The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1860-01-09
Charley Bowen and silver star.

Charley Bowen and silver star.
Report of the Local Inspectors IN The Coils
ion Case Of the Charles Bo1oen and SiLOer
.Star-O6fee Of the Local Inspectors,
january 4th, 1860.
w. N. HALDEMAN, ESQ, SURVEYOR OF Gus
TONS
SIR-By request of the parties, we have
lately made such examination into the causes
that led to the running foul of each other,
of the steamers Charley Bowen and Silver
Star near Uniontown. Ohio river, on the
evening of the 10th of June, 1859, as the
matter seemed to demand.
This case, as you are doubtless aware from
the public press of neighboring city, has
assumed an Importance hardly warranted by
the evidence before us, and has produced
somewhat of i'll feeling among the parties
mostly interested, occasioned no doubt by
the somewhat hasty manner the parties i'm
plicated were hurried into previous exami-
nation by the local inspectors of a neighbor-
ing district, who no doubt deemed themselves
authorized to make it, but who failed from
some cause to make decision. From the
evidence before us, the case is about this:
The boats to some extent were running in
the same trade, the Bowen making bi-week-
" trips to Cairo and the Star making tri-
weekly trips to Paducah. This brought them
together one trip of each week, and seemed
to stir up among the crews of each boat
quite feeling of rivalry in regard to the
merits of their respective boats to win the
favor of the public.
On the evening in question the boats
both bound down landed at Uniont0wn, the
Star few moments in advance of the Bow
en- about the time the Bowen landed the
Star backed away from the upper wharf and
backed down to the lower landing or dis
tiIlerv. There is at Uniontown three land
ings at two of which there are wharf-boats
kept; these landings are distant according
to the proof $50 or 500 yards from each
other About midway between them is the
second landing and wharf boat. Some short
time after the Star had backed away from
the upper wharf boat where the Bowen had
landed, the Star also having landed at the
lower landing (distillery), the Bowen got
under way By backing her stern up the river
and started on her way down the river, and
when near the lower wharf boat, and near
the middle of the river, the Star was seen
backing square out, or as directly across the
river as possible, from the lower landing
(distilery) The proof shows that she con-
fiaued to back until she was past the middle
Of the river and did not reverse her engine
till a collision between the boats seemed in
evitabe ;athat when the engines. were revers-
ed on the Star and started ahead, the most
they did as stated by the engineeron watch,
was to make two or three revolutions before
they came together.
The proof in regard to the Bowen is, that
her engines were stopped about fifty yards
above the Star, and that they were not back
ed because the boats were so close together,
there was no time for the pilot to have shift
ed his rudders, and the attempt to have done
so would have brought the Bowen's head on
to the side of the Star, and thus have endan-
gered the lives of all on board. The Bowen
swinging rapidly towards the Indiana shore,
as IS IN proof; and as the fracture on the
star. showed, rendered this a probability,
and that they might miss altogether. The
boats came together nearest the Indiana
shore land bright moonlight) by the lar
hoard bow of the Bowen striking the larboard
fantau and cylinder timber of the Star dam
.oiuo to considerable extent both the boats,
md fhou,h some of the witnesses on the
cart OF Tie Star testify that the Star was
strcck on the starboard side by the Bowen,
vet this is an impossibility, as tae boats
were lying in the river at the siine, and is
not borne out by the engineeE on watch on
board the Star at the tlrae, and who wit
messed the whole affair; he also testiies that
the boats came together as we have stated
In respect to the pilots of these boats, we
consider it but an act ofjustice to state that
they are and should be considered fair men
ia fheir Professions, and though we cannot
consider them as wholly free from blame in
this matter, yet we do not consider the blame
that should attach to either of them, sRcl
as 10 warrant revocation or suspension o.
their licenses to act as pilots. We canno
sav that by their negligence or Unskilfulnes
life has been placed in peril We do no
think life was placed in peril, as the blow
Nxyoc bvrf- ~
the causes that produced it were, to some ex
tent, brought about by mutual spirit of riv
alry that had grown up between the crew
of the boats. What we blame the pilots for
il for not demonstrating against the order
Of the O. plains of these boats in not having
them stopped sooner than they were stopped
n il prc ven that the Captains OF both boat
were on their respective decks all the tim'
after be- king away from the shore, directin!
the motions of their boats; the act must
therefore, be considered theirs and not tn
,;lot's This is in strict accordance will
tbe ruling Of the Federal Court, in the cas-
~ the eyplosion of the Reindeer, wherein
rvas set forth that the Captain of steamboa
must take upon himself the proper response
bilitv belonging to his station and that b
rannot ~, any possibility, shift an act from
his own shoulders to that of another, mere
Tecause t would be convenient to do so.
In looking at the measure of blame tina
should attach to these pilots, we must, how
ever. place the largest share upon the pile
Moore Of the Star, because all the wltnesse
IN both sides testify that the Bowen left tn
landing first; and he, in backing his boa
ant directly across the track OF the Bowen
ard where he knew the Bowen must pas;
did to some extent violate the commo
mage Of the river and Rule Fourth of Pilot