Smith v. The Monmouth

44 F. 809, 1891 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 9, 1891·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Brown, J.

The above libels were filed, to recover for damages sustained by the canal-boat William Doran and the canal-boat Sarah, caused by the displacement waves from the steam-boat Monmouth in the forenoon of July 14,1890, while she was making her trip from Sandy Hook to pier No. 8, North river. The canal-boats were part of a fleet of about 30 boats, in tiers of 4 each, lashed together in the usual way, and coming up the bay from South Amboy to New York in tow of the steam-tug Raritan and three other helpers, upon hawsers about 500 feet long. The libelants’ boats were the inside boats of the third tier. The tow was making its way slowly against the first of the ebb-tide, at the rate of not over a mile or a mile and a half an hour; and at the time of the accident it was a little way to the westward of the Bell or black buoy, and about three-fourths of a mile to the southward of Fort William, heading for the North river. The Monmouth is one of three large and swift passenger steamers built for speed, to make close connections with the railroad trains at Sandy Hook in the transportation of passengers to and from New York. Each steamer makes'three round trips daily. The passengers in 1890 were about 400,000; an increase of 110,000 above the number for 1889, due to the better service and quicker time. The displacement waves of these steamers, which make their trips of about 20 miles in a few minutes over an hour, is well known to be dangerous to small boats, if the steamers pass near them and at full speed. Their usual practice has been to slow when coming near small craft or tows of this character, or t;o sheer away from them, if they lie too near their course. On this trip, the tow was not observed by any of the officers or seamen of the Monmouth, and they testified that any tow near enough to be likely to suffer damage would have been noticed. The other witnesses, while they differ considerably in the estimates or the data they give as to the distance at which the Monmouth passed them to the westward, mostly estimate her as not more than 600 or 700 feet distant; the extremes varying from one-half to twice that distance. There is no doubt that the Monmouth, when passing the tow, was going at least at her usual speed of about 20 miles an hour, and that her displacement waves, which ran quartering astern at an angle of about four points, were such as to cause the forward tier of the tow, attached by four hawsers to the tugs, to break loose from the rest of the tow to which they were lashed. The boats were described by the witnesses as jumping up on each other, and pounding each other, while the forward tier was submerged by the first wave. The Doran was broken in her bow, and received some injuries astern, causing her to sink in a few minutes. The Sarah was also damaged. Another tow, a short distance ahead'of this, also received some [811] injisry. According to the defendants’ evidence, the swells of various steamers at the dock at the Narrows were found upon measurement to be of the following height: Of the Monmouth, passing three-eighths of a mile distant, 17 inches; of the Sandy Hook, three-eighths mile distant, 18 inches; of a German steamer, one-half mile distant, 24 inches; of an English steamer, the same. This, however, was in very deep water. For the steamer, it is conten tied that she was pursuing her usual course, heading for pier 1, North river, and going a little nearer to the Statue of liberty than to the Bell buoy. This would make her to have passed more than 2,000 feet distant from-the tow, if the latter was within 500 feet of the Bell buoy, as the witnesses allege.

It has been urged with great ability and force by the counsel in this case, as well as in the case of The Majestic, post, 813, that such a distance from tows or other small craft is sufficient, and more than sufficient, to answer all the legal obligations of steamers in passing other boats; that though the rivers and harbors are a common highway for all, in which all have an equal right, yet this very equality of privilege excludes such methods of making up and navigating tows as impose unreasonable restrictions or obstacles in the way of passenger transportation; that in the increase of commerce, the growth of population, and the needs of passenger service, quick dispatch, such as the Sandy Hook boats offer, is an indispensable necessity; that the waves of those steamers, 1,000 feet from the steamers, are no greater than those made by ordinary gales; that tows like the present could not bear such ordinary waves from storms, and would be deemed unseaworthy to encounter them; that sometimes two of such tows in succession, as in this case, stretch over nearly half a mile, and proceed at so slow a pace as to become unreasonable obstructions; and that’ it is unreasonable that such a raft of boats, unseaworthy in their character and in their make-up as a mass, should he held entitled to such privileges as to preclude a fast passenger service, and thus virtually to monopolize the use of a common highway of commerce, and to prevent its beneficial enjoyment by the public in a rapid passenger traffic; that, if such tows also serve the public good in the form of cheaper transportation of some of the necessaries of daily life, they may he, and should be, modified in their make-up, in the character of the boats used, and in the power and speed of the tugs that hard them, so as to become reasonably compatible with the other general needs of the public.

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

Smith v. The Monmouth, 44 F. 809, 1891 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19 (S.D.N.Y. 1891).

44 F. 809 (Smith v. The Monmouth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Indian Towing Co. v. Tankship Lyons Creek
187 F. Supp. 774 (E.D. Louisiana, 1960)
Dufrene v. The Tug Diversity
163 F. Supp. 331 (E.D. Louisiana, 1958)
The Hendrick Hudson
159 F. 581 (S.D. New York, 1908)
The Chester W. Chapin
155 F. 854 (E.D. New York, 1907)