The Drew

• Decision Date: 11 June 1888
• Citation: 35 F. 789
• Parties: THE DREW. [1] v. THE DREW. McDONALD
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

35 F. 789

THE DREW. ^[1]

McDONALD v. THE DREW.

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

June 11, 1888

Goodrich Deady & Goodrich, for libelant.

W. P Prentice, for claimant.

BROWN J.

At about half past 4 o'clock in the morning of November 16 1887, during a violent gale from the north-west, the libelant's schooner Robert Knapp, lying at anchor about half a mile below Caldwell's point, in the Hudson river was run into by the steamer Drew, on her trip from Albany to New York. This libel was filed to recover the damages.

Many witnesses on behalf of the claimant insist that the schooner was lying in the usual track of the steamer, and that she exhibited no anchor light, so that she was not seen until the Drew was within 75 or 100 feet of her, when she was disclosed by the illumination of the Drew's head-light, and collision was inevitable. For the libelant it is contended that she was at anchor to the westward of the usual course of steamers, and that she had a good light burning up to the moment of collision. At Caldwell's point there is a sharp bend in the river of at least six points. Above the point the general course is downward about S.E. by S.; below the point, about S.W. by S. Immediately below the point the line of the shore runs, according to the map submitted, about W. by S. for more than half a mile, and then about S.W., forming a kind of bay below the point, in and below which is a common anchorage ground, and a convenient shelter against violent winds from the west and the north-west. The schooner had come to anchor there on account of threatening weather, during the afternoon previous, a little below Caldwell's dock, which is about half a mile below the point. The master testified that he anchored first about 300 feet from the shore; that at 1 o'clock at night the wind blowing heavy, all hands were called, and 30 fathoms more of chain given to the anchor, and an additional anchor dropped with 15 fathoms of chain; and at the same time the light, attached to a lanyard suspended from the fore-rigging and about 15 feet above deck, was trimmed and renewed. The captain was up and down all night. Just before the collision he was looking to the southward, astern, to take the range of some objects in order to determine whether the schooner was dragging her anchor. He did not hear the Drew's approach until she was close aboard. He says that the light was extinguished by the shock of the blow, and that immediately after the Drew had passed without stopping, he took down the lantern, found it still hot, with the wick red, the glass cracked, and a few small holes broken through it. At about 2 o'clock at night the tug-boat W. E. Street came to the landing, and anchored between the shore and the Knapp. Her pilot testified that the Knapp's light was then shining brightly. About half an hour afterwards the tug Osceola also came to anchor just above the W. E. Street, and in coming in, her tow just escaped collision with the Knapp. Her captain and pilot both testify positively that there was no light at that time on the Knapp. The testimony of the lookout on the Drew was not taken in consequence of his illness. Her captain and three quartermasters, who were in the wheel-house, all testify that no light on the Knapp was visible, and that, if there had been, it would have been seen, and the Knapp easily avoided. Soon after the collision the lamp was relighted and hung up; but the wind blew out the light. The lantern was produced on the trial, showing a crack in the glass and some small holes broken in it, which the master testifies was done by the collision.

There is a great difficulty in dealing satisfactorily with such contradictory testimony in regard to the Knapp's light. But where there is a concurrence of many persons, who testify that no light was visible; who were in a position to see it if it was visible; whose interest and duty and safety were involved in observing it; and who, as in this case, did see other lights nearer the shore, but did not see the light in...