The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

MARINE REVIEW. It said Judge Swan in rendering his opinion, "that it may be doubted if judicial records afford a parallel to the negligence and recklessness of her navigation. The admitted facts tina Her officers did not hear the first two signals of the Conemauch and though her attention was challenged to her by her third whistle. did not see her until the alarm whistles were sounded, when the vessels were scarcely a quarter ofa mile apart, although the weather was favorable to sight and hearing, and the Bean tion of the locality called for careful navigation are con- elusive that her master and lookout (if she had one) were either incompetent or grossly negligent of their duties. Even after the Conemaugh was seen and heard, the action of the New York merits the severest condemnation. Invoking against the Conemaugh steering and sailing rules 19 and 21, the New York neither held her course as required by the first, but by porting thwarted the effect of her adversary to keep out of her way, nor slackened speed, stopped or reversed in compliance with rule 21, when the course, position, lights and alarm whistles of the Conemaugh proclaimed the perilous proximity of the _ steamers, but kept her speed to the very instant of the collision. Under the circumstances, these offenses were scarcely less vicious than the criminal negligence which disregarded the lights and signals of the Conemaugh. 'The temporary departure of the New York from her general course up the river was necessitated by the position of the Burlington's tow. When she passed that and saw the Conemaugh, it was her duty to starboard and resume her course as soon possible, having regard to the exigences of the situation. There was ample room for her to have obeyed this requirement, which would have taken her under the stern of the Conemaugh. 'I'he maseter of the Cone-. maugh had a right to expect that this plain duty would have been performed, for his vessel had then crossed the proper path of the New York. : "A fitter case for the exercise of disciplinary power com- mitted to the inspectors of steam vessels than that afforded by the navigation of the New York can scarcely be imagined. Revo- cation of the license of the master or an extended period of sus- penslon would have a salutary effect in promoting the safety of life and property on thelakes. The case of the New York is without the shadow ofa defense. 'These steamers were naviga- ting in a crowded channel, and that fact exempts the Conemaugh from the obligation to port under pilot rule 2. The New York in coming up necessarily held her course close to the descending tow; passing within 50 or 100 feet from the fourth vessel, and only attained that distance by asharp sheer to the starboard when abreast of the third vessel in the tow. At that time the Conemaugh was under the stern of the Ferguson. She had crossed the New York's proper course, and the position of the latter in reference to the Burlington's tow left her no room to pass between the New York and the tow. There was, moreover, an unobstructed channel, 600 or 700 feet wide, on the starboard side of the New York. 'The Conemaugh also had a right to as- sume that the New York on clearing the tow would perform her duty and resume her normal course. Under these circumstances the Conemaugh with three-fourths of the channel occupied by a tow, though crossing the course of the New York, was not un- der the rule of port helm, but might properly continue her course provided there was time and room for that maneuver. Had the New York, after seeing the Conemaugh, even held the course on which she was passing the tow, collision would have been impossible, though she had maintained her full speed. Up to the Conemaugh's second signal, her navigation had been cautious and in exact conformity to the statutory and inspectors' tules. Even to the giving of her third signal, the only criticism made on her conduct is based on inspectors' rule 3, that, though under check, she was not 'slowed to a speed barely sufficient for steerage way,' although the vessels had then approached within half a mile of each other, and no understanding had been estab- lished with the ascending boat. This, however, though an in- fraction of that rule, had no relation to the collision, for the ves- sels were then so far apart and on such courses and held such relative positions to each other and to the tow, that without risk of collision the Conemaugh would have safely crossed the bows of the New York, had the latter held her lawful way. "But when the New Vork shut in her green light, its dis- appearance announced and the alarm whistles of the Conemaugh acknowledged risk of collision, which imposed on each in their then dangerous proximity the duty of stopping and reversing. Both were knowingly under the operation of rule 21, on courses Involving risk of collision. 