(Collision.)

The defendant put in an absolute appearance without protest or declinatory plea, but the question as to the jurisdiction of the Court was raised by him at the hearing. Held, That under the statutes 24 Vict. c. 10, and 26 Vict. c. 24, the Court had full jurisdiction in the matter. The Wavelet, Young, 34.

152. The We're Here came to an anchor in Halifax harbor on the night of November 5th, using only one anchor. On the 6th the Ben Nevis anchored beside her, and, as it was alleged, in too close proximity. On the morning of the 7th both vessels were apparently securely moored, and the master of the former went on shore, leaving six men on board. In the course of the morning a gale sprung up, and the We're Here, not being adequately moored, collided with the Ben Nevis. The men on board the former vessel did not act as experienced seamen should have done under the circumstances, and her master made no attempt to get on board, while no negligence or want of skill or seamanship was proved against the Ben Nevis. Held, That judgment should be entered for the Ben Nevis for damages and costs.

Strictures made on evidence received in the Admiralty Courts. The We're Here, Young, 138.

153. The French barque Clementine, on her way to Halifax, collided with and sank an American fishing schooner on St. George's Bank. The collision occurred soon after sunrise, and there was conflicting evidence as to the state of the weather, the plaintiffs alleging that it was clear; the defendants that there were fog and mist. A sufficient lookout had been maintained on board the barque until within a few minutes before the collision, when the man on the lookout was called down to assist in working the vessel, and before he had returned to his post the schooner was struck. Held, That the barque was in fault; that a sufficient lookout should have been maintained throughout, and that she was therefore liable in damages and costs. The Clementine, Young, 186.

154. The question of jurisdiction having been raised in the last case, on the ground that both vessels were foreign, Held, The Court had full jurisdiction. ibid.

155. The steamer M. A. Starr, while proceeding down Halifax harbor, collided with the schooner Edith Wier. The schooner was lying at a wharf in such a position that her bowsprit and jibboom projected some twenty-five feet beyond the end of the wharf, there

(Collision.)

by violating the harbor regulations. The collision would probably not have occurred but for another schooner which had been lying outside the Edith Wier, and which, just previous to the collision, had broken ground, and this narrowed the channel down which the steamer had to pass. Held, That as the Edith Wier's position was contrary to the harbor regulations, she should be liable for all damage to the steamer with costs of suit.

The rule as to inevitable accident stated. Young, 237.

The Edith Wier,

156. The schooner Hero, drifting down Halifax harbor with the tide, bound for a port along the coast, all sails set, and regulation lights duly burning, was run into by the steamer Alhambra, which had just entered the harbor. The night was fine and clear, and the harbor perfectly calm. The steamer was going at a good speed, and had altered her course a few minutes before the collision to avoid a schooner becalmed near by the Hero. The lookout on board the steamer did not perceive the Hero till too late. Held, That although it was one of those cases in which the two colliding vessels occupied such relative positions that the lights of the schooner could not be seen by the steamer, yet the speed of the steamer being too great, and her look-out defective, in that the schooner was not noticed in time, the steamer was held liable in damages. The Alhambra, Young, 249.

157. Two vessels, the Elba and Genoa, approaching the harbor of New York, collided at an early hour in the morning, about twelve miles from shore. Both had their lights burning brightly, and were visible to each other. The Elba was seriously damaged, but succeeded in reaching New York, where she was owned. The Genoa was only slightly injured, and, instead of continuing her voyage, turned about and made for Halifax, where she was proceeded against by the owners of the Elba. The evidence was very voluminous and contradictory, but the preponderance went to show the Elba was blameless. Held, The Genoa liable for damages and The Genoa, Young, 275.

costs.

158. The passenger steamer S., sailing up the river St. John, met the steam-tug N. coming down, near Akerley's Point, where the river is about half a mile wide. The S. was near the western shore, which was on her port side going up; the N. about one hundred and fifty yards from the same side of the river. The S., by keeping

(Collision.)

her course when she first sighted the N., might have avoided the collision, but instead ported her helm, which gave her a diagonal course to starboard towards the east side, and as a result struck the N. on the starboard quarter, and sank her. Held, That the S. was to blame, and liable for the damages sustained; also held that when two vessels are meeting end on, or nearly so, the rule to port helm may be departed from, where there are reasonable grounds for believing such course is necessary for safety, and consequently the N. was not to blame, immediately before the collision, for putting her helm to starboard. The Soulanges; The Neptune, Stockton, 1.

159. Two vessels, the R. and the G., were sailing up the river from St. John to Fredericton. At Perley's Reach, so called, near Fredericton, where the river runs about north-west and south-east, and is about three hundred yards wide, the R. being on the starboard side of the river, and on her starboard tack, the G. on the port side of the river, and on her port tack, the vessels were passing each other port side to port side. When the G. was nearly abreast the R. she suddenly rounded to, and struck the R. on the port side forward of the main chains, when the R. immediately sank. Held, That it was not a case of inevitable accident; that the R. being on the starboard tack, had the right of way; that the G. was to blame for the collision, and was liable for damages. The Grace, Stockton, 10.

