Case Name: THE ELSIE. THE RED R
Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1923-04-12
Citations: 288 F. 575
Docket Number: No. 17441
Parties: THE ELSIE. THE RED R.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 288
Pages: 575–575

Head Matter:
THE ELSIE. THE RED R.
(District Court, N. D. California, Third Division.
April 12, 1923.)
No. 17441.
1. Telegraphs and telephones <§=»9 — Telegraph company may lay cable across bottom of river.
Rev. St. § 5263 (Comp. St. § 10072), authorizes a telegraph company to lay and maintain a. cable across a navigable river on the bottom, provided it does not obstruct navigation of the river by vessels properly navigated.
2. Shipping <§=>81 (I) — 'Tug and tow held liable for negligent injury to telegraph cable by dragging chain.
A tug, with a tow dragging a 22-fathom heavy anchor chain, held liable for the breaking, by the chain, of a telegraph cable laid across the bottom of a river of which the owners and their employees had knowledge.
©csoFor other eases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
In Admiralty. Suit by the Postal Telegraph Cable Company against the tug Elsie and barge Red R.
Decree for libelant.
Willard P. Smith and William B. Acton, both of San Erancisco, Cal., for libelant.
J. A. Olson, of San Francisco, Cal., for respondent and claimant.

Opinion:
BEAN, District Judge.
Libelant's cable was not an obstruction to navigation. It was laid at the bottom of the river, and there was ample water above for vessels navigating the stream in the ordinary way. The libelant, therefore, had a right to lay and maintain the cable. Act Cong. July 24, 1866; R. S. U. S. § 5263 (Comp. St. § 10072). Its location was plainly shown by signs at the cable crossings and was known by the respondents .and their employees.' It was in operation until the Elsie-and her tow dragging a heavy chain passed down the river, when it went out of commission. Investigation showed that it was broken in two. It did not part of its own accord. The only reasonable explanation from the testimony is that it was fouled by the anchor chain, which was being dragged by the barge. In my judgment it was negligence for respondent to navigate over and along that portion of the river in which the cable lay, a tug having in tow a barge loaded with 285 to 290 tons .of sand and dragging 22 fathoms of five-eighths anchor chain having at the outer end thereof a 6-foot bight fastened into the chain with an iron shackle.
Decree for libelant with usual order of reference to ascertain damages.