John Walsh, Edward Walsh, and Dickinson Morehead, Owners of the Steamboat Iowa, Appellants v. Patrick Rogers, Thomas Sherlock, John Simmons, Edward Montgomery, John Baker, and Anshute, Claimants of the Steamboat Declaration, Her Tackle, Apparel and Furniture

• Decision Date: 01 December 1851
• Citation: 13 How. 283,14 L.Ed. 147,54 U.S. 283
• Parties: JOHN WALSH, EDWARD WALSH, AND DICKINSON B. MOREHEAD, OWNERS OF THE STEAMBOAT IOWA, APPELLANTS, v. PATRICK ROGERS, THOMAS SHERLOCK, JOHN B. SIMMONS, EDWARD MONTGOMERY, JOHN W. BAKER, AND P. A. ANSHUTE, CLAIMANTS OF THE STEAMBOAT DECLARATION, HER TACKLE, APPAREL, AND FURNITURE
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

54 U.S. 283

13 How. 283

14 L.Ed. 147

JOHN WALSH, EDWARD WALSH, AND DICKINSON B. MOREHEAD, OWNERS OF THE STEAMBOAT IOWA, APPELLANTS, v. PATRICK ROGERS, THOMAS SHERLOCK, JOHN B. SIMMONS, EDWARD MONTGOMERY, JOHN W. BAKER, AND P. A. ANSHUTE,

CLAIMANTS OF THE STEAMBOAT DECLARATION, HER TACKLE,

APPAREL, AND FURNITURE.

December Term, 1851

THIS was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

The libel was filed by the appellants, in the District Court, where they obtained a decree on the 1st May, 1848, for $18,500 and costs. An appeal was taken to the Circuit Court.

On the 19th of February, 1850, the cause was heard finally in the Circuit Court, and upon consideration of all the testimony, as well that considered by the District Court, as the testimony subsequently taken, and arguments of counsel, the judgment of the District Court was declared to be erroneous, was ordered to be reversed and annulled, and the libel to be dismissed at the costs of the appellants.

The libellants then appealed to this court

It was argued by Mr. Fendall and Mr. Chilton, for the appellants, and Mr. Badger, for the appellees.

The questions were exclusively those of fact and evidence, as will be seen by a reference to the opinion of the court. No question of law was raised in the case.

Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court.

This case presents no question of law for our decision. As is usual in cases of collision, each party makes out a good case by the testimony of the pilot and crew of his own boat. This collision occurred, also, after night; and although the night was not very dark, the most calm spectator, on such occasions, is subject to great illusions as to the motion and position of the respective vessels. The attention of passengers is also seldom given to the subject until their fears are excited; and the danger to life and property threatened by the sudden shock of the collision, generally renders them incapable of a clear apprehension of what passes at the time, or a distinct recollection of what preceded the event. The pilot and crew of each boat feel bound to exonerate themselves from blame, and consequently cannot be expected to give a very candid statement of the facts. In such cases the oral examination of witnesses before the court, with a stringent cross-examination by skilful counsel, is almost the only method of eliciting truth from such sources. This may be done in the District Court, and sometimes, possibly, on appeal to the Circuit Court. But such a course of sifting out the truth in doubtful cases cannot be pursued here. We are disposed, therefore, to require that the appellant should be held to make out a pretty clear case of mistake in the court below, before he should expect a reversal of their judgment. Raising a doubt on contested facts, is not sufficient for the action of this court. An appeal should not be a mere speculation on chances.

It is admitted in this case, that if the story told by the libellants' witnesses is true, they are entitled to recover the value of their boat. It is admitted, also, that if the facts testified by the respondents' witnesses are true, the appellants ought not to recover. Their several statements cannot be reconciled; and one or the other of them must be false in all its material allegations.

The libellants' witnesses testify: That on the 1st of October, 1847, about 8 o'clock in the evening, the steamboat Iowa was ascending the River Mississippi, above Morgan's Bend, on a voyage from New Orleans to St. Louis. That she had previously landed a passenger about two miles below the place of collision, on the right bank of the river. That she then crossed the river to the left bank, and was proceeding in her proper place, close to the shore, (from ten to twenty-five feet from it.) That the Declaration was seen coming down the river towards the Iowa. That the Iowa stopped her engine a minute before the collision. The Declaration turned towards the left bank, and ran quartering into the Iowa, driving her, by force of the collision, against the shore, where she sunk immediately, and so suddenly, that one of the passengers was drowned in his berth. In support of this statement, the pilot, the captain, fifteen of the crew, and five passengers, have testified. They are supported, also, by two witnesses on the right bank, who testified that the Iowa crossed the river immediately after letting out the passengers. Without criticizing these depositions, as to the probability of the facts stated, or the consistency of each with itself and the others, we shall merely state the opportunity which they respectively had, by their own statements, for...