The Josephine B.

• Decision Date: 13 November 1893
• Citation: 58 F. 813
• Parties: THE JOSEPHINE B. v. THE JOSEPHINE B. and THE ARROW. THE ARROW. THE MAUD. WOODBERRY et al. McALLISTER v. THE ARROW and THE MAUD.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

58 F. 813

THE JOSEPHINE B. THE ARROW. THE MAUD. WOODBERRY et al. v. THE JOSEPHINE B. and THE ARROW.

McALLISTER v. THE ARROW and THE MAUD.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

November 13, 1893

W. W Goodrich, for the Maud.

J. A Hyland, for the Josephine B.

A. B Stewart, for the Arrow.

Before WALLACE, LACOMBE, and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges.

LACOMBE Circuit Judge.

When the master of the lighter first sighted the tug the former was just below Negro Point, and the latter had just come around Hallett's Point, both, as he says, near the center of the channel. The Northam, a large passenger steamboat bound for New Haven, came around Hallett's Point immediately after the Arrow and Maud, and overtook them on their starboard side, keeping well over to the Long Island shore. The Josephine B. passed to the starboard side of the Arrow and the port side of the Northam, and had barely cleared the latter, when she came in collision with the Maud, which was towing on a hawser 250 feet long. According to the statement of the master of the Josephine B., the Northam was as close to the Long Island shore as she could get, and the distance between her course and that of the tug and tow was from 100 to 200 feet. He further testified that the width of the channel there was about 900 feet. The only faults charged in the several pleadings are these:

Against the Josephine B.: (1) That she attempted to pass the tow starboard to starboard, instead of port to port; (2) that she gave no proper signal in answer to the signal of the Arrow; (3) that she did not slow, stop, or back in time to avoid the collision or take some other steps to avoid the collision.

As to the Arrow: (4) That she did not slow, stop, or back in time to avoid the collision; (5) that she did not regard the fact that the Northam was overtaking her in a place where navigation is difficult and dangerous; (6) that she went ahead before receiving a signal from the Josephine B.; (7) that she did not keep to the north, or Ward's Island, side of the river; (8) that she undertook to tow the schooner on a hawser about 300 feet long through Hell Gate.

As to the Maud: (9) That she did not keep proper lookout; (10) that she did not steer directly after the tug; (11) that she did not starboard her wheel before collision.

The fifth of these charges of fault was not discussed upon the argument, as the rule of the supervising inspectors upon which it was predicated was not in the record, nor apparently proved before the district court.

The neglect of appellants to present to this court the chart which was in evidence in the district court makes it impossible to determine as accurately as the district judge could the exact location of the collision, the position of the vessels when sighting each other, and their subsequent movements. All the important witnesses testified with this chart before them, carefully marking upon it courses and positions, which, as the record shows, were noted by letters or symbols. Without the chart, much of their testimony is unintelligible. The statements that the collision took place at the 'point marked 'B," or that one or other of the vessels was at the time of sighting at the points marked 'W' or 'J,' or what not, might as well be left out of the record altogether, if they are not accompanied with the map which alone identifies them.

It is beyond dispute, however,...