Distinguished in Philadelphia etc. Ry. Co. v. Adams, 89 Pa. St. 35, 33 Am. Rep. 724, holding steamer is not obliged to keep out of way of a rowboat.

Duty of sailing vessel to hold her course. Note, 75 Am. Dec. 603.

Where vessels are proceeding toward each other, neither is under obligation to take precautions to avoid a collision until danger of collision should be apprehended.

Approved in The Kaiserin Maria Theresa, 149 Fed. 99, 78 C. C. A. 681, steamer is not required to maintain speed so low as to enable her to avoid collision without other vessel navigating without proper lights; The Manitoba, 2 Flipp. 254, Fed. Cas. 9029, holding there is no obligation to slacken speed until it appears vessels are closing in on each other; Kennedy v. Sarmatian, 5 Hughes, 160, 2 Fed. 918, The Louise, 52 Fed. 888, 3 C. C. A. 330, and The Oceanic, 61 Fed. 359, errors committed by one vessel do not excuse the other from adopting every proper precaution to prevent collision; to same effect, The Victory, 68 Fed. 399, 15 C. C. A. 490; The Ellen Holgate v. Illinois, 8 Fed. Cas. 514, and The F. & P. M. No. 2, 36 Fed. 269, both holding as to duties of vessels in passing when both are proceeding in same direction.

Infringement of regulations to prevent collisions at sea. Note, 23
E. R. C. 632.

Whether act is tortious or not must generally be determined by laws of place where act was committed, but American vessels on the high seas are for some purposes considered a part of American territory.

Approved in In re Clyde S. S. Co., 134 Fed. 99, upholding admiralty jurisdiction over suit for death due to collision on high seas, where recovery for wrongful death is given by statutes of States in which both vessels belonged; The Lamington, 87 Fed. 753, 754, in discussion as to what law governs in case of a tort committed on a foreign vessel on the high seas.

Persons in charge of vessels will not be held at fault for collisions on the high seas when they have observed the rules of navigation prescribed by their own government.

Approved in The Belgenland, 114 U. S. 369, 370 29 L. Ed. 157, 5 Sup. Ct. 867, and The Golden Grove, 13 Fed. 702, both holding section 4234, Revised Statutes, requiring sail vessel on approach of steamer at night to show a lighted torch, is as applicable to navigation on sea as to inland navigation.

Sailing vessel which does not carry the lights prescribed by law for such craft, but carries a light which causes her to be mistaken for a steamer,

is without remedy, if in consequence of such mistake she collides with a steamer on the high seas and is destroyed.

Approved in The St. John, 54 Fed. 1020, 5 C. C. A. 16, holding a steamer not liable for colliding with a barge on a dark, rainy night, the barge having displayed no lights and being in usual way of travel.

Rules and regulations adopted by principal commercial nations for government of vessels on high sea are part of general maritime law; hence the rules of navigation of British orders in council of 1863, concurred in by nearly all the commercial nations of the world, will be deemed part of law of nations.

Approved in The New York, 175 U. S. 197, 44 L. Ed. 131, 20 Sup. Ct. 71, taking judicial notice of Canadian parliament's act regulating navigation on Canadian water; The Gov. Ames, 187 Fed. 45, 109 C. C. A. 94, as to high authority of British admiralty decisions; The Belgenland, 114 U. S. 370, 29 L. Ed. 157, 5 Sup. Ct. 867, Richelieu Nav. Co. v. Boston Ins. Co., 136 U. S. 422, 34 L. Ed. 403, 10 Sup. Ct. 937 (affirming 26 Fed. 601), dissenting opinion in The Britannia, 153 U. S. 150, 38 L. Ed. 067, 14 Sup. Ct. 795, The Oregon, 158 U. S. 201, 39 L. Ed. 951, 15 Sup. Ct. 811, Thomassen v. Whitwell, 9 Ben. 408, Fed. Cas. 13,929, In re Long Island Transp. Co., 5 Fed. 622, 623, and The New York, 175 U. S. 197, 44 L. Ed. 131, 20 Sup. Ct. 67, all following rule; The Brantford City, 29 Fed. 385, holding “law of the flag," so far as it differs from general maritime law, has no authority abroad.

