Morten v. Five Canal-Boats

• Decision Date: 13 July 1885
• Citation: 24 F. 500
• Parties: MORTEN v. FIVE CANAL-BOATS.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

24 F. 500

MORTEN v. FIVE CANAL-BOATS.

United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

July 13, 1885

Hyland & Zabriskie, for libelant.

Frank L. Hall, for respondent.

NIXON J.

This suit is brought to recover damages arising from a collision between the fishing sloop Flash, of which the libelant is owner, and five canal-boats, the property of the Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Company, of which corporation the claimants are receivers.

It appears that on the sixth of December, 1884, the Flash was bound up the North river, and, being overtaken by a storm anchored off a coal-pier at Jersey City about sundown; that about the time of casting her anchor she was notified by the employes on the pier that she would be in the way of the boats coming for coal and water; that, in order to get out of the way, leaving the anchor where it was first cast, not far from the river end of the coal-pier, they began to pay out the cable. The wind was strong from the south-east, blowing the sloop into the slip between the coal-pier on the south and the dock of the New Jersey Central Railroad Company on the north, until she was floating within about 15 feet of the said dock, her cable stretching across the slip 80 fathoms or more to the anchor. The slip was less than 400 feet in width bounded on the northern side by the wharf, or dock, of the said railroad company. This was 700 or 800 feet in length, at the lower end of which, next to the river, the five canal-boats were moored,-- fastened together, with their bows towards the river,-- three of them (Nos. 71, 70, and 7) in front, and the remaining two (Nos. 6 and 31) in their rear. The libelant's sloop was held by her anchor and cable stretching diagonally across the slip, a short distance behind the last-named boats.

As the wind increased later in the evening, the canal-boats were exposed to the full force of the gale across the river, and found themselves in an unsafe and dangerous position. At about 9 o'clock P.M. they were unloosed from the dock, in order to go further into the slip, whither they were carried when unfastened by the force of the wind. In this movement they in some way got entangled with the cable of the sloop and were brought into collision with her, doing her considerable injury.

The libelant claims that the accident was caused solely by the negligence, mismanagement, and bad navigation of the canal-boats. The respondents reply that the...