en

Doldie

is2

an al

In the words of Dr. Lushington, that there that if one vessel is going dead before the must be exceptions

wind, and the other going free on the starboard tack, the latter must luff and pass astern of the former. It would seem from

analogy that if the vessel with the wind on her side were on the larboard tack, it would then become the duty of the one before the wind to give way by porting her helm. The principle being, we suppose, that as both have a free wind it is the duty of that one to give way the porting of whose helm will carry her astern of the other.

et To which, however, it may be well to add that the onus of proving the exception will rest with the party violating the rule. And tokel in the second place, that the rules are inthet tended purely for vessels whose courses coneside verge, and are known or deliberately believled to converge, and not for those whose hacourses diverge, or may reasonably be beelieved to diverge; nor for cases where darkngbaness absolutely shuts out even reasonable itte belief as to their converging or not. Where port there is no knowledge there can be no law. astern of the other. 1st Trinity rule and our

thed These last remarks may, perhaps, be thought And supererogatory by those who are unacquaintbated with the modes of reasoning which pass tarb for syllogisms among masters of ships, or fair who have never listened to the arguments

ic of learned civilians in Doctors' Commons.

e.

CASE No. 3.-A vessel close-hauled on the starboard tack, and one with a free wind on the larboard tack, are crossing in an angular direction, and the latter is on the windward side of the track of the former.

The helm of the vessel sailing free is starboarded, and she passes to windward, going

remarks in explanation.

CASE No. 4. - The vessels are sailing as in Case 3, but the one with the wind free is on the leeward side of the track of the other.

The helm of the vessel sailing free is port

Only the other day it was believed by and ed, and she passes to leeward, going astern contended on behalf of the commander of a of the other. 1st Trinity rule and explana

edit steam vessel going down the Thames with tion. the the wind aft, that he did right to port his reshelm on seeing

a

CASE NO. 5. The vessels are sailing as in Case 3, but approaching "end on" or in a straight direction.

sail ahead in the gloom, before he knew whether she was tacking is and across to the right or to the left? Without, The vessel sailing free ports her helm and ce then, pretending to any dogmatic application of rules to ever-varying circumstances, goes before the wind, passing to leeward of the other. 1st Trinity rule and explanarandt we venture to say that the tion; also the case of the Harriet' already third vergent

ver,

cases of concourses on opposite tacks may be

a bations:

the following general combi

CASE No. 1.--Both vessels are beating to windward, close-hauled on opposite

tacks.

cited.

CASE NO. 6.-A vessel close-hauled on the larboard tack, and one with a free wind on the starboard tack, are crossing in an angular direction, and the latter is on the windward side of the track of the former.

The helm of the vessel sailing free is ported, and she passes to windward, going astern of the other. 1st Trinity rule and explanation.

CASE NO. 7.-The vessels

are sailing as in Case 6, but the one with the wind free is on the leeward side of the track of the other.

The helm of the vessel sailing free is starboarded, and she passes to leeward, going astern of the other. 1st Trinity rule and explanation.

This combination requires sound judgment and skilful seamanship, because after allowing for leeway made by the closehauled ship, the angular lines from leeward

along which a vessel can be crossing with the wind free are comprised within a very small space; while at night, after the decision already cited in the case of the 'Traveller, it would appear to be unsafe for the vessel on the starboard tack to starboard her helm at all.

CASE NO. 8.-The vessels are sailing as in Case 6, but approaching "end on," or in a straight direction.

The vessel sailing free, ports her helm, and passes to windward of the other. 1st Trinity rule and explanation; also the cases of the Athol' and the 'Ann and Mary." But as the vessel on the starboard tack has the wind a couple of points abaft the beam, she is probably carrying studding-sails and under a press of canvas, rendering it much less inconvenient to herself to bear away than to luff. Hence the necessity for anticipating the rule by keeping a good look out and bearing away in time. This may not be practicable at night, but the Court would say that sail ought to have been shortened at night in a crowded locality.*

We have yet to speak of steam vessels. The rules affecting them are simple enough. If two steamers are meeting on opposite courses, each ports her helm. Meeting a sailing vessel close-hauled, the steamer gives way exactly as a sailing vessel with the wind free would do in similar circumstances. Meeting a sailing vessel with a fair wind, the steamer ports her helm; because when the wind is on the latter's larboard side, the sailing vessel, being on the starboard tack, is entitled to hold her course; and when wh the wind is on the steamer's starboard side, since it would be her duty to port were the opposing vessel another steamer, she is bound to do the same thing when the other ship is under sail. Steamers, it has been said, should always give way to sailing vessels, and therefore should not cross their bows.†

