1. Under the Act of Feb. 16, 1875, c. 77, a finding in a case of
admiralty and maritime jurisdiction on the instance side of the
circuit court has the effect of a special verdict in an action at
law, and although no exceptions are filed, its sufficiency in
connection with the pleadings to support the decree rendered is
open to consideration on appeal.
2. A sailing vessel meeting a steamer should keep her course
unless it is manifest that she would thereby occasion a collision.
Where, therefore, as in this case, by her unnecessary changes of
course, she misled and embarrassed an approaching steamer that was
laboring to keep out of her way, and a collision occurred whereby
she was sunk, whereas had she kept on the course she was sailing
when first seen by the steamer or adhered to her first new course
afterwards taken, a collision would not have happened,
held that the steamer is not liable.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case comes before us on appeal from a decree of the circuit
court, with a finding of facts upon which it was rendered. We are
therefore relieved of much of the embarrassment experienced on the
trial, both by that court and the district court, from the
difficulty of determining from the evidence the exact position of
the vessels immediately preceding the collision. Here, we must take
the facts as found and apply the law to them. In cases of admiralty
and maritime jurisdiction on the instance side of the court, under
the act of Congress of 1875, the finding has the effect of a
special verdict in an action at law.
There is, it is true, a bill of exceptions in the record, but it
contains exceptions only to the finding, and to the refusal of the
court to find otherwise. It presents no question for our
consideration except such as arises upon the facts as found. There
is no occasion in any case to except specially to a finding, as its
sufficiency, in connection with the pleadings, to support the
decree rendered is always open to consideration on appeal.
Page 107 U. S. 513
On the evening of December 30, 1875, the ship
Harvest
Queen, an American vessel, sailed from the harbor of
Queenstown, Ireland, for the port of Liverpool, England. She was
187 feel long, of 1,626 tons burden, and had at the time a cargo of
grain on board. On the same day, the steamer
Adriatic, a
British vessel, left Liverpool for New York and proceeded down the
Irish Channel. She was 450 feet long, and of over 3,000 tons
burden. Her forward deck was roofed with what is termed a turtle
back, so called from its shape. The spray of the sea dashed over
this roof, and the lookouts of the steamer were therefore stationed
on a house just abaft of it.
The wheel house was on deck, and above and a little forward of
it was the bridge, on which the officer on watch usually took his
position. Adjoining the wheel house and opening into it was the
chart room. At a quarter past two on the morning of December 31,
the captain, who had been on duty all the time after leaving
Liverpool, went into that room and lay down on a sofa, giving
orders to be called at four, or sooner if any vessels came in
sight. The first officer was then on watch, standing on the bridge,
most of the time on the starboard side. Three seamen were on the
lookout, one on each side of the house mentioned and one on the
port side of the bridge. At thirty-five minutes past two, the first
officer, looking through a night glass, saw a green light about two
points on his starboard bow. It could not be seen by the naked eye.
It proved afterwards to be a light on the
Harvest Queen.
At this time, the sky was clear, with scattering clouds, but on the
water the night was dark; the wind was blowing a fresh breeze from
the southwest, and the sea was running high. The steamer was going
about twelve knots an hour, having all her lights in their proper
places and burning brightly. Soon afterwards, the light on the
Harvest Queen was seen by one of the lookouts, and two
strokes were given to the bell on the turtle deck as a signal that
a light was seen on the starboard bow.
Four minutes after that -- at thirty-nine minutes past two --
the green light of the ship, which had broadened to three and a
half points, changed to red. Up to this time, the steamer had not
altered her course. The character of the approaching
Page 107 U. S. 514
vessel was not known, nothing but her light being seen. But
whether she was propelled by wind or steam, the steamer pursued the
proper course to prevent the danger of collision. Her green light
must have been equally visible from the
Harvest Queen, and
when two vessels keep the same colored lights in view of each
other, collision is impossible, for they are them moving on
parallel lines. The lights on vessels are required to be so placed
as not to be seen across their bows. The red light coming in sight
indicated that the ship had changed her course, and was no longer
running on a parallel line, but in a direction which, if continued,
would bring her across the bow of the steamer. The first officer
therefore at once gave an order to port the helm, and signaled the
engineer to stand by the engine, following this with a further
order to slow the engine. Both these orders were promptly obeyed,
and the steamer slowly swung to the right.
