The New York herald., 1869-03-19
6ROOKLYN CITY.
THE COIRTs.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CovaT-N ADMIRALTY.


Before Judge Benedict.
Joseph w. Dyer Ct al Is. The National Steam
Navigation C0mpany--The following decision was
rendered yesterday by Judge Benedict In this case.
which was tried nearly year ago:-
This IL a cause OF damage arising ont OF the fol-
lowing circumstances:-Tne snip Kate Dyer, owned
by the ibelants was on the night OF the std OF sep
tembcr, 1860, or Fire Island. bound from Calia0 TO
New York, 1ully laden The night Was dark, otter
aud cold, but starlight and shlps light could 10 seen
for several miles. The wind was blowing fresh
from the north northwest, and the ship was sailing
to westward, close hauled the sarbvard tuck. At
a speed OF about seven and half knots, with all the
proper lights displayed and In charge Of pilot me
bound nom New York to Liverpool, was proceeding
at o speed OF ten 10 twelve knots upon course
declared by the 0cer OF the deck TO be due east and
bv the master to be southeast tnreequarters east,
displaying also the proper lights. The TWO vessels
striking the sarboard bow Of the snip and having at
time sufficient headway to carry her over the snip
and iOr considers able distance tn leeward before
sne was stopped. The effect OF the collision was
such as the ship TO 20 to the bottom rapidly.
SO That out OF the whole number twelve OF the per-
| while the steamer herself was SO injured tuat
although ut once put about she could only reach the
outer middle when sne SANK ana became e 50 soai
| amounting in ali to some $25o,O0 The avermeuts
| upon the evidence are that the night was
nne and clear and ana the snip close as hauled; sss
| tnat the masthead lgnt OF the steamer was seen
two points over the sIarbOard Of the snip and dls-
tant two and half mics; that the ship held steady
to her course and as the light approached 1t grew
closer the ship, and 1t was apparent that the ship
was attempting TO cross the steamers bow WITH ner
nsa He s snps n@ a1 ns
a9d sas &c sss s g. 's Steamer
the me snP Dow @ sRss s answer
tlat the night was clear, and AYERS that che
tance than three miles; that the Scotland was on .
course about east. and while 80 heading discovered
the hghts OF the ship about one and half point OH
the port bow; that In order 10 give the ship wide
BERTH and when the ship was ar least three to four
miles OF, the helm OF the steamer was ported alter
Ing her course to starboard as sue proceeded; that
thereafter the persons n cnarge Of the steamer dis
covered that the ship was falling or to the south
ward and dOwn o. the steamship. aud that the Only
thing then left for the steamer was TO put her helm
hard aport ana stop and back which she dd, and at
the tine Of COLLISION had changed about four points,
esdscs prod1ced @ IN Of these
averments Is contradictory and In some particulars,
Unsatisfactory. have givel 70 the difficulties which
1t presents my best attention; and alter careful con-
sderation OF he opinion that little doubt can be
entertained as TO what snOad be tine proper decree
II viii be more convenient rst to exa nine the evi
dence intrOd uced by the steamer In regard to her
own movements. This evidence presents GER
tain features and disc0ses certain attendant cir
Clmstances which at the outset chailenge attention
iCr It appears tnAt the starD0arl watch or the
steamer was on duty, but up to the time OF the
second officer was In charge o. the decA but was not
at his prODer station upon the upper bridge until
alter the was ship repor.ed tat two men arc stated
neither OF them Is produced, and the omission Ii un
explained; that two mel were at the wheel, but
they are called by the li0elanis; that no witness
called from the steamer aUe to say which OF the
sldeghts OF the snip was presented to the steamer
although 1t Is beyond question that these lights
were plainly TO be seen, and according to the
theory OF the defence the snip was seen a. distance
al fnhn
circumstances become significant wnen the accounts
OF the c0lslUn given by tnese witnesses are
amined. Turning, then. to these accounts careful
comparison Of the various stalemels Of fact rend-
1t quite ap ent that aGention OF the officer
In charge OF the movements OF the steamer was noE
fastened upon the ship unsl she was enough TO
show her sal and so ci0se tnIt although the Meln