Supreme Court will take judicial notice of the law of nations.

Approved in State v. Gramelspacher, 126 Ind. 404, 26 N. E. 83, as authority for holding courts will take judicial notice of acts of Congress; The Paquete Habana, 175 U. S. 712, 44 L. Ed. 333, 20 Sup. Ct. 290, where court took judicial notice of law of nations relating to status of fishing vessels in time of war.

Distinguished in Yang-Tsze Ins. Assn. v. Furness, Withy & Co., 215 Fed. 866, 132 C. C. A. 201, holding courts of admiralty of United States cannot take judicial notice of laws of foreign countries unless pleaded and proved.

Judicial notice. Notes, 11 Am. Dec. 781; 89 Am. Dec. 664, 670.
Proof and evidence of foreign laws and their effect. Note, 113
Am. St. Rep. 872.

American sailing vessel failing to carry lights required by act of Congress cannot absolve herself from blame for collision with English steamer on plea that the act of Congress was a mere municipal regulation, of which English steamer could not avail herself.

Approved in Pouppirt v. Elder Dempster Shipping, 122 Fed. 988, holding action for injuries sustained by American passenger on foreign

ship on high seas governed by general maritime law administered where action prosecuted.

How case determined when proper foreign law not proved. Note, 67 L. R. A. 34.

Overvaluation in fire insurance. Note, 35 Am. Rep. 76.

Duty of conquering with respect to obligations of conquered State.
Note, 5 L. Ed. 907.

Miscellaneous. Cited in Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U. S. 163, 40 L. Ed. 108, 16 Sup. Ct. 143, as to rules for determination and construction of international laws; Dogge v. National Ins. Co., 49 Wis. 504, 5 N. W. 891, erroneously.

14 Wall, 189-199, 20 L. Ed. 834, THE JAVA.

Steamer pursuing, in crowded harbor, a channel not usually occupied by vessels of her size, is bound to use every precaution to avoid accident, but having done so, is not liable for collision with small schooner not visible till close aboard.

Approved in The Manna-Hata, 193 Fed. 808, holding as damages from collision were due to steamer failing to see schooner while latter kept her course, steamer was responsible; The Fred. W. Chase, 31 Fed. 94, as authority for holding a steamer has a right under all circumstances to use the channel of a harbor, provided she observes the law of the road. Distinguished in The Hudson City, 38 Fed. 447, where in collision between ferry-boat and schooner, the former was under circumstances held to blame.

14 Wall. 199-204, 20 L. Ed. 873, THE MERRIMAC.

For negligence or want of skill in management of boat the owner is responsible, notwithstanding a license pilot was in charge.

Approved in The Robert Rickmers, 131 Fed. 642, vessel liable for damage to another by drifting through anchorage chosen by master of her tug; The John G. Stevens, 170 U. S. 122, 42 L. Ed. 973, 18 Sup. Ct. 548, lien upon tug for damages to her tow by negligent towage bringing tow into collision with third vessel is preferred in admiralty to statutory lien for supplies furnished tug in home port before collision; The E. M. Norton, 15 Fed. 688, and in the F. C. Latrobe, 28 Fed. 379, both holding municipality liable for damages caused by its boat in rendering gratuitous services to another vessel; The Shubert v. The Brown, 45 Fed. 503, arguendo; Ramsdell Transp. Co. v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 63 Fed. 850, where modifications of rule are suggested.

VII-49

Distinguished in The Joseph Vaccaro, 180 Fed. 275, denying recovery to association of pilots for damage to pilot tug caused by one of its members in charge of another vessel.

Liability of vessels and their owners for injuries caused by collision. Note, 45 Am. Dec. 57.

Liability of ship owner for collision due to negligence of qualified pilot. Note, 19 E. R. C. 219.

Precautions to prevent collisions must be seasonable, and it is no defense to say that nothing could be done at moment of collision to prevent vessels from coming together.

Approved in The Adventuress, 214 Fed. 838, holding no proper inquiries having been made nor assistance asked, yacht could not avoid liability on ground of inevitable accident to launch lying empty at moorings; The Wenona, 19 Wall. 54, 22 L. Ed. 59, where steamer was held liable for damages caused by collision with a sailing vessel; The Merrimac, 2 Sawy. 597, Fed. Cas. 9478, holding tug responsible for loss of a scow which it had been towing, the master of tug not having exercised due skill in attempting voyage.