160. A railway passenger car, standing upon a track on a wharf on the western side of the harbor of St. John, and within the limits of the city of St. John, was injured by a hawser attached and belonging to a steamship moored to the wharf. Held, That since the passing of the statute 26 & 27 Vict. c. 24, s. 10, the Vice-Admiralty Court has jurisdiction to entertain a claim for damage to property done by any ship, although the property injured is within the limits of a county, and situate upon the land. The Teddington, Stockton, 45.

See also judgment of Palmer, J., in this case on application for prohibition. ibid, 54.

161. The A. and the B. came into collision on the high seas. The B. was close-hauled on her starboard tack, the A. on her port tack, running free. It was not shown that the lights of the B. were so placed as to be fairly visible to the A. Both vessels kept their courses, and the collision took place. Held, notwithstanding the lights of the B. were not fairly visible to the A., it was the duty of

(Collision.)

the latter to keep clear and give way, and not doing so, she was liable for the damages. The Arklow, Stockton, 66.

162. The last case was reversed on appeal to the Judicial Committee (9 App. Cas. 136), the Court holding where there has been a departure from an important rule of navigation, if the absence of due observance of the rule can by any possibility have contributed to the accident, then the party in default cannot be excused. Where the lights of the complaining vessel were not properly burning, and were not visible on board the other vessel. That in the absence of proof that this latter was also to blame, the suit must be dismissed. The Arklow, Stockton, 72; s. c. 9 App. Cas. 136.

Held,

163. The tug G. was proceeding up the river St. John, and the tug V. coming down; when near Swift Point they came into collision, and the V. sank. The G., at the time of the accident, was, contrary to the rules of navigation, near the westerly shore on the port side of the vessel; the V. did not exhibit any masthead white light, as required by the regulations. Held, That both vessels were to blame; that the collision was occasioned partly by the omission of the V. to exhibit her masthead white light, but principally by the course of the G., and a moiety of the damages was given to the V. with costs. The General, Stockton, 86.

See Salvage, 54.

164. The vessel M. G., under command of a pilot, was entering the Miramichi, and near the Horse Shoe Bar, in the lower part of Bay du Vin, came into collision with a lightship there placed for the safety of navigation. Held, That under the evidence no fault was attributable to the M. G.; that it was a case of inevitable accident, and the suit was dismissed, but without costs, as the Crown was the promovent, and no costs can be given against the Crown. The Minnie Gordon, Stockton, 95,

165. The M., close-hauled on the port tack, heading about southwest by west, and going about three knots an hour, with the wind south, came into collision with the M. P., heading east, and running free about ten knots an hour, and was totally lost. Held, from the evidence, that the M. P. had no proper lookout; that failure to have a proper lookout contributed to the collision, and she was accordingly condemned in damages and costs. The Maud Pye, Stockton, 101.

(Collision.)

166. The V., stone laden, on a voyage from Dorchester to New York, off Tynemouth Creek, in the Bay of Fundy, close-hauled on the starboard tack, came into collision with the E. K. S., running free, in ballast, going up the Bay to Moncton. The night was dark and foggy, and from the evidence it appears that the V. had no mechanical fog-horn, as required by the regulations, and that the one she had was not heard on board the E. K. S., which was to windward. Held, That it was a case of inevitable accident; that the E. K. S. was not to blame, and the action was dismissed without costs to either party.

It is a rule of the Admiralty that where there is a material variance between the allegations of the libel and the evidence, the party so alleging is not entitled to recover, although not in fault, and fault is established against the other vessel. The Emma K. Smalley, Stockton, 106.

167. A tug boat was engaged by the charterers of a vessel, the E., to tow her from the harbor of St. John, N. B., through the Falls at the mouth of the river, beneath a suspension bridge which spans the Falls at the point where the river flows into the harbor. The vessel towed was chartered to carry a cargo of ice from the loading place above the Falls to New York, and the charterers were to employ the tug and pay for the towage services. The tug, having waited to take another vessel in tow, together with the E., was too late in the tide, and in going under the bridge the topmast of the E. came into collision with the bridge and was damaged. Held, That the Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit; that the delay of the tug in going through the Falls was evidence of negligence; and the tug and owners were condemned in damages and costs. The Maggie M., Stockton, 185.

168. Two vessels-the M. P. and the P.-ca came into collision in the Bay of Fundy, whereby the former was badly damaged. The wind at the time was blowing strong from south south-east. The M. P. was hove to on the port tack, under a reefed mainsail; and the P. was close-hauled on the starboard tack. The weather at the time was foggy. The M. P. did not have a regulation fog-horn on board, but had a tin one blown by the mouth. When the P. was first seen by the M. P. she was from a quarter to a half mile distant. The M. P. was loaded with piling, bound for New York. The P. did not change her course, and ran into the M. P. and caused the injury. Held, That although the M. P. was on her port tack, she

MM