The Fort George
| Decision Date | 12 December 1910 |
| Docket Number | 74. |
| Citation | 183 F. 731 |
| Parties | THE FORT GEORGE. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
W. S Montgomery and Roderick Terry, Jr., for the Sommers N. Smith.
Frederick M. Brown, for the Fort George.
Harry N. Abercrombie, for appellee.
Before LACOMBE, COXE, and NOYES, Circuit Judges.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the District Judge and need not be repeated here. He found the Smith liable for towing the Fort George, which drew 22 feet, into water only 22 1/2 feet deep. With but 6 inches between her keel and the bottom of the river, she refused to answer her helm and collided with the Vim which was anchored near the center of the river, engaged in deepening the channel. The tendency of vessels to steer badly, in such circumstances, is well known and the Smith was found at fault for proceeding in so dangerous a locality when all danger from bad steering would have been averted had she waited for the rising of the tide. We are in entire accord with this ruling. The tug knew or should have known every danger to be encountered in the navigation of the Delaware river. Her master was required to know the depth of the channel, the rise and fall of the tide, the dredging operations at Deep Water Range, the location of the three dredges there and all the usual dangers to be encountered from Philadelphia to the breakwater. It was for the master of the tug to decide whether he could take the barque to her destination in safety; if he could not do so, or if there were risk in the undertaking, he should not have attempted it. If the situation at Deep Water Range made the trip unusually hazardous-- and the presence of the three dredges anchored near the center of the river, together with the shallow water existing there, unquestionably had that effect-- he should have waited for the flood tide or procured the services of another tug to assist him. Clearly the Smith was negligent in permitting the barque to collide with the Vim, which was at anchor and helpless. After condemning the tug the District Judge says:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cox v. Dempsey
... ... 447, 113 N.E. 279; Shepard v ... Jacobs, 204 Mass. 110, 90 N.E. 392, 26 L.R.A. (N.S.) ... 449, 134 Am. St. Rep. 648; 63 C. J. 21; The Fort George, 183 ... F. 731; Societe Des Voiliers Francais v. Oregon R. & Nav ... Co., 178 F. 324; Densby v. Bartlett, 318 Ill ... 616, 149 N.E ... ...
-
Bisso v. Waterways Transportation Company, 15464.
... ... ground at Tampa, Florida, four days earlier, and it was this vessel, in this trim, in this shape, which The Kevin Moran undertook to tow, The Fort George, 2 Cir., 183 F. 731; The Inca, supra; The Algic, supra; Shasta Steamship Co. v. Great Lakes Towing Co., supra; The Severance, supra; ... ...
-
Tebbs v. Baker-Whiteley Towing Co.
... ... 7. Captain George C. Hinkleman, one of Baker-Whiteley's tug captains, was in charge of shifting the vessel on the morning of April 17. He boarded the Sands Point and ... In The Rebecca, 152 F.2d 607, 609 (4 Cir., 1945), the Court quoted from The Fort George, 183 F. 731, 732 (2 Cir., 1910), as follows: ... "We understand the rule to be, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, that when ... ...
-
Dow Chemical Company v. Tug Thomas Allen
... ... Supp. 1356 James B. Kemp, Jr., Phelps, Dunbar, Marks, Claverie & Sims, New Orleans, La., for Dow Chemical ... George A. Frilot, III, Lemle, Kelleher, Kohlmeyer, Matthews & Schumacher, New Orleans, La., for New York Underwriters ... Donald L. King, ... 156 (C.C.1886); McWilliams Transit Inc. v. The Gerd H. Henjes, 50 F.Supp. 159 (E.D.N.Y.1943) ... 31 The Fort George, 183 F. 731 (CA2-1910); Griffin On Collision, p. 414; Sturgis v. Boyer, 24 How. (65 U.S.) 110, 16 L.Ed. 591 (1871); The Stella, 278 F. 939 ... ...