OF the steamer was put hard OF port ana the engine
stopped and reversed at full speed. she struck the
ship be ore her Leadway AZ seriously reduced. II
this be so. the steamer must 90 neid IN fault. Sho
requiring The utmost wa cnfulness on account OF tue
danger Of meeting vessels. by the exercise Of q
proper care the ship could have been seen and her
course determined ia abundant tina to have enabled
the steamer to take with proper dellbera0n, steps
to avoid her. and Inc failure 10 give proper attention
10 the approaching ship IN time to avoid her was
negligence. In coming to the conclusion that the
ship was not seen by thS 0dicr OF tine deck until 1t
portions OF the & stimony which are reied on as
supporting the avermeuts OF the answer, that the
ship was seen at Q distance and the steamers helm
then ported. But estimates OF time AMI Of distance
cannot be relied upon and here they are 0verb0rne
by the sequence OF events stated By these witnesses
which shows th ~ wnen the helm or the steamer
first changed Il was got hard Gown possi-
bic, and tnat this was simultaneously with the stop
page and reversal OF tho engine, and that all this
brl0Re. The engine was reversed by Hunt the third
olicer who h9ftened from below on nearing the
order 70 shit the wheel and the ship was IS he
says, then only two hundred and nifty yards distant.
This failure 10 notice the ship aud take steps
to avoid her may have arisen from absence Of At
tenve lookout or from failure Oh the part OF the 0
OF the deck to observe the reports OF the LOOKOUT
II any such there were; and N this connection
the omission to produce cither Of the men claimed
to have been upon tine LOOKOUT Is very Noticeable,
while the statement Of one OF the crew VI the
steamer whU was upon the f0recast.e and Is called
by bellan g. that the first report OF the ships
light from the fOrecastie received attention tends
to increase the Significance OF the admission. Tne
statement OF this L. moreover, strengthened
by tins circumstance tnat although the deposition
containing the statement was taken In December,
1865. and the witness then named several Others OF
the crew who on the fOrecas.le VITA hiin,
OF thoso witnesses called t0 contraQ 1T hn. But
or ihe steamer. that the ship was seea when sss
three or four miles on ann tnas the steamers
helm then ported she would still be guilty oI neg
lgence not sooner Stopping iler ensae. The Wit
nesses from the steamer declare that from the tme
the ship light was seen up 10 the moment Of the
collision the bearing OF the snip In reference TO the
steamer did not change. According to tns tReory,
then, the steamer, at distance of three or four
mi es began sneering To leeward and actlay mace
a leeway of o mile before coming IA contact With
the snip during all winch time IL was apparent that
from the bearing OF the ships light that tac change
C course Ia the HttatucT W1S uOb Cn3uSiuk Ioa-
tive bearings OF the vessels Lnaer sucn crcum-
stances It was the duty Of the steamer,
as soon as It was noticed tnat sne was
not shaking or the liSnt by porting her
helm, to nave Stacked her speed and ascertained
the direction IN which the ship sailing anu acc
accordingly; instead which she kept up iuii speed
till the COLLISION inevitable 10 cannot ne doubted
that f tne steamer as tine distance OF q mile even,
had stopped her engine no COLLISION would have oc-
curreu. whether, then, II be considered that the
scotland failed ~ pay proper attention. TO the snip
until close upon her. or that having seen her at the
distance OF fnreo l0ur miles, she continued vt fuil
speed until the collision MISUNDERSTANDING In
the interval mile 10 the leeward Of her course,
with the snip's light oil the time bei ring within
point OF her port bow-it must he heid that the
steamer was guilty OF negligence. There only re-
mans, then, TO consider whether any fault y shown
on tue para Of the slip winch conduced T. lac col
lision. The principal fault charged upon her ~
that sne did nos ho.d her course but kept
away falling or TO tho southwark AMI down on the
steamship. La considering the evidence bearing
upon this point IL Is to be noticed tas NO wi.nes5
produced On behalf OF the steamer lesthes that he
saw any change whatever In the snip's course. aud,
as before remarked although the snip was display
ing the proper co.ored lights winch, III the language