The Golden Rod
The Golden Rod
Opinion of the Court
A difficult question of fact arises. The tide was running ebb, at rate of not less than four miles an hour. The accident occurred in the daytime, and in clear weather, although the sky was overcast. All of the vessels saw each other, no mistake of signals occurred, no failure to give warning by any lookout or delay in observation on the part of the boats occurred, and but two questions of fact are presented for decision. The first is the place of collision, which includes the relative positions of the boats; and, second, the movements of the boats and their exact positions from the time signals were exchanged.
Transfer No. 20 is one of the powerful tugs frequently passing up and down through Hell Gate, in the service of the New Haven Railroad. Her captain had many years of service in New York waters, and particularly upon the very trip which he was making on this day. There is no dispute that the Transfer was proceeding up the river at a fair speed aroundl Hallett’s Point, and, as she made the turn in front of what is knowh as Pot Cove, she observed two tows coming down toward the Gate. Doth tows at the same time observed her, and the testimony of all the witnesses is to the effect that, when
This tow of the Golden Rod (which is a boat 30 feet wide by 62 feet long) consisted of a barge, the Sarah, upon a hawser 75 feet long, and a barge, the Crow, which suffered the damage by collision. The Crow was close up to the Sarah, and was herself 30 feet wide and 95 feet long. The Sarah was about the same width and about 90 feet in length, films the entire length of this tow was approximately 325 feet. If proceeding in a straight line, its width would be no more than 30 feet, but, according to all the testimony, the tug was holding over do starboard, so as to counteract the effect of the ebb tide, and the barges were towed to port a distance estimated by the captain of the Golden Rod at 25 feet, and by the captain of the Crow at 50 feet. This tow of the Golden Rod had come around Lawrence Point between the Middle Ground and the Sunken Meadow's, and then fol lowed a steady course until she had passed Negro Point: Bluff. She was making about six knots an hour, and her captain estimates the tide at five knots, giving a combined speed of eleven knots over the ground. The other Low which affected the situation consisted of two
The captain of the Transfer has put in evidence a diagram made by him in connection with his report immediately after the collision, in which he locates his float close to the Long Island shore, axxd the tow of the O’Brien Brothers and the tow of the Golden Rod as at all times to port of midchannel, indicating by this diagram that both the O’Brien Brothers’ tow and the Golden Rod’s tow had been carried over bodily — that is, shifted to port by the sel of the tide — to such a degree that both boats were occupying a part of the river where they had no business to navigate. The captain of the O’Brien Brothers was called as a witness, and he cori'oborates the captain of the Golden Rod in fixing the position of both tows prior to the collision, as just off the Ward’s Island shore, but he corroborates the captain of the Transfer in fixing its position as just off from the Long Island shore, and suddenly transfers the Golden Rod and the O’Brien Brothers to a point some 200 feet further to port, or substantially into the position located by the captain of the Transfer as the place of'collision. The captain of the O’Brien Bi-others, the captain of the Transfer, and to some extent the captain of the Golden Rod, all agree that the tow of the Golden Rod had not completely cleared or passed the txxg O’Brien Brothers. The captain of the Transfer, corroborated to some extent by the captain of the O’Brien Brothers, places the Golden Rod barely aliead of the O’Brien Brothers’ tug, but with the tows still alongside of each other. The captain of the barge which was struck did not see the O’Brien Brothers’ tug at any time. Other witnesses xxpon the Golden Rod locate the O’Brien Brothers as almost directly astern, but this would pxxt the O’Brien Brothers lixxndreds of feet from her actxxal position, as the Golden Rod was at this time working to starboard according to all the testimony. If this had been the position of the boats, the O’Brien Brothers would have gotten in trouble also. ■
It is some 3,000 feet from Little Hell Gate to the point of collision. While passing they were moving at a rate of 1,100 and 1,000 feet per minute, respectively. Hence they covered the distance ixx
The captain of the Golden Rod charges the captain of the Transfer with a rank sheer to port, and a forward movement of some 200 or 50P feet under the effect of this sheer, explaining that it occurred because of the Transfer's reaching the point where the tide set over to the Long Island shore. The captain of the Transfer charges the captain of the Golden Rod with a swing to starboard, in an attempt to pull around ahead of the O’Brien Brothers’ tow and out of the way of the Transfer. This maneuver was not of itself negligent or blamable at the time, for, if it had not occurred, the captain of the Transfer says that the Golden Rod’s tow would probably have gone into the car float's broadside. This broadside collision might have been kws injurious than what occurred, but the execution of such a maneuver just at the time of the collision could not be held negligent.
'fixe Transfer has not alleged fault against the O’Brien Brothers, because the whistle signal was properly given to the Golden Rod, and she accepted responsibility for the situation, and. never by alarm or otherwise attempted to do more than rely upon her own efforts, if the O’Brien Brothers was in the position located by the captain of the Transfer, she would still be substantially in the middle of the channel, and would have interfered only with the Golden Rod’s movements. If she occupied the position located by her captain and that of the captain of the Golden Rod, the O’Brien Brothers had nothing at all to do with the difficulties of the colliding boats.
