Societe des Voiliers Francais v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co.
Decision Date | 21 March 1910 |
Docket Number | 4,988. |
Parties | SOCIETE DES VOILIERS FRANCAIS v. OREGON R. & NAV. CO. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Oregon |
W. C Bristol, for libelant.
W. W Cotton, Arthur C. Spencer, James G. Wilson, and Ralph E Moody, for respondent.
The French bark Marthe Roux, being loaded and ready for the sea was on December 24, 1906, moored at Montgomery Dock No. 2, her bowsprit downstream. Previous to her departure it was desired that she should be taken to anchor instream, and the respondent was employed to make the removal. Capt. Pearson was placed in charge of the work. He utilized two tugs for the purpose-- the Oklahoma and the Henderson. The Oklahoma, with bow downstream, was made fast to the port quarter, and the Henderson, with bow upstream, to the port bow of the Marthe Roux. The river was at freshet at the time, and some drift was observed to be running. Owing to this condition of the water, although the Marthe Roux was of the smaller type of vessels, being about 1,600 tons net register, it was deemed expedient to use two tugs for the service. Pearson's purpose was to take the vessel to anchor a short distance upstream, and in doing this he designed to navigate her diagonally across the stream to a point near where the Albina ferry lands on the west side, and thence to place of anchorage still above that point. Immediately above Montgomery dock was an open space, and above this space was a sand dock provided with a crane for handling merchandise. A large scow lay immediately in front of the sand dock loaded with wood. By reason of these conditions, it became necessary to navigate the vessel somewhat instream from the start, so as to pass the scow. In other words, by reason of the sand dock and the scow, it was impracticable to navigate the Marthe Roux directly upstream at once along the margin of the stream on the east side. The mate, Jean Louis Quero, was in charge of the Marthe Roux at the time, the captain being ashore. Pearson testifies that when ready to move he ordered the mate to let go, and proceeded to swing the ship away from the docks, but that the jib boom caught inside of the jib boom of another ship lying in front of her, and that it was by an accident that he got her back to the dock so as to clear the forward ship; that he then pulled away from the dock, proceeding upstream slowly. Quoting the language of the witness:
Speaking again of the drift, witness says:
'It was an immense body of sticks and trees and logs and timbers, all characters of stuff, even houseboats and such old trash that would pile up on a bank, and when the high water come it would come off. * * * This was nearly solid; there was a thin place here and there through it.'
Speaking further as to the direction the vessel was navigated, the witness continued:
The mate testifies that in getting the ship away from the dock Pearson steered at an angle of 45 degrees with the stream, so as to pass the sand dock and scow; that, after clearing them, he tried to head the vessel upstream again, but was unable to do so; that he succeeded slightly, but the current was so violent that he was driven back; that when he saw the conditions got worse--seeing that the barge was lying there, and knowing that something had to happen, and seeing that there was plenty of space, when he reached a certain point in his effort to head upstream again and did not succeed, to reverse the machinery and take the vessel down in the current of the river-- instead of doing what any other mariner would have done, he kept on going across the river, and, when the vessel came in proximity with the dredge, he let go the tugs; whereupon witness dropped the port anchor of the Marthe Roux, and right away she came into collision by her port bow, about the main hatch, on the after starboard quarter of the dredge, and the current carried her port quarter against a scow lying to the rear and to the west of the dredge. In the opinion of the witness, the vessel would have crushed the dredge entirely had he not let go the anchor when he did. And he further states that the chain was not tight when he hit the dredge, but that nevertheless the shock was minimized by the action of the anchor. There was lying in proximity to the dredge the Eugene Schneider, a vessel moored to the dock, by the side of which, instream, were two scows, the dredge lying somewhat further instream than any of these craft. Subsequently the dredge was taken away downstream, the scows removed, and the Marthe Roux made fast alongside the Schneider.
The narratives of these two witnesses comprise the salient features of the testimony in the case relative to the facts leading up to the collision. The libelant claims that, upon the testimony thus adduced, it is entitled to damages, and the respondent insists to the contrary.
In a case like this, the tug becomes the dominant mind. It supplies the propelling force which is to carry the tow to its destination. The tow is essentially inanimate, without mind to direct its maneuvers, or power to carry them on. All therefore, depends upon the tug for direction and for navigation. It is true that the officer upon the tow may, and often does, assist in maneuvers, but he is under the direction of the navigating officer upon the tug, and subject to his orders. The tug does not become a freighter for the transportation of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cox v. Dempsey
... ... J. 21; The Fort George, 183 ... F. 731; Societe Des Voiliers Francais v. Oregon R. & Nav ... Co., 178 F ... ...
-
Moore-McCormack Lines v. The Esso Camden
...damages on the basis of the average earnings of a river vessel on voyages for the preceding five years. Societe Des Voiliers Francais v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co., D.C.Or., 178 F. 324, looked to its average net earnings for five 333-334. To compute detention damages for an ocean going vessel, th......
- The Marie Palmer
-
Grays Harbor County v. The Brimanger
...employed only as the power to move the ship. The pilot and the tugs were all servants of the ship; nor was this compulsory pilotage. The Oregon, supra. The master did not command to the pilot. The St. Charles, supra. Under such circumstances, the ship was in charge of the operation. Hence, ......