As already stated, the steamer was going at the rate of twelve
knots an hour. The
Harvest Queen, judging from the time
she occupied in passing over the distance from Queenstown, must
have been sailing at the rate of eight knots an hour -- that is,
the two vessels were approaching each other at a speed equal to
about twenty miles an hour. The light on the
Harvest Queen
could not have been seen that night further than two miles and a
half, and over this distance the steamer with her speed had passed
four-fifths of a mile, and the
Harvest Queen a little more
than one-half of a mile. So that at this time, when the red light
was seen, the vessels must have been about a mile and a quarter
apart. At the rate they were moving, they would come together or
pass each other in four minutes. The first officer of the steamer
at once perceived the necessity of an immediate change in her
course so as to bring her on a parallel line with the approaching
ship. To accomplish this, it was necessary to port the helm of the
steamer, which was at once done. The order to do this was, under
the circumstances, the proper one to be given. The slowing of the
speed of the steamer, by reason of the proximity of the other
vessel, was also a proper proceeding. When a steamer is nearing
another vessel and there is danger of collision from continuing the
rate of speed at which she is going, it is the duty of her captain
to
Page 107 U. S. 515
slacken her speed and, if necessary, to reverse her engines and
move her backwards. Such is the express language of Rule 21,
adopted by Congress for the prevention of collisions on the water,
which is as follows:
"Every steam vessel, when approaching another vessel so as to
involve risk of collision, shall slacken her speed or, if
necessary, stop and reverse, and every steam vessel shall, when in
a fog, go at a moderate speed."
Rev.Stat. sec. 4233.
Had there been no other change in the course of the
Harvest
Queen, the new direction taken by the steamer would have
carried her past that vessel without collision. But about a minute
afterwards, or forty minutes past two, the red light of the
Harvest Queen changed again to green. The steamer had then
yielded to her helm and gone off a point to the starboard, and was
swinging further in that direction. The first officer, seeing the
reappearance of the green light, at once gave an order to stop the
engine, and, as soon as it could be done, to back the steamer at
full speed. This order was obeyed, and the engine was put in a
reverse motion at about forty-one minutes past two. The captain was
then called, and immediately came on deck. Looking ahead, he saw a
green light not far away, about two points off the starboard bow;
then green and red lights appeared together, and then the red
alone. He noticed also that the helm was to the port side, and that
the engine was under reversed action. Thereupon he gave the order
from the deck, "hard a-starboard," which was obeyed. He then went
on the bridge.
Had the steamer been then going astern, there could be no
question as the propriety of this order; it would have turned her
to the right and she would have passed on the left side of the
Harvest Queen, showing red light to red light, the two
vessels in that event moving on parallel lines. The effect of a
starboard helm when a vessel is going astern is directly the
opposite of that produced when she is going ahead. But at the time
the order was given, the forward motion of the steamer had not been
entirely overcome, and she was still moving ahead slowly. It
appears, however, that while thus moving with the reversed action
of her engine, the steamer did not yield to her
Page 107 U. S. 516
helm so as to materially change her forward direction. The order
could not, therefore, have contributed to the collision. But were
it otherwise, we cannot say that the captain could be justly
blamed. In considering his action, the question is not whether the
order given was the best when viewed in the light of subsequent
events, but whether, under the circumstances in which he was
placed, it was that of a prudent and skillful commander. The
nearness of the approaching ship and the frequent change in her
light, while calling for prompt action on his part, were well
calculated to embarrass and confuse him. Delay in acting was full
of danger; there was no time for deliberation and consultation with
others, and seeing the reversed movement of the engine, he would
naturally conclude that the ship had yielded or would soon yield to
it and pass the approaching ship in safety.
Soon after he reached the bridge, the
Harvest Queen
appeared through the darkness under full sail and bore down
directly on the steamer. Before anything could be done, her
jib-boom ran over the turtle-back of the steamer, and was broken in
two, one part falling into the water. The engines of the steamer
were then backing at full speed, and if she was not in fact going
astern, she was, according to the finding of the circuit court,
"not going ahead much, if any." She continued backing after the
collision, and when the vessels separated, the
Harvest
Queen passed across the bow of the
Adriatic from port
to starboard. Her masts were standing and her sails were all set.