Duty of vessel in motion to one anchored or moored. Note, 75 Am.
Dec. 605.

Duty of vessels in navigable waters. Note, 75 Am. Dec. 612. Miscellaneous. Cited in Ramsdell Transp. Co. v. La Compagnie Gen. Transatlantique, 182 U. S. 415, 45 L. Ed. 1161, 21 Sup. Ct. 835, to point that Louisiana statutes, requiring employment of pilot or payment half fees, not compulsory; The Energia, 124 Fed. 847, enforcing lien given by State statute to recover damages for breach of executory contract to carry lumber from Puget sound to Australia.

14 Wall. 204-216, 20 L. Ed. 881, THE MABEY AND COOPER.

Where those in charge of a tug and tow, respectively, jointly participate in their control and management, both vessels are liable for damages as result of collision with another vessel.

Approved in The Virginia Ehrman, 97 U. S. 313, 24 L. Ed. 892, where tug and tow were held jointly responsible; The Doris Eckhoff, 32 Fed. 559, and Cumberland County v. Central Wharf etc. Tow-boat Co., 90 Me. 99, 60 Am. St. Rep. 249, 37 Atl. 868, both holding fact that suit is pending against tug for an injury does not prevent a suit against tow for same injury; The Belknap, 2 Low. 285, Fed. Cas. 1244, as giving summary of law of this country relating to collision between vessels when one is in tow; The Kallisto, 2 Hughes, 144, Fed. Cas. 7600, and The Express 46 Fed. 861, arguendo.

Distinguished in The Doris Eckhoff, 50 Fed. 137, 1 C. C. A. 494 (reversing 32 Fed. 559), where, under facts, it was held sole management of tug and tow was with master of tug.

Liability of tow for collision with another vessel. Note, 19 Ann.
Cas. 304.

Inevitable accident is that which party charged with offense could not possibly prevent by exercise or ordinary care, caution or nautical skill. Approved in The Fullerton, 211 Fed. 836, 128 C. C. A. 359, holding damages to barkentine due to fault of ferry-boat running at speed excessive and negligent under circumstances; Coxe Bros. & Co. v. Cunard S. S. Co., 174 Fed. 174, holding that accident resulting from breaking of moving posts on pier and vessel being damaged, was not inevitable; The Blackheath, 154 Fed. 759, collision of steamship with beacon held caused by pilot's error of judgment; New York etc. S. S. Co. v. New York etc. Ry. Co., 143 Fed. 993, defense of inevitable accident not made out where collision between tug and steamer caused by floating ice which was not seen because of absence of proper lookout on tug; The Rebbecca, 122 Fed. 622, 60 C. C. A. 251, holding collision due to negligent navigation on part of overtaking vessel, striking at end of tack; The Mary S. Blees, 120 Fed. 45, holding steamer liable, barge struck properly moored to bank; The Severn, 113 Fed. 579, holding inevitable accident not established, squall short, one anchor out, and only one other vessel dragging same; Arbo v. Brown, 9 Fed. 319, and The Mary Cushing, 60 Fed. 111, where breaking loose of steamer from its mooring during storm and inflicting damage on other shipping was held inevitable; The Olympia, 52 Fed. 991, where collision due to parting of a tiller rope was held inevitable.

Distinguished in The Columbia, 48 Fed. 326, and The Bowden, 78 Fed. 651, 24 C. C. A. 267, where it was held sufficient caution had not been observed to avoid danger.

Where collision occurs exclusively from natural causes, without negligence or fault of either party, the loss must rest where it fell.

Approved in The Florence P. Hall, 14 Fed. 416, holding further as to burden of proof where inevitable accident is alleged

In considering improbabilities of amended answer in libel for collision, fact that original answer also contained palpable errors was accorded weight.

Approved in The Sunnyside, Brown Adm. 239, Fed. Cas. 13,020, holding where original libel set up a grossly false case, this will essentially affect the right to relief.

Who are independent contractors. Note, 65 L. R. A. 473.