May 7, 1898.]
be abandoned could be more advantageously utilised in purchasing and reconstructing insanitary sections of the town. We should think the sum in question would not be large enough to go very far in that direc tion, but our contemporary also puts for ward a scheme for compulsory sale against payment in promissory notes, which it thinks might ultimately result in a profit. On that portion of the article we are not in a position to comment, but it is to be hoped most sincerely that the Macao authori- ties will adopt the suggestion to avoid col- lecting Chinese crowds together during the prevalence of plague.
INSULTS TO CHINESE WOMEN IN THE STREETS OF HONGKONG.
A correspondent draws our attention to a subject that has on previous occasions been mentioned in this column, namely, the ex- treme annoyance to which Chinese women walking in the street are subjected by the in- sulting and indecent language used towards them by the coolie class and street urchins. Mention is made by our correspondent of a case in which a young woman was followed from D'Aguilar Street, up Wellington Street, and along Lyndhurst Terrace by a crowd of youngsters using the most filthy language. It is said that several lukongs joined in the hooting, but this state- ment we should be inclined to doubt. The lukong, we should think, would be more likely to simply stand by and grin at the amusement afforded them than to commit any overt breach of their duty that might land them in trouble. In Canton, our correspon- dent says, Chinese women move about freely everywhere without being subjected to any annoyance beyond an occasional remark of their beauty or the colour of their dress, and even this is rare, whereas in this British colony, where our government is supposed to be so much superior to that of Canton, native women are jostled and insulted on all hauds whenever they show their faces in the streets. The matter is one which night well receive the attention of the police authorities.
SUIREME COURT.
29th April.
IN ADMIRALY JURISDICITION,
Before Sir John CARRINGTON (CHIFF JUSTICE) WITH COMMANDERS HASTINGS AND HENDERSON AS ASSESSORS.
THE COLLISION BETWEEN THE KWANG- LED AND THE POWAN."
19
The hearing of this case, which was com. menced on Tuesday, was resumed. It was a cross suit, the China Merchants Steam Naviga; tion Company, owners of the Kwanglee, and the Hongkong, Canton, and Macao Steamboat Company, owners of the Powan, each claiming damages against the other, the claims arising out of a collision which took place between the vessels named on the morning of January 25th in the harbour.
|
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
second officer, because the latter was on his way to his station at the time. The first officer was with the ship, but the second officer left of his sion. Witness came on deck at ten to one, at own free will about three weeks after the colli. which time the steamer was abreast of Green Is land. They did not steer by compass, but steered for the western end of the line of junks. The lights on the junks were lower than the lights on the Prays, and that was how be distinguished them. The distance from abreast of Green
361
kind, and there was no doubt on that point, decks on the starboard side through the 'tween Further there were lights reflected from the decks, but these lights ended a distance of some 32 feet or thereabouts from the stern and taff-rail. Some 35 feet of the vessel was pro- jecting beyond the extremity of the China Merchants Wharf and into the fairway. She carried no stern light. This being her posi- tion, it was said in evidence that there were two. Island to the entrance to the southern fairway
quartermasters on watch that night, and there was no pretence that they were not keeping a he could not tell, because he had never measured from the western side of the line of junks when it. He could not tell what distance they were
proper look-out. One of them said he made out the Powan at some little distance away he could see it clearly. When abreast of the think at first that she was going to come into to the west coming up, but he did not of course junks he was going at the rate of about six collision with the Kwanglee. As soon as he knots, which would take him about 200 yards thought there was a danger of such a collision in a minute. he saw there was a possible danger of collision, jumped out of his berth. He had hardly jumped When he gave the order to steady he went and called the chief officer, who at once but he did not whistle, or slow, or stop, or out before the shock of the collision came, and reverse. When he gave the order to port he would be four or five ships lengths-or four
therefore he and the other officers could not give hundred feet-off.
much evidence as to the circumstances preced- launch was
At that time the steaming the collision. It was admitted that the a little to the eastward of the Kwanglee. He ported no more than a quarter
Kwanglee had no stern light, and the point arose as to whether she should have carried one of a point, and then the order to steady was given, and he began to head to the northwards the prevention of collisions at sea, which came under the circumstances. The regulations for of the sternmost light on the Kwanglee. He into force on the first of July. 1897, were seconds after he steadied he saw that the those regulations it was provided that a vessel was then about two ships lengths off. A few relied upon by defendants. By article 11 of launch had changed her course, and a few seconds after the launch showed her red light Kwanglee was some 286 feet in length, when of 150 feet or upwards in length, and the be gare the order "hard to starboard" then about half-a-ship's length off the aftermost part at a height of not less than 20 feet and being at anchor should carry in her forward light on the Kwanglee. He was on the bridge at the time, and he was there at the time of the
not exceeding 40 feet above the hull one collision and immediately afterwards. He did could be seen at a distance of at least one mile- side light-a white light in a lantern which not mistake the green light on the end of the aud that she should carry in the stern of the China Merchants Wharf for a launch. He vessel, at such a height that it should not be was certain there was a launch there.
