Ernmnrnen v. our or PHILADELPHIA. 43
time to avoid the collision, when the Dentz was soon approaching to
the westerly half of the channel around Hallett’s point. Her pilot
claims that when this was observed he could not stop, on account of
the currents of that locality. I cannot accept this statement as an
excuse. The Pilgrim, just astern of him, was able to stop, and did
so without diiilculty, and passed the Plymouth Rock some five min·`
utes afterwards. The flood tide, since the removal of the shoals from
Hallett’s point, runs true between that point and Flood rock. The
Dentz, according to the pilot’s statement, was seen hauling to the
westward after passing Astoria ferry; and the Plymouth Rock had
suliicient notice of her course to have kept entire control of herself,
or, if need be, to have kept astern of the Dentz, as required by the
inspectors’ rule, until all danger was past. Both vessels must there·
fore be held in fault, and a decree for the libelant be rendered against
both, with costs.
Ernmmnem v. Cru or P1rrm.nnr.1>n1s.’
(District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania. November 16, 1885.)
1. Mrmrcu-An CORPORATION—LIABILITY ron Dnmrcrrvm Dmw-Bnmem—0or.-
r.rsroi~z—Jua1snrer1or:.
The schooner Elm City had engqged a tudg to tow her from Pine street _
wharf, on the Schuylkil , to Port ichmon . The tug made fast to the
schooner and signaled those in charge of defendants bridge to open the draw
to let them in. The draw was opened in response to the signal. The vessels
proceeded on their way. There was a high wind blowing at the time. Those
in charge of the bridge, owing to its being out of order, were unable to fasten
the draw securely. It got beyond their control, swung round, struck and
damaged the schooner. Held, that the admiralty court had jurisdiction, and
that the municipal corporation was responsible or the negligence.
2. BAME—·DEFEC'1‘IVE Barnes:-NnenrenNom—Norron. ‘
When the draw of a bridge is turned to remove obstructions to navigation,
it must be securely fastene . Failure to do this is negligence.
In Admiralty. `
The cause camo up to be heard on libel, answer, and proofs.
Driver d (Jculston, for libelant. —
McMichael d Warwick, for respondent.
’ Burma, J. The question of jurisdiction is settled by the follow-
ing cases: The Ceres, 7 Wkly. Notes Cas. 576; The Plymouth, 3 Wall.
35; The Rock Island Bridge, 6 Wall. 215; Atlee v. Packet C0., 21
Wall. 390; Railroad Oo. v. Steam-boat Oo., 23 How. 219; Leathers v.
Blessing, 105 U. S. 626; The Maud Webster, 8 Ben. 551.
It is quite clear that the accident resulted from defect in the bridge. `
When the draw is turned, to remove obstruction to navigation, it is
intended to be secured in place by an iron bolt and socket. This ar- ·
*Reported by C. B. Taylor, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar. _ , -
'