The Commodore
| Decision Date | 19 August 1887 |
| Citation | 40 F. 258 |
| Parties | INLAND & SEA-BOARD COASTING CO. v. THE COMMODORE. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Sharp & Hughes, for libelant.
Harmanson & Heath, for respondent.
On the morning of the 21st December, 1884, a steamer of the libelant, the Jane Moseley, after backing out from the cut which has been dug from the wharves at Cape Charles City to the channel of Cherrystone river, in rounding into the channel with bow to the southward, struck an anchor which was lying on the bottom where she passed, was sunk, and sustained damages, which are the subject of this libel. The Moseley had been pulled out through the cut from the wharf into the channel, by a tug, before running upon the anchor. The anchor had been originally used at or near that place by the master of the dredge Commodore, for holding the dredge fast while at work there; was afterwards left there, with a buoy attached to mark the southern side of the entrance of the cut into the channel; and had not been removed after the clump of piles now standing there had been put in that place. The anchor was lying under the water, with or without a buoy attached, when the Jane Moseley ran foul of it on the morning which has been mentioned.
The case turns upon two questions, viz.: (1) Whether the anchor was in a place to obstruct navigation; and, (2) if so whether the steam-dredge Commodore, is liable for the damage resulting from the accident in question.
The clump of piles now marking the southern side of the entrance of the cut from Cherrystone channel was placed there before the accident, and stood there at the time of it. Bowman, the engineer who had charge of the work at Cape Charles City places this clump in eight feet water on the map he has filed in the cause, and which I mark 'Map B.' He marks the spot where the anchor lay at the time of the accident in water of not less than eight feet, just north and north-west of the clump of piles. Indeed, the anchor must have been in nearly the position marked on Bowman's plat, in order to have been struck by the Moseley, which cleared or was clearing the clump of piles at the time of the accident. It is impossible that it could have been some distance within and south-east of the clump of piles in five feet water, as stated by Turner, and marked by him on the plat which he filed, and which I mark 'Map C.' If it had been where Turner locates it, the Mosely would have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Hydraulic Steam Dredge No. 1
... ... 502, ... decided by Judge Butler in 1894; The Alabama, 19 F. 544; id-, ... affirmed on appeal, 22 F. 449; Aitcheson v. The Endless ... Chain Dredge, 40 F. 254; Maltby v. Steam Derrick ... Boat, 3 Hughes, 477, Fed. Cas. No. 9,000; Coasting ... Co. v. The Commodore, 40 F. 258; The Atlantic, 53 F. 607 ... (citing The Alabama, supra, with approval). Admiralty ... jurisdiction has also been held in numerous cases of water ... crafts not actually engaged in transporting or carrying ... cargoes, but engaged in navigation and certain employments ... incident ... ...
-
McRae v. Bowers Dredging Co.
...v. One Covered Scow, 30 F. 269; Disbrow v. The Walsh Bros., 36 F. 607; Aitcheson v. The Endless Chain Dredge, 40 F. 253; Coasting Co. v. The Commodore, 40 F. 258; Seabrook v. Raft of Railroad Cross-Ties, 40 F. Bywater v. Raft of Piles, 42 F. 917; The City of Pittsburgh, 45 F. 699; The Progr......
-
Consolidated Coal Co. v. Knickerbocker Steam Towage Co.
... ... that the piles were placed between high and low water mark ... They constituted an obstruction to vessels navigating the ... creek at high water and such vessels were entitled to ... protection.' ... See ... Inland, etc., Coasting Co. v. The Commodore (D.C.) ... 40 F. 258; North American Dredging Co. v. Pacific Mail ... S.S. Co., 185 F. 698, 701, 107 C.C.A. 620 ... I ... think, too, that the Dredging Company cannot successfully ... maintain that vessels could have been towed in safety in some ... part of the channel. In Omslaer ... ...
-
North American Dredging Co. v. Pacific Mail S.S. Co.
... ... she is deemed an offending thing. Therefore a suit in rem for ... damages is maintainable. 19 Am. & Eng. Enc. of Law (2d Ed.) ... 1117; 1 Am. & Eng.Enc.of L. & Pr. 1285; The China, 7 Wall ... 53, 19 L.Ed. 67; The Tiber, Fed. Cas. No. 8,715; The ... Commodore (D.C.) 40 F. 258; The General De Sonis (D.C.) 179 ... F. 126. As in other cases for the recovery of damage for a ... tort, the burden rests upon the libelant to prove the extent ... of the injury and the amount of the actual loss incurred, as ... a direct or necessary consequence of the wrong ... ...