shall give way, and the other shall hold her The Mary Bannatyne, 1 Stuart, 350.

course.

60. But she is not to do this if, by so doing, she would cause unnecessary risk to the other. ibid.

61. Neither is the other bound to obey the rule if, by so doing, she would run into unavoidable or imminent danger; but if there be no such danger, the one on the starboard tack is entitled to the benefit of the rule. ibid.

62. The circumstances of the case examined, and no sufficient excuse being found for not following the rule, the vessel inflicting. the injury condemned in damages and costs. ibid.

LL

(Collision.)

63. The Court of Vice-Admiralty exercises jurisdiction in the case of a vessel injured by collision in the river St. Lawrence, near the city of Quebec. The Camillus, 1 Stuart, 383.

(Doubts which had arisen on this head removed by 2 Wm. 4, c. 51, s. 6.)

64. The non-compliance by a vessel with the Trinity House regulations, as to the exhibition of lights, will not prevent the owners from recovering damages for injuries received from another vessel by collision, if the officers of the latter vessel saw the former, and knew her position. The Martha Sophia, 2 Stuart, 14.

65. Where a collision occurs, without blame being imputable to either party, loss must be borne by the party on whom it happens to alight. The Margaret, ibid, 19.

66. Where the evidence on both sides is conflicting and nicely balanced, the Court will be guided by the probabilities of the respective cases which are set up. The Ailsa, ibid, 38.

67. Where damage is occasioned by unavoidable accident, arising from foggy weather, the loss must be sustained by the party on whom it has fallen. The Anne Johanne, ibid, 43.

68. The law imposes upon a vessel, having the wind free, the obligation of taking proper measures to get out of the way. ibid.

69. Where a collision occurs between two sailing vessels from the non-observance of the rule respecting lights, the owner of the vessel by which such rule has been infringed, cannot recover for any damage sustained in the collision. The Aurora, ibid, 52.

70. Between a British vessel and a foreign ship within Canadian waters, the duty and the right of the parties are to be determined by the Act regulating the navigation of such waters. ibid.

71. For a collision occasioned by the mismanagement of a pilot taken on board and placed in charge of a ship, in conformity with the requirements of the law (enforced by a penalty), the vessel is not liable. The Lotus, ibid, 58.

72. When a vessel is lying at anchor, and another vessel is placed voluntarily, by those in charge, in such a position that danger will happen if some event arises, which is not improbable, those in charge of the second vessel must be answerable. ibid.