Boston Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States
| Decision Date | 09 September 1925 |
| Docket Number | No. 1826.,1826. |
| Citation | 7 F.2d 278 |
| Parties | BOSTON SAND & GRAVEL CO. v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit |
Foye M. Murphy and Edward E. Blodgett, both of Boston, Mass. (Blodgett, Jones, Burnham & Bingham, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellant.
Laurence Curtis, 2d, of Boston, Mass. (Harold P. Williams, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for the United States.
Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from a decree of the federal District Court for Massachusetts in an admiralty proceeding brought by the Boston Sand & Gravel Company, the owner of the steamer Cornelia, against the United States, under a special act of Congress approved May 15, 1922 (42 Stat. 1590), to recover damages sustained by the Cornelia in collision with the destroyer Bell in the dredged channel of Broad Sound at the entrance to Boston Harbor, August 9, 1918.
The court below entered a decree dismissing the bill, and the libelant appealed.
The Cornelia was a steam sand lighter, 130 feet long and 39.5 feet beam. At the time of the collision she was proceeding light from Boston to Scituate, at about 4½ knots, to obtain a cargo of sand and gravel. There was a thick fog, restricting one's view to from 50 to 75 yards. The Bell was 314 feet long and 31 feet in width. Her bridge was 225 feet from her stern, and she was painted in camouflage colors.
On the morning in question both vessels were proceeding out of the harbor, intending to go through the north channel. At that time, for war purposes, a steel submarine net, about 500 feet long, having a gate 100 feet wide, had been stretched across this channel. The gate swung on buoys at the left side of the channel as one passed out to sea. In the daytime it was kept open, being moored at right angles to the net. The net and gate were submerged, but their location was marked by buoys. A vessel desiring to go out of the harbor was required to receive permission from a station ship anchored off Deer Island Light, about a mile from the net.
As the vessels approached Deer Island Light, the Bell passed the Cornelia on her starboard side some 150 feet distant, and obtained permission to go through the net a few minutes before the Cornelia did. When the Bell passed the Cornelia, the fog had lifted somewhat, and each knew and appreciated that the other was outward bound through the net, and the Bell was aware that the Cornelia was proceeding at a slightly slower speed than she was. When the Bell came within sight of the net the gate appeared to be closed, and her officers caused her engines to be reversed. The Bell stopped, and remained so for two minutes, when her lookout on the bridge sighted the Cornelia. About three minutes...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
THE WRIGHT
...815; 3 So.Calif.L.Rev. 66. In that case, however, there was no award against the United States, even though the damages were divided (1 Cir., 7 F.2d 278; cf. D.C. Mass., 16 F.2d 643), for the claimant had filed no cross-libel. Thereafter the Court held in United States v. Commonwealth & Dom......
-
Sun Oil Company v. M/V WARTENFELS
...Nassau Barge Corp. v. The Fred B. Dalzell, 180 F.2d 560 (2d Cir. 1950); Corsair, 37 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1930); Boston Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 7 F.2d 278 (1st Cir. 1925). In general, an overtaken vessel has the right to assume that the overtaking vessel will keep clear absent any su......
-
Boston Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States
...Cornelia, on August 9, 1918, in Broad Sound Channel in Boston Harbor. On appeal from a finding in favor of the government, this court held (7 F.2d 278) both vessels at fault and that the damages to the vessels should be divided. On proceedings pursuant to the mandate, the court below, affir......
-
United States v. Boston Sand & Gravel Co., 2170.
...by a collision on August 9, 1918, between the government destroyer Bell and the steam lighter Cornelia, under the mandate of this court (7 F.2d 278), holding that both vessels were at fault and that the damages should be divided. The government now complains that the commissioner and the co......