The first officer of the steamer hailed her, but received no answer
from anyone; no hail came from her. She gave no signs of serious
injury, yet she was in some way injured so severely that soon
afterwards she sank with all on board.
Immediately after the separation of the vessels, the captain of
the steamer gave orders to clear away the boats, but, the
Harvest Queen keeping in sight, the orders were
countermanded, and the
Adriatic steamed slowly toward her
until she became lost to view. It was about that time that cries
for help were heard in the water in the direction where the ship
was last seen. The engines were stopped and an order to lower the
boats was immediately given. Two boats, under
Page 107 U. S. 517
command of officers of the steamer, put out in search of the
parties from whom the cries were heard. They were rowed in the
direction whence the cries came; but after remaining out for half
an hour to an hour they were recalled by a signal from the steamer.
Nothing was ever afterwards heard of any of the ship's crew, and
only a few fragments of the vessel were ever found. The vessel and
cargo were a total loss.
The present libel was filed to recover their value in damages,
alleged to be $225,000. The libellants charge that the collision
was caused by the negligence and improper conduct of those on board
the steamer 1st, in not having a good and sufficient lookout; 2d,
in running at too great a speed; 3d, in not keeping out of the way
of the
Harvest Queen, and 4th, in not stopping and backing
in time to avoid the collision.
From the narrative we have given of the facts of the case, which
is but a summary of the findings of the circuit court, stating the
facts with much greater detail and particularity, it is evident
that these allegations are not sustained in any essential
particular.
While the vessels were over two miles apart, the green light on
the
Harvest Queen was distinctly seen. A similar light on
the Adriatic could easily have been seen, and, if the lookouts were
attending to their duty, probably was seen, from the ship. Those
light being visible, it was only necessary for the vessels to keep
in their course and collision would have been impossible. The
subsequent changes made by the steamer were caused by previous
changes in the course of the ship, as indicated by the showing of
her lights. While it was the duty of the steamer to keep out of the
way of the ship, being more under control, it was no less the duty
of the ship to avoid anything tending to mislead and embarrass the
steamer in the performance of this duty. That she did thus mislead
and embarrass the steamer is plain from the statement already made.
To one at a distance, her changing lights were confusing --
indicating either doubt on the part of her officers as to the
course to be taken or, what is more likely to have been the
case,
Page 107 U. S. 518
the absence of a good and sufficient lookout on board of the
ship to report the sight and approach of the steamer.
The continued appearance of the green light for the first four
minutes after it was seen answers the suggestion that the change of
lights on the
Harvest Queen was the result of the swinging
of the vessel from the wind and sea, and not from an alteration in
her course.
The general rule as to the conduct of a ship under circumstances
like those presented in this case in much stronger against the
course the
Harvest Queen pursued than we have stated. That
rule is for a sailing vessel meeting a steamer to keep her course,
while the steamer takes the necessary measures to avoid collision.
In
Crockett v. Newton, we said that
"Though the rule should not be observed when circumstances are
such that it is apparent its observance must occasion a collision,
while a departure from it will prevent one, yet it must be a strong
case which puts the sailing vessel in the wrong for obeying the
rule,"
59 U. S. 18 How.
581,
59 U. S. 583,
and in
New York & Liverpool U.S. Mail Steamship Co. v.
Rumball, that
"Under the rule that a steamer must keep out of the way, she
must of necessity determine for herself and upon her own
responsibility, independently of the sailing vessel, whether it is
safer to go to the right or left or to stop, and in order that she
may not be deprived of the means of determining the matter wisely,
and that she may not be defeated or baffled in the attempt to
perform her duty in the emergency, it is required, in the admiralty
jurisprudence of the United States, that the sailing vessel shall
keep her course, and allow the steamer to pass either on the right
or left or to adopt such measures of precaution as she may deem
best suited to enable her to perform her duty and fulfill the
requirement of the law to keep out of the way."
62 U. S. 21 How.
372,
62 U. S.
384.
Here, so far from observing this rule, the ship, by her frequent
changes, embarrassed the action of the steamer and prevented her
from continuing in a course which would have avoided the disastrous
result. If the ship had kept on the course she was sailing when
first seen or had adhered to the first new course afterwards taken,
no collision would have happened.
Page 107 U. S. 519
It seems to us plain, upon the facts found by the circuit court,
that whatever fault there was which caused the collision, it
originated with the ship and not the steamer.
Decree affirmed.