In all these solutions it is assumed that the facts stated in the respective propositions have been fully ascertained. We earnestly entreat the reader's attention to the observations already made on the deviation of a close-hauled ship (whose prima facie duty it may be to keep her course) in circumstances of doubt or of imminent danger. And the remark made under Case 7, implying that the line must not be drawn too fine, applies in a less degree to Case 3 also: the crossing lines should be decidedly and undoubtedly angular, to bring the case within the limits of either of those proposiAs to cases 5 and 8, it should be

Such appears to us the true interpretation of the Trinity rules. We are aware that high authority may be arrayed against some of our conclusions. If so, the difference must be settled by appeal to the decisions we have cited. That is the law which the Court of Admiralty declares to be so; and the principles laid down there must be ad hered to, howsoever their opposite may be recommended by the weight of eminent names. Should the instructed seaman, on the other hand, to whom our propositions familiar as household words, consider we have been elaborately demonstrating axioms, we reiterate the assurance of our belief, that a very large number of those to whom the conduct of vessels is commit

are

tions in mind that if the tracks are suppos- ted, are either possessed of nothing th

ed to be parallel, and yet not divided by distance sufficient to render contact improbable, the rule must be acted upon, as though they were coincident. Suppose, for example, the free vessel should be steering north, and the head of the close-hauled is observed to be lying south, these courses are readily seen to be either coincident or parallel. If the former, the helm is ported; if the latter, either no change whatever

is required, or

the tracks so nearly agree

"end

the ships approaching so nearly are
on," as to afford reasonable ground for fear;
when that must be done which would be
the rule were there certain ground for fear.
The Court will listen to no plea of nice and
narrow calculation:

than a surface-knowledge of the subject, or are given to the formation of theories of

their own. It may be proper to aduce

to

some proof stronger than the simple as site sertion of personal experience, that even among those who stand in the foremost ranks Be of the profession, a great conflict of interpretation is often discovered; and illustrations are readily found in the proceedings before an common law courts when it has been nedo cessary to submit collision causes to the de termination of a jury. For a jury

men

of landsvert of dome

need guidance in the application sailing rules; and the only way in which they can have it is by parole testimony from men of skill in the witness box. Each party accordingly brings such evidence for

ward, and the opinions expressed are usu-law limits responsibility for loss by collision ally diametrically opposed to each other on to the value of the damaging ship and her precisely the same state of facts. A trial at freight, though the ship and cargo sunk may Durham last year is a notable case in point. have been worth ten times the fund thus Both vessels had sustained damage; the liable to make them good. We are not jury gave more faith to the scientific wit- questioning the policy of the law; but this se nesses of the plaintiff than to those of the we do say, that if an owner is indemnified, simple defendant, and the verdict was in favour of even partially, against the errors of his serthe former. The loser then raised an ac- vants, some pains should be taken to see tion for his own damage against the winner that those servants are competent to their este in Doctors' Commons, and was successful, work. It might silence the clamorous reessed the judge and Trinity masters pronouncing monstrances of Mr. Somes, and others,*

that vessel in the wrong, ON HER OWN against the proposed examination of masters thai STATEMENT OF FACTS, which the Durham and mates, were the legislature to replybez jury had declared in the right: so that each "You may appoint whom you please, but hot ship-owner eventually paid for the damage your liability for your captain's errors shall se sustained by the other! In another case, not be limited to the value of your ship and where no essential fact was in dispute, a freight, except where his fitness has been large number of nautical men, naval officers, tested by examination; if you depend on to put commanders of merchantmen, and superin- your individual judgment, you must indemStendents of pilots, delivered opinions ex nify those injured by his blunders to the full actly conflicting. Among them, and on dif- extent of the loss they may have sustained." Pitha ferent sides, we observed the names of two Without then seeking to palliate the culgentlemen-Mr. Forrest and Mr. Cumming pable apathy of the shipowner, it is impossi-who have given valuable evidence before ble to deny that the fault of the mariner's this very committee on shipwrecks. It ignorance of the rules of the sea is shared

rue inter

red

as a misuse of words to charac- by the Trinity Board and terize either as uninstructed; yet they have The same observation applies to the

to ter riance on a very simple case.

The law

select

at va- of signal lights. There is no law to compel

If vessels, their use, the Trinity House having made no

respectively commanded by Mr. Cumming regulation on the subject. Except

oppas most probably

ass

of zo

and Mr. Forrest, should be nearing each case of a vessel at anchor, which pt in the courses, a collision would held to share the blame of a which has been

ensue as the immediate con- neglects to exhibit a light, we recollect no of their different readings of the instance in which the result of an action has

sequence
rule. And a catastrophe might follow like
that of the Governor Fenner, where ONE

directly turned upon its presence or absence. "You have invariably decided," says Dr. LushHUNDRED AND TWENTY human beings were ington, addressing the Trinity Masters, in the case hurled into destruction, and the only ques

of the 'Rose,' "that merchant vessels under sail tion agitated was, which of the commanders are under no necessity whatever to carry lights." The difficulty usually assigned, is the em

ground

oumte was in fault. resses We conceive, then, that on the broad barrassment that may be produced by the of humanity alone, we are entitled to confusion of ships' lights with those of lightprotest against the poco-curante legislation, houses on shore. There is much weight in which thus leaves the lives of men to be the objection; but we can scarcely believe

on of 3

the

tossed to and fro on the conflicting waves of that, by the use of lamps of particular colpopposite opinions. We claim from the ours, and in particular relative positions, a

rience the rules.

