274
SUPREME COURT.
Thursday, 9th April,
IN ADMIRALTY, JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR WILLIAM M. Goodman (Chief Justice) AND COM-
Mander BasiL TAYLOE (ASSESSOR).·
COLLISION CASE.
His Lordship gave judgment in the cross- action arising out of a collision which occurred on 22nd November about half-past three in the morning in the China cea about 100 miles N. of Hunan Island, between the French s.s. Eclair and the Portugu se 8.8. Hoi-kiang, while the Eclair was going to Kwanchanwan and the Hoi-kiang coming up to Hongkong, as a conse. quence of which collision the latter vessel sank in deep water and the former was seriously damaged.
*
Thursday, 16th April.
|
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND very different tale. Their acconst was that they first saw a green light a little over a mile off. They had seen the white light several minutes before that. When they saw the green they blew two blasts and slightly sta boarded, and of green to green. They proceeded thus for three or four minutes and then suddenly, and at a distance of not over eighty yards, the Eclair red opened out, whereupon the Hoi-kiang starboarded and reversed, but the collisin oc- curred. His Lordship then reviewed the evidence on both sides, and came to the conclusion that the Eclair's account was supported by a far stronger body of testimony than that on Lehalf of the Hoi-kiang, and continued:- There is, however, one matter which can be submitted to the test of absolutely reliable and independent testimony. The Eclair was surveyed on 24th and 25th November, on her arrival in Hongkong, by Mr. A. G. Gordon, His evidence makes it certain that the Eclair's stem did not penetrate the loi-kiang, bat that the Hoi-kiang's stem did, as alleged by the Mr. E. H. Sharp, K.C. (instructed by Mr. F. Eclair's lawyers, in their preliminary act, inflict Paget Hett of Messrs. Monnsey & Brutton, great damage to the port bow of the Eclarabout solicitors), appeared for the Eclair, and Mr. T. five feet from the stem. In spite of this, the Morgan Phillips, barrister-at-law (instructed by-preliminary act of the Hoi-kiang alleges that Mr. G. C. C. Master of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes the stem of the Eclair orashed into the star- & Master, solicitors), was for the Hoi-kiang. board bow of the Hoi-kiang, jnat forward The Chief Justice, in giving judgment, said of the green side-light. After Mr. Gordon's -Abont 3.15 or 3.30 am. of the 2nd November evi lence, the counsel for the Hokiang last, a collision occurred between the French had to admit that his clients' prelim steamer Eclair and a Portuguese small steamer,inary act was wrong ia that respect. or large launch, called the Hoi-kiang. The Here, therefore, we find the allegations collision occurred some three or five miles off of the witnesses of the Eclair to be promontory known as Sung Yia Point, correct, and those of the opposite side to situated, roughly, some 70 miles from Kwang-be erroneous. My nautical assessor agrees with chauwan, and it resulted in the sinking of the me in coming to the conclusion that the collision Hoi-king. At the time, the Eclair was pro- was entirely owing to the faults of those in ceeding from Hongkong to Kwangchauwan, charge of the navigation of the Hoi-kiang, and and the Hoi-kiang was on her way from that I, accordingly, find in favour of the Eclair in port to Macao and Hongkong. The course the original action and also in the cross-action steered by the Eclair, shortly before the colli- which was brought by the Hoi-kiang. There sion, was west by south, and that of the Hoi- must be the usual enquiry as to damages, and kiang was east by north. Each was steered by I give judgment for the Eclair in both cases compass, and the courses were exactly parallel. with costs. Each steamer olaims that it was nearer to the shore than the other: If that contention on the part of the Eclair is correct the vessels would have passed each other, in the ordinary course, red to red. If, on the other hand, the Hoi-kiang was nearer to the shore than the Eclair, they would, in ordinary course, have passed green to green. The evidence, with exception, was, on both sides, that of Chinese, and as is, unfortunately, only too common, in Admiralty cases, the witnesses on the one side contradict flatly those on the other on the important points of the relative positions of the vessels and the lights seen from each respectively. The account of those on the Eclair is that they saw the red and green lights of the Hoi kiang nearly right ahead, but very slightly on the port bow and about a mile or a mile and a half distant: If this is correct they did the right thing by porting their helm, and the Hoi- kiang ought to have done the same. The evidence for the Eclair is that the vessels thus proceeded, red to red, until they were some four lengths apart, when the green light of the Hoi kiang suddenly appeared on the Eclair's port bow and the red shut out. The Eclair was making 10 knots and the Hoi-kiang about 8, from which it follows that they were approach ing each other at the rate of a nautical mile in a little over three minutes Four lengths of the Eclair are equal to 160 yards, and this dis- tance would be covered in, roughly, 15 or 16 seconds. There was, therefore, very little time for the Eclair to take measures to avoid the collision, but such measures as they say she did take appear to be proper, viz, putting the helm hard-a-port and telegraphing to reverse the engines—an order which was immediately carried out. The cases cited by the counsel for the Hoi-kiang as to the necessity of prompt reversal where risk of collision is involved do not seem to me to assist much in the determins tion of this case. The engines were reversed if the evidence can be believed, and it would appear there were not more than 15 or 16 between the sudden opening of the Hoi ang's green light and the actual collision, Assuming the evidence of the Eclair's witnes, ses to be ɛnbstantially correct, the fault was tirely that of the Hoi kiang. Passing to the evidence of the Hoi-kiang people, they tell a
+
one
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HI HONOUR A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGF).
