54 rn1>naA#r."Rm>onT1sn.
~ puttosea. did so, and made their voyages in safety. I do not think the
S1g¤a1.sa·v1ee.0mcers have become so thoroughly versed as yet in the
laws governing the changes of the weather as to make their predictions a
safetzguide by which to regulate themovement of the vessels engaged in
~ commerce. We know from our common experience and observation
that their predictions fail at least as often as they are realized, and that
’ they would make a very unreliablecriterion for navigators to adjust their
times of going to and from their ports by,—so much so as to make it
impracticable to allow their predictions very materially to control the
movement of ships without regard tothe trained judgment of expe-
rienced seamen, especially when voyages are short as they are upon our
lakes, and vessels never very far from a port of refuge. But, even if
‘ their predictions were implicitly reliable, the proof shows that the signal
officer only told the captain that his information was there was a storm
impending, which might reach there in 10 hours, and+there was then
ample time for this strong, swift tug to have made this port, without the
incumbrance of a tow, before the arrival ofthe predicted storm; so that
` it seems to me no excuse is shown for this delay in port from Monday
till Thursday. . ·
, It is urgedthat the questionwhether the weather is suchas to make·
it dangerous orbad seamanship to leave a safe harbor by reason of bad
weather, that is, whether a vessel is wind-bound, is wholly a matter of
judgment and discretion on the part of the master, and that,if he deems
the weather so rough or threatening as to make it unsafe to leave port,
then all parties are bound by his action in that regard. e I think this is
a fair statement of the general rule, if there can be said to he a general
rule, on the subject, but this ruleas stated is, I think, subject to this
qualification: that the weather must be actually tempestuous or rough,
or there must be such indioationsof a coming tempestas are considered
reliable by experienced navigatorsl in those watersgand I am satisfied
~ from the proof that there was no such storm prevailing, and no such in-
dications of an immediate storm on .Monday morning, when the tug was
discharged, as should have kept aprudent seaman in port. " If the cap·
r tain of the Morford hadleft Grand Haven, say, at 11 A. M. on Monday
morning, he could have made theport of Chicago before any bad weather
*would have been experienced. It must be borne in mind that this was
A inthe wintentime, when rough weatherwas to be expected. This cap!
tain had no right to lay in port, at the expense of another, waiting for a.
summer sea. He rnustnhave known that at that time of year rough
weather and water were the rule, and the mere fact that the weather was
cold and some sea running was no more than was to be anticipated;. but
I do not think, from the proof, that the weather was either such infact,
or to be anticipated from threatening indications, as to make it seem
perilous to a properly prudent and courageous seaman.
,1 do not intend to be understood as saying that the weatherprognos-
tications ofthe signal·service bureau are to be wholly disregarded by the
prudent seaman; but that they are not to be implicitly followed; and
also to say, in this particular case, that no such indications or informa-