less than 15 feet lower than the forward light, The hearing was further adjourned.
another such light. This provision was a new one and did not seem to have been contained in previous regulations relating to this subject. It was clear that the contention of the de- fendants was well founded, if the Kwanglee was governed by these provisions, that she did not comply with this provision. It was matter of law for the Court to determine the part of plaintiff it was contended that she whether she was bound by that provision. On was not bound by these regulations on that point, but that there were certain harbour regn- lations made by the Legislative Council of this colony which applied to the case, with a reservation to which he would presently refer. These provisions were contained in section 27, sub-section 2, of the Merchants' Shipping Con- solidation Ordinance, 1891, of this colony, and he was of opinion that in this case the Kwang- lec was not governed by article 11 of regulations for the prevention of collisions at sea, but by section 27, sub-section 2, of the Merchants' Ship. ping Consolidation Ordinance, 1891. being so it followed that on the night in ques- tion the Kwanglee complied with statutory requirements. That, however, did not entirely dispose of the question as to whether or not sion. In the regulations for the prevention she was to blame in any way for this colli-
5th May
The Chief Justice, in delivering judgment, said that in this case plaintiffs as owners of the steamer Kwanglee brought an action against the owners of the steamship Powan claiming damages on acconut of a collision between the two vessels, Defendants, on the other hand, brought an action against plaintiff's claiming damages in respect of the same collision. The general circumstances relating to the collision were not in dispute. It appeared that it took place on the early morning of the 25th of January last, a few minutes past one o'clock. At that time the Kwanglee was moored along. side the China Merchants Wharf, which was the wharf belonging to plaintiffs. The Powan was coming to Hongkong from Canton, and in en- deavouring to get into the fairway she struck the Kwanglee some 12 feet from her taff-rail on the starboard port. The point of impact as regarded herself was a few feet from her stem on the starboard bow. Considerable damage was done to the Kwanglee by the collision thought, was broken, and other damage done, Some plates were broken, the stern post, he a boat being damaged when the Porcan came forward again after having backed. The wharf was also bent out of the straight line a considerable distance and much damaged. The mooring rods were also to some extent broken. On her side the Powan also sustained some dam-
age on her starboard bow, where she had struck the Kwanglee. The nights dark but clear. and there was a There was a little wind from the north current setting eastward going at the rate of about a knot
an
hour. Under these circumstances each side
said the other vessel was entirely to blame for the collision, and it became necessary to con- sider how far the facts supported them in their respective contentions. He would take the Mr. Francis (instructed by Mr. H. L moored alongside her wharf. It was not dis- case of the Kwanglee first. The Kwanglee was Dennys) appeared for the owners of the Kang-puted that she had been lee and Mr. Pollock (instructed by Messrs. Deacon and Hastings) for the owners of the
Powan.
Captain Patrick, of the Powan, was cross: examined by Mr. Francis. He said the Euro- pean deck officers consisted of the first and
second mates and himself. At the time of the collision the chief officer had just relieved the
moored there from time to time when she was accustomed to be in the harbour at Hongkong. It was in evid- ence also that some of plaintiffs' vessels were longer than the Kuanglee, and it was said that they lay alongside in the She was carrying that night an anchor light or with the regulations relating to lights of that a riding light in her fore-stays. complying
same manner.
&
That
article
of collisions at sea there was an which had a bearing upon this point, which article said that if any master or crew neg- lected to keep a proper look-out or neglected any precaution required by the ordinary prac tice of seamen he should be liable. He con-
sidered that this article applied to the Kwanglee in the present case.
Her stern was projecting a distance of from 30 to 40 feet beyond the end of the wharf into the fairway. It was not alleged on the other side that she could have drawn her bows nearer up to the wall, but still
the fact remained that she projected into the fairway some 35 feet, and the whole of that length was unlighted. His assessors thought that under those circumtances it was neglect of a precaution required by the ordinary practice of seamen and that that neglect contributed to the collision. The effect of this finding was lision. It would be necessary to consider the that the Kwanglee was to blame for this col- case of the Powan before settling whether the Kwanglee was solely to blame or only partly to blame. With regard to the case of the Powan, the facts as put forward for the defence were in fence was founded to a great extent on the con- some ways not altogether satisfactory. Her de-