Idle Transfer has alleged fault against the Golden Rod for not obeving rule 7, requiring an overtaking tow coming down through Hell Gate at ebb tide to fall back and let a tow ahead of her and to "tarboard pass through the Gate first. This rule was in effect when the collision occurred, hut has since been changed. It was plainly a rule to provide protection for the overtaken vessel. At the same time it established a binding rule upon the overtaking vessel, so as to insure safety by observing single file and actually falling back if the boats be so located as to reach the narrow passage side by side. An evasion of the rule, if collision results with a vessel coming in the opposite direction, cannot be excused by suggesting that an approaching vessel would understand that the overtaking tow was not intending to obe\ the rule, but was putting the approaching vessel into danger because this could be done without risk to the tow which was being overtaken, and for whose benefit the rule was primarily intended.
The court is satisfied that no such movement on the part of the Transfer has been proven. Plenty of water and a clear river was in front of the Transfer to the east. The testimony of witnesses for the Transfer is persuasive that, before the collision, she stopped her engines and waited, her captain testifying that in his opinion there was not room for the vessels to pass at the point in the channel where they were going to meet, and that he therefore stopped his engines and substantially stood still; the way of the Transfer being merely sufficient to overcome the effect of the tide. Under these circumstances, even if the O’Brien Brothers had forced the Golden Rod to a position where she could not avoid the Transfer, it must be held that the responsibility for getting in that position was with the Golden Rod; that an observance of rule 7 would have protected the O’Brien Brothers so far as the Golden Rod was concerned, but would also have kept the Golden Rod in a position where a reliance by the O’Brien Brothers upon her rights would not have given rise to the danger of collision between the barge and the Transfer. The collision according to the testimony must have occurred more to the port side of the channel and nearer the Long Island shore, than the captain of the Golden Rod locates it.
The only remaining question to consider is the responsibility of the Transfer in proceeding up the river and into the narrowest part of the channel after she had given a one-whistle signal to an approaching tow, which she saw at the time of the signal was to port of another tow, which it was then passing. The fact that the Golden Rod was given the signal and answered the signal, and that the Transfer saw no reason to signal the O’Brien Brothers, is positive proof that the
The captain of the Transfer testifies that he expected the Golden -Rod’s tow to drop back, and that, when he did stop his engines, he did so because he saw that she had not dropped back. Before this, he proceeded against the tide some 2,000 feet, and ultimately stopped at a point where he could not back and could not do anything to avoid being struck as the Golden Rod attempted to pull out of the way. inasmuch as both the O’Brien Brothers and the Golden Rod were affected by the same ebb tide, it would appear that the Golden Rod could have dropped back at any time before the boats actually rounded Negro Point Bluff, and it is apparent that the Transfer by that time had reached a position from which she could not do more than she did do to avoid collision. If the O’Brien Brothers by slowing up had waived rule 7 and let the Golden Rod start to go through ahead, then the Transfer should not be blamed if the O’Brien Brothers kept too close to the Golden Rod until it was too late for the Transfer to tell which of the others would yield. Even a mistake in estimating the swing of the rear scow in the Golden Rod’s tow, and a failure on the part of the Transfer to stop quick enough to avoid being carriedi lo a point where the extreme corner of her nearest float failed to clear by from 3 to 15 feet, would not seem to be such negligence on the part of the captain of the Transfer as to justify holding her responsible for a part of the damages of the collision, in the face of the apparently plain fault on the part of the Golden Rod. Perhaps a little more caution on the part of the captain of the Transfer and greater readiness to anticipate that the Golden Rod was not intending to respect rule 7, but was negligently disregarding that rule upon the theory that the O’Brien Brothers would either give way, or that the Golden Rod could pass so quickly as to make observance of the rule unnecessary, would have allowed him to avoid the collision. But this cannot be considered negligence on his part, nor should he he thereby made responsible for an accident of which the proximate cause was plainly the miscalculation on the part of the Golden Rod, or utter disregard by her of the rights of the other parties.
'L'he cases in which damages have been divided because one of the vessels has been approaching a situation recognized as dangerous and has failed to observe ordinary precautions, but has insisted upon the right of way or has relied on compliance with the rules by other vessels after they have passed the point where compliance could he observed, such as Duluth Steamship Co. v. Pittsburg Steamship Co., 180 Fed. 656, 103 C. C. A. 622, U. S. v. Erie R. Co., 172 Fed. 50, 96 C. C. A. 538, and The New York, 175 U. S. 187, 20 Sup. Ct. 67, 44 L. Ed. 126, cannot apply in this case. To hold the Transfer at fault for proceeding a few feet too far toward the east before she stopped her engines and waited seems to be impossible. The necessity for careful estimate on the part of the Golden Rod before attempting to pass the O’Brien Brothers, or on the part of both the Golden Rod and the O’Brien Brothers, if the latter tug was slowing up and the Golden Rod was endeavoring to go ahead, makes it necessary to hold (even
It must be remembered that the O’Brien Brothers couldi always have given way, and, if the Transfer could be blamed, after the O’Brien Brothers had waived the requirements of rule 7, the O’Brien Brothers could be held in fault as well, and the court would have to try the issue between her and the Transfer.
The libelant may have a decree against the Golden Rod for his damages and costs, and! the libel against the Transfer must be dismissed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- THE GOLDEN ROD
- Status
- Published