126 F. 564 | D. Minnesota | 1903
This action is brought by the petitioner, William P. Rend, owner of the steamer George G. Hadley, under the statute, to limit his personal liability for damages resulting from a collision between that steamer and the steamer Thomas Wilson, in Lake Superior, just outside the harbor of Duluth. The Hadley was appraised, and a bond for $23,998.23 was filed, with approved security, to abide the order of this court in determining the liability of the Hadley. This court, by its order, required all persons interested to intervene. The Pittsburgh Steamship Company, on its
Guy Fink was second cook on the steamer Wilson. He was an unmarried man, 21 years of age, and in good health. He was earning wages at the rate of $25 per month. His next of kin were his father, 58 years, old, and his mother, 48 years old. He had been in the habit of contributing to their support about $15 per month in the summer time, dr about $90 per annum.. William Roebuck was a fireman on board the Wilson. He was 19 years of age, unmarried, and in good health. He was earning $45 per month. His next of kin were his father and mother, each about 52 years old, to whose support he had been in the habit of contributing about $100 per annum. James McDougal was an oiler on the Wilson, 23 years of age, unmarried, and in good health. He had been earning his own living since he was 15 years old. His next of kin was his mother, 55 years old, to whose support he had been in the habit of contributing about $7 per month, or $84 per annum. He had also been clothing his younger brother, his mother’s child. James M. Fraser was a fireman on the Wilson, 24 years of age, unmarried, and in good health. He was
From the foregoing facts it appears to me that the collision was clearly due to the negligence of the Hadley, and that no- negligence is shown on the part of the' Wilson which contributed to producing the collision. Neither of the vessels gave the signal required by rule 5 of the pilot rules (Pilot Rules for the Great Fakes and Their Connecting and Tributary Waters as far East as Montreal, approved by the Secretary of the Treasury, 1902) when they came within half a mile of each other. At that time it was evident to each of the masters that, if the vessels kept on their then courses, they would pass each other at a safe and proper distance, between 400 and 500 feet. The Wilson was then sailing in an oblique direction to the course of the Hadley, their courses constantly diverging, and there would have been no possible chance of a collision if they had kept on their courses. The failure, therefore, to give this signal in no way contributed to producing the accident. The danger, began when the Hadley put her wheel hard astarboard. At that time the vessels were so near together that a change of course to port on the part of the Hadley was a hazardous and dangerous thing to do, and the Hadley was clearly at fault for starboarding her helm, when the vessels were so close together, without having first informed the Wilson of its intention so to do, and obtaining the latter’s consent to. such a change of course. When the Hadley first began to swing to port, the captain of the Wilson had a right to suppose, as he did suppose, that she was merely sheering from her course, having received no signal indicating an intention to. change her course, and he had a right also to suppose that her master would almost immediately put her upon her former course. He very wisely, however, and in the exercise of due care and prudence, ported his wheel, so as to make the distance between the two vessels greater. And even when the Hadley still continued to swing to port, the master of the Wilson had a right to suppose that shfe would port her helm, and try to. regain her former course. I think it was wise and prudent for the master of the Wilson to hard aport his wheel at that time, thus endeavoring to further increase the distance between the two vessels. Not until the two-blast signal was given by the Hadley could the master of the Wilson understand her intentions, and then it was too late for him. to attempt to perform the maneuver which the Hadley’s signal indicated he should perform. It would therefore have been clearly wrong for him to have answered her signal and attempted to pass upon the starboard side of the Hadley. To have done so would have made a collision practically certain.
Following the rule of damages laid down by the Supreme Court of the state of Minnesota in the case of Hutchins v. St. P., M. & M. R. R. Co., 44 Minn. 5, 46 N. W. 79, I find that Jacob Fink, administrator of the estate of Guy Fink, deceased, William C. McCarter, administrator of the estate of William Roebuck, deceased, M. H. McMahon, administrator of the estate of James McDougal, deceased, and Archie Campbell, administrator of the estate of John Campbell, deceased, are entitled to recover the sum of $3,500, each; and that Frank Hicks, administrator of the estate of James M. Fraser, deceased, is entitled to recover the sum of $5,000. ^ I find that the Pittsburgh Steamship Company is entitled to recover in its own behalf $152,605.60, and as trustee for the Oliver Iron Mining Company, owner of the cargo, $6,839.70, and as trustee for the surviving menu bers of the crew of the Wilson $510, the value of their personal effects lost.
I am of the opinion, and so hold, that the petitioner is entitled to a decree limiting his personal liability to the appraised value of the Hadley, as represented by the bond filed herein.
Holding, then, as I do, that the Hadley was solely at fault, the proceeds of the bond to abide the decree of the court herein must be applied to the payment of the above amounts found for the various parties pro rata.
Ret decree be entered accordingly.