Prinz Oskar

216 F. 233, 1914 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1581
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedJuly 16, 1914
DocketNo. 10
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 216 F. 233 (Prinz Oskar) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Prinz Oskar, 216 F. 233, 1914 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1581 (E.D. Pa. 1914).

Opinion

THOMPSON, District Judge.

[1] The schooner City of Georgetown was a four-masted American sailing vessel 168 feet in length, of 506 tons net burden, and at the time of the collision was bound on a voyage from New York City to Savannah, Ga., loaded with a cargo of salt in hulk. The Steamer Prinz Oskar was a German steamer owned by the Hamburg-American Line, 403 feet in length, with a gross tonnage of 6,026 tons, and at the time of the collision was bound on a voyage from Philadelphia to Hamburg, with general cargo and passengers. The schooner had on hoard a crew of eight men all told, consisting* of master, mate, engineer, steward, and four able seamen. On [234]*234February 1, 1913, from 8 p. m. to 12 midnight, she was in charge of her master, and was proceeding, on her starboard tack, her course being southwest, with-the wind blowing from northwest to west northwest. She had her three lower sails, consisting of foresail, mainsail, and miz-zensail set, as'well as her forestaysail and jib. Shortly after 12 midnight the watch was changed, the captain went below, and the mate took charge. An able seaman was stationed on the extreme forward part of the deck near the stem as lookout, and an able seaman was in .the wheelhouse near the stern, at her wheel, steering her in accordance with the orders of the mate. The southwest course was continued upon the starboard tack with the wind blowing in the same direction. The weather was clear, the night dark, with starlight. When in the vicinity of Five Fathom Light ship those on board the schooner observed the masthead lights of a vessel, which afterwards proved to be the Prinz Oskar, proceeding on a course crossing the course of the schooner. Subsequently the red side light or port light of the Prinz Oskar was observed, bearing off the starboard bow of the schooner, and continued to be observed by the schooner and those in charge of her until just before the collision occurred. The schooner held her course, and when it was seen that the steamer continued to approach and was getting near the schooner, the mate of the schooner took an electric torch and cast the light upon the sails of the schooner, with the intention of attracting the steamer’s attention to it. The schooner continued to hold her course and .speed, the Prinz Oskar held her course without changing or checking her speed, and the vessels collided. ' The port bow of the steamer and the forward end of the schooner came into contact at right angles, whereby the forward, end of the schooner was carried away and a hole made in the plating of the Prinz Oskar, leaving in the steamer both the schooner’s anchors. Those on board the schooner took to the boats, and the schooner almost immediately sank.

The principal points of contention in the case are as to whether the, schooner was carrying her proper lights, as to whether the steamship had a competent lookout properly placed, and as to whether she had competent officers in charge of the deck attending to their duties. It is claimed on the part of the steamship that the schooner was showing no side lights, although there was due diligence on the part of the steamship to observe lights of approaching vessels, and that the schooner contributed to the collision by her own negligence in that, finding the collision was inevitable, those in charge of her did not port her helm and throw her up to the wind, and did not exhibit a flare-up light. The evidence as to the lights upon the schooner is conflicting. The captain, mate, and lookout all testified that the lights were properly set and brightly burning. The captain testified from his knowledge of the facts when he went below about 12 midnight, the mate, from an examination made shortly prior to the collision, and the lookout, also from his observation just prior to that time. The Prinz Oskar was in charge of her second and third, officers, and had a lookout in her crow’s nest, and no other lookout, and the quartermaster was at the wheel. According to the testimony of the Prinz Oskar’s second officer, the. crow’s nest was located from 16 to 20 meters (52 to 65 feet) from the bridge and about [235]*23530 meters (about 98 feet) from the stem. The crow’s nest was 19 to 20 meters (61 to 65 feet) above the deck, and about 35 meters (81 feet) above the water. The captain was in the chartroom, and had instructed the officers upon the bridge to pass one-half mile distant from Five Fathom Light, and to report when the light was directly abeam the vessel. The Prinz Oskar had discharged her pilot shortly before midnight, and her voyage began with the Five Fathom Light. 'The collision occurred at 12:55. It appears from the evidence that the Five Fathom Light was passed at 12:49 p. in., and at that time the captain came out on the bridge and at the same time the lookout reported a steamer’s lights about four points on the starboard bow and these lights were seen by all of the officers in charge. After the light ship came abeam, the captain ordered the course changed two points. This order was communicated through the third officer to the second officer and by him to the engineer whose log shows the beginning of the voyage and the new course at 12:52, just three minutes before the collision. Meanwhile the captain had returned to the chartroom. The duty of the third officer was to put the course on the log for which purpose he would have to go on top of the wheelhouse. About the time of passing the light ship, the lookout saw the flare of the white light on the port bow and reported it to the officers on the bridge. To this report he received no reply. The white light continued for a period, then disappeared for an interval and was again seen by the lookout, who again reported it to the officers, but received no reply. The lookout then saw a green light on the port bow and reported “light on the port bow,” and had barely reported the light when the collision occurred. The second officer testifies that he was looking out for lights or vessels and saw nothing until about a minute before the collision, when he saw a dark object ahead, which proved to be the schooner. The third officer was on top of the wheelhouse observing the standard compass. He first saw the dark object about 2 or 2% points on the port bow of the steamer at a time, which appears to have been about a minute before the collision. He did not make any report of this to the second officer until within 10 seconds of the collision. He then called out that they would not go clear. At the time he saw the vessel he says she was less than a quarter of a mile from the steamer. Just before the collision the captain came up on the bridge, aiid at that time he and the second and third officers all saw a green light on the schooner. According to the second officer, this did not differ from the green lights ordinarily shown on schooners, and "that seemed to be the opinion of the third officer, while to the captain, whose eyes were momentarily blinded by the darkness after the light of the chartroom, the light seemed to be faint. After the third officer called that they would not go clear, the second officer ordered the quartermaster to “hard astarboard,” which, according to the method of giving orders upGn German vessels, would put the vessel to starboard. Ihe second officer telephoned to the engineer, and both engines were reversed at practically the same time. Up to 12:55, the time of the collision, the steamer’s engines were running full speed ahead, and at that time, as appears by the engine room log, both engines were put full speed astern.

[236]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

The Buenos Aires
5 F.2d 425 (Second Circuit, 1924)
The Windrush
286 F. 251 (S.D. New York, 1922)
The Sagamore
247 F. 743 (First Circuit, 1917)
The Prinz Oskar
219 F. 483 (Third Circuit, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
216 F. 233, 1914 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1581, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prinz-oskar-paed-1914.