The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-12-24 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, 1% ESDAY, DEC.

Sittings at Nisi Piing, before Mr. Baron Gurney, and a Spe-
cial Jury at Guildhall.)
YATES AND ANOTHED. P. erne. CITY OF DAJDLIN STEAM-
rAciIiT COMPANY.
Sir F. Pt;llocck, with r. Whately and Mr. Greenwood,
was counsel for the plaintiffs; and Mr. Creeswell appeared
with Mr. Jervis and Mr. Watson for the defendants.
This wisest case in which the plaintiffs', iron merchants of!
leveia:ool, aleiseed to recover the value of a large quatltity of
iron, valued at about £7OO, which was shipped by them on
board a schooner called the Byron, in the menth of April
last, for_ the port of Liverpool, and which; 'together with
that vessel and one of her crew; went to the bottom on the
night of the 16th of Aprilsin consequence of her having been
run dowzi by the Duchess of Kent, a Dublin and Liverpool
steamer, the property of the defendants. The facts of this
case, as proved by the plaintiffs witnesses, were, that the By-
ron, having been boarded by a pilot off Lynes-point on the
I6th April; was by him conducted to an anchorage at the en -
trance to the Rock Channel, on her way to Liverpool, about
half-past eleven o'clock, the wind being then contrary, and
the tide nearly exhausted ; and as soon as this was done, the.
sails were furled, and the pilot having ordered a light to he
hoisted in the rigging. went below to get some tea, and while
there saw the mate, who was not called, take up a lighted
lantern, which a witness swore that he fastened to the fore-
stay, about seven or eight feet aloft. But long after this,
another vessel, the Lady Rowley, came to an anchorage near
the Byron, and also hoisted a light, her berth being about a
cable's length off her neighbour, and in a part of the water
called the Bight of Hoyle, the Byron being between the
Spencer Gat buoy and the north east buoy, but nearer to the
t latter. While these vessels were so situated, the lights of the
steamer were observed bearing down upon them ; and when
she neared the Lady Rowley, she seeing that vessel's light,
avoided her, and immediately ran in upon the Byron, and
striking her just amidships, sunk her in a few seconds,, there
being only just time for the crew to clamber up the sides of
the steamer, and escape that grave to which one of them
(a boy) was in fact consigned, he being at the moment below.
The witnesses for the plaintiffs, including the pilot of the
Byron, in making this statement of the circumstances attend.
ing upon the accident, swore that the position taken up by
the Byron was a proper one, and that the steamer was more
to the south than was usual with outward-bound vessels,
and that while she approached they sung out to her without
any avail; and furtller, that some of her crew, on being taxed
with keeping d"! terrible blind look out," asked, " how -it
could be expected that they should keep their eyes open both
day and night ? "
On the part of the defendants it was contended, that there
being a good look-out kept on board the vessels, the light on
board the Lady Rowley was descried, and an opportunity af-
forded to the captain of the steamer to avoid that vessel, but
that there was not any light at all exhibited on board the By-
ron, which vessel lying just in the fair track of all outward-
bound vessels was not calculated on, and so run down by the
steamer a second or two-after she had passed to the north of
the Lady Rowley. To prove this defence the captain and
others of the Duchess of Kent were called, the former of
whom swore that he saw the light of the Lady Rowley at a
distance •of more than a mile, and the latter, who was sta-
tioned at the bow to. look out, that they saw it when they
were about half a cable's length off, when they reported her
to the captain, by whom orders were(given to port the helm,
in order that she might be cleared. All these, and a passen-
ger besides, who was leaning over the larboard bow of the
steamer, from the time ske left the dock till she struck the
Byron, swore that they saw no other light whatever but that
of the Lady Rowley, and that the first notice they had of the
propinquity of the other vessel was when she appeared of a
sudden under the larboard bow of the Duchess of Kent, and
within a few seconds only of the time she had passed the
Lady Rowley. The report of course was given of her as soon
as possible, and orders given to " stop and reverse her en-
gines and post her helm," but without any hope of saving
her, for ere the words were out of the captain's mouth the
mischief was done, and the ill-fated vessel, with her cabin-
boy, went down almost immediately. Besides these wit-
nesses several gentlemen, among whom were Captain Chap-
pell, Lieutenants Townley and Lord, of the Royal Navy, and
Mr. Askew, harbour-master of Liverpool, were called, who,
' onaand gave- it as their opteloeettlertlesepostrlonstaken try
by the pilot for aechOring the schooner. was most dangerous..
as it placed her during the night in the very centre.of the fair.
channel, for the steamers and other vessels, and unless the
greatest vigilance was used on board such a vessel, no one
ought to think of going there. It was also proved that the
wreck had been buoyed off to mark its position, but that, not-
withstanding that, another vessel had run foul of her masts,
which were visible about twelve feet above low-water mark,
in consequence of which.the masts were drawn out of her,
and the hull blown up in September last, in order to clear
the channel, after all attempts to weigh her and her cargo had
failed, during which latter operation, the forestay, on which
the plaintiffs asserted that the light had been seearely fastened
had been partially exposed to view, but no traces had been
found thereon of any iantern or anything else which might
lead to the conclusion that any light had'been exhibited. In
addition to this piece of evidence, it was also proved, by the
passenger of the Duchess of Kent, that the mate of the By-
ron, who was not examined on account of his alleged absence
at Seville, had confessed that no light had been shown, but
that the truth was, they were about to do so when the acci-
dent hapPened. -
Sir F. Pollock having replied on the whole case in a very
able address to thajury,
His Lordship summed up the evidence, on both sides in a
narrative form, and left it to the jury to say, first, whether
the position taken up by the Byron was a safe and proper
one ; and secondly, whether any light had been exhibited by
her crew. If the Byron has taken up her anchorage in the
channel so as to incur danger, still it was necessary for the
defendants to show that they had exercised that due care and
attention in the navigation of the steamer as would have pre-
vented the collision, and to try that question it was necessary
to see whether there had been any light exhibited by the By-
ron ; if so, then, though in the fair channel, she had done all
that was required of her, and the defendants not having seen
that light, must be held not to have kept a proper look-out
for it. On the one side was the direct testimony of the crew
of the Byron that the lantern had been shown, and also that
of the pilot on board the Lady Rowley, who swore that he,
saw it for five minutes at least before the collision took
place ; and on the other there was the indirect oaths of the
steamer's crew and the passenger, who had sworn that they
saw no light, and that if there had been they must have seen
it. Between these two the jury were to decide ; it' they should
think that there had been a light exhibited on board the By-
ron, then undoubtedly the plaintiff's were entitled to recover
the value of the goods lost in consequence of this unfortunate
collision,

The jury consulted for a few moments, and returned a var-
dict•for the defendants.
In another cause which stood next in the Piny against the