*
SEQUEL TO A COLLISION. On the 11th of March last Lo Kam Ley brought an action against the Hongkong and Whampoa Dock Co., Ld., for $259.25 in respect of damages caused to his cargo-boat, No. 791, in a collision with the Dock Co.'s tug-boat Fame in the Hartour on 12th December. The cargo boat was at the time in tow of a steam-launch of which the master was Cheung Sing, 7, Salt Fish Lane and was proceeding from the Canton steamer wharf to the Empress. The Fame was going from east to west and in attempting to pass under the steru of the tug and tow she struck the cargo-boat in the stern and caused damage to the extent claimed. Judgment in the suit was given for the defendant, his Lordship holding that on the evidence the Fame was not to blame.
Lo Kam Loy now brought an action for damages against the master of the launch which had his boat in tow for the sum named above, Mr. E. J. Grist of Messr. Wilkinson & Grist, solicitors, appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. John Hays of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes & Master, solicitors, was for the defence.
tiff, said that on the day in question plaintiff 8 Mr. Grist, in opening the case for the plain- cargo-boat was being towed by defendant's steam launch from the Canton steamer wharf to the Empress when the cargo-boat collided with the tug-boat Fame. Plaintiff contended that had the steam launch kept her course there would have been no collision. She backed her engines at the last moment and took her way off, so that the Fame which was going astera could not get astern and struck the cargo-boat aft. He had summoned a number of witnesses in this caso, but for some reason or other they had not appeared.
His Lordship-Are the launch people ap pearing P.
Mr. Grist-They are appearing.
in an, a awkward hole. But I will give His Lordship Then I am afraid you are
(April 20, 1963.
you every opportunity, because you remem ber I made the i remark on that oOGARİON. that I came to the decision with very regret and that if there had ben any o evidence on the other side I would have given it full consideration, but there was none. --
cannot get something out of somebody. The Mr. Grist-It will be very hard if my client
position taken up by the defendant was in altogether unwarrantable one. He was asked to produce his witnesses in the first case and support us against the Dock Company but they never appeared.
Mr. Haya- They were subpoenaed.
Mr. Grist-They conld not have been, be they were purposely sent away. cause I tried to get the people on the boat and
Mr. Hays-You have to prove that. Mr. Grist-I can prove it.
subpœnaing, I shall issue a warrant for the His Lordship-If there is any trouble about captain.
Lo Kam Loy, master of cargo-boat No. 791, said his boat was being towed by defendant's launch from opposite the Canton steamer wharf to the Empress. The boat was lashed to the starboard side of the launch. He was giving no directions as to the course to be paraned by the launch; that was left entirely to the master of the launch. On the way the Fame collided with hi、 cargo-boat. He saw the Fame when she' was far off, going from east to west; she tried to pass on the stern of his boat. He did not know whether or not the lanuch did anything to avoid collision; she blew two blasts on her whistle, but he did not know what that meant.
Captain 8. McIsaac, who was master of the Fame at the time of the collision, said she was steering near the centre of the fairway coming from east to west. He was on the launch's starboard bow. When about 50 yards off the launch blew two blasts on her whistle, indi- cating that she was starboarding her helm and going to port. But instead of doing so she reversel her engines and, went astern with the result that a collision took place, Had she kept on her course there would have been no collision. To avoid collision, he went full speed astern.
The Chinese steerswan of the Fame gare coroborative evidence.
The case for the defendant launch was that she gave only one blast on her whistle when approaobing the Fame, and was trying to allow the Fame to pass across her bows accordingly, when the collision occurred.
with costs, and referred the question of damages His Lordship gave judgment for the plaintiff to the Registrar. He was glad that this case had come on as he now saw that his judgment in the first case was perfectly right and that the doubts he entertained at that time were unfounded. The defendant launch took the wrong manœuvre altogether and was to blame.
The Court adjourned.
MINING DEVELOPMENTS.
The correspondent of the N.-C. Daily News at Ngankin writes:→
There is reason to think that mining operations on a large scale will soon be opened up in the south-eastern portion of this province, in which extensive concessions have been obtained by three foreign syndicates, two English and one German. An expérimental shaft sunk for coal near Tatung on the river bank has proved a failure, as bed rock was struck two hundred feet down, and nothing more. Another shaft is now being drilled some six miles from the river, with what result has not yet been heard,
The mineral deposits through the sɔnth- eastern part of the province are of unquestioned value. Besides coal and iron, the chief deposits, the prospecting has been good also for copper quicksilver, lead, silver, antimony, and gold. A mine for the last-named metal, worked in the Ming dynasty, is likely soon to be reopened, and with modern methods should give a rich return. For some weeks recently the interests of the London and China Mining Syndicate were represented here by Sir John Lister Kaye, Bart, and Mr. A. Hespeler, M.E. The latter gentleman will soon start for a several months'
regions. prospecting and surveying tour of the mining