'The fact that the New York had not Tesponded to either signal, but was drawing near at full speed, 'With the eyes and ears of her watch closed to the presence and purpose of the Conemaugh, despite the warnings of her lights and signals, called for the extremest precautions on the part of the latter, and should in some measure have prepared her for the necessity of their instant adoption. 'The presumption of law is that the non-observance by the New York of the rule requiring that passing signals by whistle shall be given and answered when steamers are passing or meeting at a distance of half a mile of each other was not willful. The prevalence of the illegal prac- tice of violating that rule should under no circumstances be re- ceived to excuse non-compliance with articles 21 and 24 of the steering and sailing rules. If it was prudent to check speed when approaching a tow moving in the same direction, the ne- cessity of still greater care when she was about to meet and cross the course of a steamer rushing up the river at full speed in evi- dent ignorance of the presence of a descending vessel, was infi- nitely more obvious and urgent. 'Though not called upon to stop when no response was made to her passing signal, because she had the tow between herself and the New York, and there could be no collision while that was the case, yet when the Con- emaugh emerged from that shelter she did so with knowledge, or at least reason to believe that her presence was unknown to the New York, and that the safety of her advance was contingent on the latter's adherence to her course. 'This, though probable, was not assured, because the Conemaugh apparently was not a factor in her navigation. 'The Conemaugh, therefore, could not safely proceed in the expectation that the New York would obey rule 19, and hold her course in the absence of knowledge on her part that there was a vessel in the vicinity to whom she owed that duty. The steering and sailing rules governing the course of vessels meeting in various situations contemplate that each knows the facts upon which it is called to act. 'These rules are all qualified by article 24, which enjoins due regard to the dan- gers of navigation, and special circumstances rendering departure from them necessary to avoid immediate danger. 'There could scarcely be a greater danger of navigation than a large steamer approaching at full speed in the night, in apparent ignorance of the presence of another. Hach of such vessels is a menace to the safety of the other, because co-operation to a safe course is impossible. Under such circumstances rules 21 and 24 are of paramount force. They condemn the effort of the Conemaugh to cross the bows of the New York without first obtaining rec- ognition, and for failing to stop and reverse in so grave a peril as that produced by the New York's speed and change of course. And they and rule 19 condemn the New York for changing her course and failing to stop and reverse, when she saw the Cone- maugh. In sucha situation failure to stop and reverse is almost an unpardonable sin against the maritime code. 'The fact that the Conemaugh was struck abreast of the pilot house, about thirty feet abaft her stem, is persuasive at least that, had she stopped, she would have escaped the blow inflicted by the New York, though the New York might not have been so fortunate. 'The severe rule which makes the transgression of the stat- utes prima facie a contributing cause is, however, not infrequent- ly relaxed, and the most forcible consideration urged for the ac- quittal of the Conemaugh is founded on the indulgeuce of the courts to an error committed by a vessel which has been brought into immediate jeopardy by the fault of another. In such a case, the injured party is not debarred from the recovery of dam- ages if his vessel has done something wrong and has not been maneuvered with perfect skill and presence of mind. "The equities of the case are so strongly in favor of the Conemaugh that the conclusion that she was also in fault has been reached with reluctance, and not without considerable doubt, in view of the extent to which adjudged cases of high authority have gone in referring collisions, in circumstances not unlike these, solely to the fault of the flagrant transgressor. The great disparity of fault has invited and received the con- sideration it merits. But the impossibility of enforcing the 'great commandment' of the law of navigation, which calls a halt, when risk of collision is involved compels me to adjudge both vessels at fault." The lawyers in the case were Messrs Shaw and Wright of Detroit and H. D. Goulder of Cleveland for the Conemaugh, and Charles EK. Kremer of Chicago and H.C. Wisner of Detroit for the New York. Louis I. Burton, whose death is announced from Chicago, was the only son of J. C. Burton of Detroit. The deceased was from boyhood associated with his father in the insurance busi- ness in Detroit. Last spring he went to Chicago as general agent of the Cincinnati Underwriters, and organized the firm of Burton, Calbick & Cook, vessel and insurance agents.