at co

Trinity Board an authoritative exposition of

the tion be adopted-our own, or that of any

20 other man.

proced be

means may not be devised of securing the We care little what interpreta- benefit without incurring the risk. At all events, let the elder brethren be consistent,

rate, and other

Our induction may be inaccu- for we cannot understand why, if the use of expositors may be right-we the lamp is not to be enjoined, because of pro do but call upon authority to decide amid the danger, the very same reason should not hit the uncertainty, and tell us plainly what is

prohibit it altogether.

to be done. The rules to be enforced once The neglect of a vigilant look-out is doubtFor clearly laid down, we next call upon the less a primary cause, both of collision and the legislature to test, by examination, every of other casualties. Innumerable examples lysea-officer's knowledge of them before he is can be given:-One flagrant case was that command. We have of a vessel off Cape Horn, where the neighno desire to discuss here the limits of legis- bourhood of ice was first discovered by a lative interference. But that interference is

already begun on the other side. For the

passenger, who heard it crackle against the sioned by a bad look out, for which the ship's side, as he lay in his berth. The next crew were held jointly to blame with the moment the ship ran stem on to an ice- pilot. It has been justly said that the masberg, and stove in her bows, the officer of ter and crew are never discharged from the watch being in the cook-house at the their proper responsibility with respect to time. There is, perhaps, no immediate the management of the ship, the keeping the remedy; but if an examination of sea-offi- look out, and the execution of the pilot's cers, and an inquiry into losses be carried orders.

out, as the committee recommend; and if it The embarrassments of the shipowner do should be enacted, that an unsatisfactory not cease when his duties have been per result of the last will involve the certificate formed-when the look-out has been kept, of the officer in charge of the watch, it may and the light shown, and the rules underbe expected that mates will find their inter- stood and obeyed. Though the fault rest est in keeping a stricter eye than at present entirely with the other vessel, the difficulon the performance of the duty in question. ties met in obtaining redress are very great In the meantime the court is justly severe indeed. The remedy lies either in the upon all proved cases of negligence or reck- courts of common law or in the Admiralty lessness, and will visit upon the owners the Court. Resort to the former is less usual, De

absence of precaution, whether it show itself in want of look out, or in neglect to shorten sail and slacken speed at night, or in a fog, when in a neighbourhood where danger may reasonably be apprehended.

We must be permitted to warn the ship

owing in part to the nearly insurmountable obstacles in the way of a correct appreciation of a nautical case by a jury of landsmen -in part to the character and occupation of the witnesses of the facts, which render it difficult to secure their attendance at the

master on two points more. He must not proper time and place and in part to the fancy that the error of another ship will ab- rules of evidence governing these courts, solve him from the duty of rendering her which exclude the testimony (often abso every assistance in his power (we speak lutely indispensable) of a plaintiff or de of saving property, for when life is in ques- fendant in the suit. The usual form of pro tion, we trust no injunction is needed). It ceeding in the Admiralty Court, by "act on is held to be a suspicious circumstance, petition and affidavit," allows no cross-ex when effort has not been made to help the amination of the witnesses. The nature of damaged vessel; and the owners of the the facts to be proved in collision causes is 'Celt,'f though not otherwise in fault, were nevertheless, such as to render cross-exami

default of

a

remove

nation even more than usually necessary
A wrong operation may be strongly sus
pected to have been performed on board one
of the ships, no satisfactory evidence of
which can possibly be obtained except what
might be elicited by cross-questioning the
persons actually on board the offending ves
sel. A ship close-hauled may be run on
board of in the dark by a steamer at full
speed bra
yet positive evidence that her speed;
the tow

can

10

condemned in all costs and expenses of the suit, because the master made no attempt to save the ship run down. Neither must he suppose, as is generally done, that all responsibility is removed from him when he takes a pilot on board. It is true that the pilot taken on board compulsorily, under any act of Parliament, or if under the provisions of the General Pilot Act, whether compulsorily not, will or liability from the owners. It rests, howev- was not slackened be given only by the er, with the latter to prove that the damage crew of the latter. And half the circumlarg was occasioned by the pilot's fault alone. stances sworn to as facts would turn out toin The owners of the Massachusetts' pleaded be mere inferences on cross-examination. Itud. pilot's presence in vain, when the damage We will give a single striking example. The arose from dragging an anchor too light for happens nearly always that the statements their vessel: and in the case of the 'Diana's of the two ships with respect to the direction bet (where the judgment was affirmed by the of the wind differ to the extent of a few Privy Council on appeal), the owners were points, especially when one vessel is close also condemned, the collision being occa- hauled and the other free. On the adjust Top ment of this disputed matter the whole case

