The New York herald., 1870-03-30
BRO0ALYf COURTS.
United STATES DISTRICT couar-N AoNlaALTY.
CollisiOu-improper Anchoring-DecisiOn BY
judge Benedict.

CollisiOn-iinprOper AnchOring-DecisiOn BY
Judge Benedict.
Ran10ndo Scotto as. The snip queen of the East
ana Daniel G. Bacon as the Brig Calspso.-The ne
cessty OF speedy decision IN this case leads me to
commence at once and briefly the result OF my ex-
animation into the evidence which has been
produced before me. II appears quite plainly
from the evidence that there was neg
ligent management on board the ship IN
permitting her to drag as she did, ow
Ing doubtless to the circumstance that the
master was on shore. the chief mate or duty, aud
the second mate alone in command. Accordingly,
If, as the result of such negligence, the ship was
placed in dangerous proximity TO other vessels at
anchor in the harbor, she must De held responsible
tlon. There Is no dispute upon the evidence tnat
the brig was anchored In u proper place,
e were oy ner TO
that those en- board OF her were watchfu and when
the snip was seen dragging towards them
pass in saety, and that when upon the turn OF the
tide the ship swung down upon the brig, everything
possible to be done on the part OF the brig to avoid
damage was done. / incline to believe the state.
ment OF those on hoard the brig, tnat the ship In
dragging past them caught their chains and by rea.
son OF that enlargement the brig was started
toward the SHIP after sue had brought up under tne
brig's stern The manner In which the snip is
stated TO have passed the brig does not appear
to improbable when the currents OF the locality.
the winds ana the tides, the weight OF the snip ana
the nature Of the bottom are COnslueTeu. NoT uoes
IL appear impossible that the snips cham ana anchor
should have become entangleu with those OF the
brig, as is claimed on her part certainly the I'M.
possibility Is not SO manifest as to require me
10 hold In the face OF the positive denial OF eight
witnesses from the brig, tnal the briggs. chain
was paid out after the snip brought up
astern and the vessels by that means brought
nearer to each other II 1t be true then, that
when the ship ceased to drag she was under the
stern OF the brig with her chain entangled with that
OF the brig, the berth waY soul, and the damages
which ensued when The vessels came together upon
the turn OF the tide mnst be held be the resus OF
the negligence which placed the ship In that position.
Furthermore, am OF the opinion that the ship would
be responsible II the facts were as claimed IN
her behalf upon the hearing. Under the ad.
mitted circumstances, the brig having selected
a proper place OF anchorage was entitled
to room to swing in safety upon as large scope Of
chain as might be necessary TO prevent her from
dragging, and II to AVOID dragging she was COM
peed to pay out chain after the snip had brought up
under her stern. and when nearer approach IN.
volved danger-tne danger OF collision upon them OF
the tide-the damages accrvng from such proximity
could not be chargeable to the brig as result, ,
Ing from any neglect on her part, but must be held
to have arisen from that neglect which per-
mitted this large ship to drag at single anchor SO
long distance and placed her under the stern OF
the brig when few fatnoms change IN the POSITION