The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-11-25
The Hell Gate Pilots-lmpOrtant Decision as
10 Towing Vessels and the Laws OF Pr

The Hell Gate Pilots-lmportant Decision as
10 Towing Vessels and the Laws or Pl-
lotage.
SUPREME CoTRT-GESERAL TERM.
Before Hon Judges Davies, Sutherland and Hogeboom.
Nov. 24-The People Peter Francsco. appellant
indicted in the General Sessions and convicted OF
msdemeanor for violating the provisions Of the laws OF
Isi7 relative to the Hell Gate pilots That act provides
that there shall be appointed by the Governor and Senate
h and proper TO act pilots for the safe poge
vessels through the channel OF the Fast river commonly
called He'll Gae.o The provides for compensation for
such service and also provides that any pilot WHO shall
frs tender his TO any vessel passing through the
Gate and such services shall not be accepted he shah be
emitted 10 demand and receive half potage Tho act fur
Their provides that II any person, other than He'll Gate
pilot shall pilot for any other person. any vessel Of any
description through the channel Of the East river
monty called Hell Gate be shall forfeit and pay the
Of thirty dollars for each offence, on conviction there
Of be deemed guilty OF misdemeanor and shall be pun
ished a. such and the also declares that il shall
be construed applying to STEAMBOATS,. The defendant
was the pilot Of the seamtug H. Mnturn, which
1851 the two schoonefs called the George and Humnng
Bird dashed to the steamtug Mntlrn, one on each
SIDE and thus taken through Hell Gate by the defendant
he being the steamboat and plotting u, aud making
signals TO board the schooners TO change their
helms to conform to the movements Of the steamer.
u Il conceded that the plotting OF the steamer
offence under the act, for il expressly excepted from
sous but II insisted the part Of the people
that the Of taking the two schooners through the chan
meaning of the act, and which II has made an offence.
DAVIS p Justice.-The duties OF the pilots authorized
the appointed and " ACT pilots for the safe
potagc OF vessels through the channel commonly called
Hell Gate: and person not such pilot who shall pilot
any vessel, y made subject 70 the penalties o. the act
first, officer serving on board OF ship during the
course Of voyage and having the charge Of the helm
and Of the ships route. and secondly officer autho
rized by law who taken board at particular place
for the purpose Of conducting ship through river, road
or channel OF from or INTO port. This definition would
hat ul Ia be
ship po,cd that he IL not in the legal sense pilot IN
less board the ship which he y conducting through
river or ohanue Can he be said 70 be plot be stood
on the shore and directed the of the vessel by
signals, or along tho banks OF the stream aud by
words or signs controlled and directed the coarse OF the
vessel navigating the stream We think rot and that the
iniendmcnt u the act was TO apply 20 pilots on board
plotting and directing The snip or vessel while
the stcarntug through the channel Of the East
river a. be lawfully might do Tue two schooners which
Il claimed he plotted, were isned To the steamboat
anepce they plotted through the channel, and 80
they would have been placed on the deck Of inc steamer
II Is true the persons the schooner had 70 obey, ana
did obey signals given 10 them by the Defendant while
on the steamer lie might have given tho same II on the
the land do not thai this circumstance deter
that he was plotting the schooner: We have not
any decision Of courts upon the proper consiruc
ton 10 b. s'v,n 10 this statute upon TIE point nos pre-
scented for consideration But case his bcea decided IA
the English Court OF Excheruer upon similar statute,
which sccms to Of high authority and quite contr
"a Geo 4, chap 125, sec. Io.) The language II the
English statute s-Eyery person assuming continuing
in the charge conduct OF any ship OF vessel with
out being licensed pilot, after any licensed pilot shat!
have offered n tex. charge 81 such ship vessel shall
forfeit, &c" II will he that the language Of this
statute comprehensive than ours and 10 not 30
technical In the terms used Ours ia 10 pilot "pot
ing theirs o act IN the charge conduct Of any ship
or vessel Bcilby Va. scott, Mison Wclsly Rep y.
a3, an action 10 recover penalty incurred under
this statute Cor doing act like that for which the dc
PENDANT In this has been convicted 81 msdcfncanor.
Barvn Parke, in delivering the opinion Of The Court,
says,-Ihr nfst question arising on this case u
xrh. 10 DIFF had he ~
within tho meaning Of the plot act We are Of the
opinion that be had not These words arc t. br nner
stool Tie ascrbcd 10 them Ia other parts % tho
act they the taking the charge and direction
plot, whose appropriate and, indeed, sole duty 4 Is 10
select tho and take the management and conduct
Of the vessel for the purpose Of directing her IN tina,
The master of coasrg vessel may n h. resses
perform that duty himself but If he chooses 70 employ
another for that purpose he must employ licensed pilot
and unlicensed person taking that duty on himself by
command of tho master, when licensed pilot ocrs his
services would b. liable 10 the penalty the seventeen
section Hut the master precluicd employing
ans moving power wh Oh he may plcssc-be may make
VS. q another vessel % boat OF stcamiug Tor tha par
pose. and that cannot be done without necessarily de-
vnyinr upon hosc who may apply the power the sc0c.
ton Of the course and certain portion or indeed al the
charge and conduct of the vessel that stu the
bpa fds oc,, thc employ be the moving power
the person employed not pilot aad has not the c0n
du and charge % The vessel - such within the meaning
a the act IT, indeed the real object in any should
appear he 10 obtain the assistance 81 the skill Of pilot
and give him the charge and conduc e thc vessel aud
some coorahle dGy assigned 20 him. the case would
be- within the act; hut the present instance V
pressy found that the sfeamtug was id ds hired for
The purpose q conducting The vessel INTO The river and
the Court in that hell that penalty incurred.
II was assumed the trial q the defcniant That Nc
was engaged In tho business q towage: y not, the
anh and sixth requests % the defendant to the
iaage raised the question aud brought the case whn
that IN the English Fxchcqucr Tho h request was that
the jury believed that the oct done BY the defendant on
this of towage only that the defendant must
be acquitted Cor that offence not contemplated ~ the
and the Judge charged, with this qualification that
the defendant directed aud controlled the ents
Of the steamer, and the controlling spirit Then BIS
art Of potage 10 this the defendant excepted
and In holding that the defendant, whe controlling The
movements of the ur ami IS master spirit was commit
po'agc, think the learned Recorder erred
So also We think erred refusing charge that the
steamtug Minurn, being steamboat propelled by steam
had right To tow vessels through Hell Gate without being
subicct the laws relating ~ pictage, and that by The
10th section OF the act of 1sa1 steamboats, were excepted
from operation We think that upon the facts proved
the defendant has not been guilty Of any offence under
tho of 1917 and that there in refusing 20
charge In The particulars mentioned, requested and that
consequently the conviction must he reversed.