a

• The 'Rose,' 7, Jurist, 381; The Virgil, 7, Jur- may turn, because upon it hinges the deter sed it was 10 ist, 1,174. In the cases of the 'Ebenezer,' 7 Jurist, mination of the question whose duty 1,117, and Itinerant,' Jurist, 121, the claims were to make way. Now it is a well-known ef dismissed, on the ground that the darkness was too fect of the composition great to prevent collision at any rate of sailing.

† 3, Haggard, 321.

† 1, Robinson, jun., 371.

§ 1, Robinson, jun., 131.

a

of forces, that whe

to the

ship is in rapid motion with the wind ofn her side, the apparent direction of the wind is always a-head of its real direction. The Enc

forces,

with

ed

!

e

when she is staying or going about from one tack to the other.

Tack. To put

a

ship about so that from having the wind on one side you bring it round on the other by the way of her head: the opposite of wearing. A vessel is on the starboard tack when she has the wind on her starboard side; and on the larboard tack when she has the wind on her larboard side.

greater the velocity of the ship as compared, Stays-In-stays. The situation of a vessel with that of the wind, the greater the difference will be. But suppose a vessel going only five knots, with a brisk wind of about fifteen knots right on her beam, the sailor who judges from the vane will take the di-rection of the wind to be about a point and a half before the beam. If another vessel is approaching in an opposite direction, the united error will amount to three points, and both will probably claim to have been closehauled.* Hence the necessity for a minute inquiry into the precise nature of the obser

the)

vations from which the direction of the wind has actually been deduced. The Act of 1840† contains, in its 8th section, a provision for the vivâ voce examination of witnesses before a commissioner in the presence of, and subject to cross-examination by, both parties or their agents. Why this excellent provision should be allowed to remain so nearly a dead letter (we speak as laymen must, and not as learned in the law), it must be left to suitors themselves to decide.

We have thus endeavoured to gather together the fragments of maritime law on these much-vexed questions, and we trust we have collected materials for those able to

Wear.-To turn a vessel round so that from having the wind on one side you bring it upon the other, carrying her stern round by the wind. In tacking the same result is produced by carrying a vessel's head round by the wind.

ART. V. 1. Tithes Commutation; a Return to an Order of the Honourable the House of Commons, of all Agreements for the Commutation of Tithes, to the 1st day of July, 1843. Specifying the amount of Rent-charge agreed to be paid in lieu of Tithes, &c. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 21st August, 1843.

Charges, for the year 1844. By Henry
Pyne, Esq., London. Shaw and Sons.

THE Tithe and Corn Laws show how we deal in this country with the rights of the rich and the wrongs of the poor. They are useful statutes, inasmuch as they mark the

follow up the work more fully and efficiently 2. Table showing the value of Tithe Rent

than ourselves: in conclusion, we would shelter ourselves with the apology of the late Professor Robinson, craving pardon for the presumptuous attempt to discuss a nautical subject, while we confess we cannot "hand," nor "reef," nor "steer." L.

Explanation of Sea Phrases in the above; from relative zeal of legislation, towards interests

the Seaman's Manual.'

Bear-up or Bear-away. - To put the helm up (or to the windward or weather side) and keep a vessel away to leeward.

Close-hauled-On a bowline-On a wind.-Applied to a vessel which is sailing with her

essible to windward.

eyards braced up, so as to get as much as pos- Church. The power as well as the doc

The Free-Large.-Applied to a vessel sailing with

trine of the Church, are questions wholly apart from the inquiry into the amount, or mode of payment she receives: and so we shall treat it; for with the latter subject alone is it our purpose to deal. This caution is needful; for Tithes are as easily mistaken for holy things, as rubrics for Religion, and forms of prayer for faith of heart; and the confusion of these is very prevalent. We would rescue the utility our argument may

chance to possess, from the damage of a

prejudice it has no need to enlist against it.

helm is to put the tiller to the larboard side. Starboard. The right side of a vessel looking Leaving, therefore, all sorts of questions as

forward. To starboard the helm is to put the tiller to the starboard side.

"Sea

See Encyclopædia Britannica. Art. manship." † 3 and 4 Victoria, cap. 55.

to Church doctrine untouched, we betake ourselves solely to Tithes and such secular topics as they naturally present for consideration.

No one denies to the labourer in the spirit