slowly as it is possible to do so.
The Do r(/o(j )U' (s), in a fog so dense that vessels could The Lordogue.
not be seen by each other their own distance apart, in the
ocean off Ushant, heard three times, at least, the whistle
of another approaching. Within ten or fifteen minutes
of tlie first whistle being heard, the ships were in collision.
The Dordo<j)te stopped and reversed her engines when the
other shi[) came into view, and not before. It was held
that she had broken Ai't. 18, and that she had also broken
Art. lo. The duty of a steamship, under Articles l-i and
18, when in frequented waters, or in the vicinity of other
ships, to proceed at her lowest possible speed, or, imder the
cii'cimistances of the particular case, even to bring herself
to a standstill, was strongly insisted upon.
Tlic Lebanon and The Ceto (t), steamships of 395 and The Ceto.
612 tons respectively, were approaching each other at
night off the Yorkshire coast upon opposite (S.by E. |E. and
N. by W.) courses in a fog so dense that neither could see
the other more than a ship's length off. The Lehanon\
whistle w^as heard from The Ceto less than a mile off, and
four points on her port bow. The Ceto's helm was ported.
The Lebanon's whistle was again heard nearer and on the
same bearing. The Ceto\ helm was again ported. The
Ceto was going as slowly as she could go throughout. The
Lebanon's whistle was again heard, and this time giving
the starboard helm signal. Immediately afterwards she
came into view a ship's length off The Ceto and a point
on her port bow. The Ceto, on hearing the starboard
helm signal, and in answer to a hail from The Lebanon, put
(s) 10 P. D. 6. (0 The Ceto, 14 App. Cas. 670.
448 THE REGULATIONS.
Art. 18. her helm hard a-port and set her engines full speed ahead.
The Lebanon struck her on her port quarter thirty feet
from the stern, and she sank. The Leba)ioii was found to
be alone in fault in the Admiralty Division and Court of
Appeal. The House of Lords {k) varied this decision by
finding The Cefo also in fault, under Art. 18 (r), for not
having stopped and reversed before The Lehcuion came into
view, and after she heard the second whistle and judged
her to be approaching upon the same bearing.
The Ebor. The TelesUla, in a thick fog off Cromer, heard, nearly
right ahead, the whistle of The Ebor about a mile off. She
was held in fault, under Art. 13 and under Art. 18, for not
stopping and reversing at once (//).
Ecsult of the The result of these cases may be thus summed up :
cases. 27^g Frank/and decides that a steamship in a fog, hearing
the whistle of another steamship approaching, should
bring herself to a standstill, at the latest when the ships
are within hailing distance. The Jesmond, The Love
Bird, The Dordorjne, The Kirby Hall, and The Ceto,
are to the like effect. But Tlie Jesmond does not, nor does
The Kirby Hall, decide that in a fog a steamship must
stop and reverse her engines as soon as she hears the
whistle of another. The Jesmond decides that where two
steamships are approaching each other with risk of collision,
and one of them, by altering her course, determines the
risk, Art. 18 does not require her to stop or reverse ; but
if the risk is not in fact determined, although the course
may have been altered, The Ceto decides that the engines
must be stopped and reversed. The Khedive decides that
if the omission to stop and reverse might by possibility
have contributed to the collision, the ship wiU be held in
fault, though those on board showed no want of ordinary
skUl, care, or nerve. It appears, on the other hand, from
(m) Lords Halsbury, Watson, {x) Lords Bramwell and Hals-
Brainwell, Herschell, and Mac- bury intimated that she was in
naghten ; Lords Selborue and fault apart from the Regulations.
Fitzgerald dissenting. (y) T/ic Ebur, 1 1 P. D. 25.
HULK AS TO STOIM'ING AND UK\r.RSlNG. 449
The Khedive {z), The Emmy Ilame, The Beri/l, The Thro- Art. 18.
dorcll. Rand, The C<?^o, and The J/^vwwo^, that an omission
to comply with the Regulation will not be deemed a fault
unless the officer knows, or ought to have known, and, hut
for his negligence, would have known, tliat the Regulation
in (j[uestion Avas applicable. Tlie Benares decides that
where there is one chance, and one chance only, of
escaping collision, and that is, not to stop and reverse.
Art. 2'6 applies, and justifies a departure from Art. 18,
The Beri/l and The Ceto show that a vessel will be held in
fault if, although she slackens her speed, or if, although
going as slow as she can, she does not stop and reverse
until the collision is inevitable, provided those on board
had time and opportunity to stop and reverse, after
slackening, and before the collision was inevitable.
Ai"t. 18 does not require a steamship to slacken and Art. 18 is
, ,1 ,11 • ci. K not iufriuged
reverse at the very moment when danger arises. A man unless there
must have time to consider whether he should reverse or ^^ ^^} "ppor-
tunitv ui
not. The Court is not bound to hold that a man should obeying it.
exercise his judgment instantaneously. A short, but a
very short time, must be allowed him for this i)ur-
pose"(f/). But it is, of course, not an excuse for non-
compliance with Art. 18, that the time which elapsed
between the risk of collision becoming apparent and the
collision, was so short that the engines could not reason-
ably have been stopped and reversed, if the shortness of
the time was due to want of a projoer look-out. Thus,
where it was proved that more than half-a-minute must
have elapsed from the red light of an approaching steam-
ship, A., coming into view on the starboard bow of the
other, 13., had a good look-out been kept on board B.,
B. was held in fault for not having reversed before the
collision. If the red light had, in fact, been visible for
(;) 5 App. Cas. pp. 894, 902. Brett, M. R., The Beryl, 9 P. D.
(a) Fcr Butt, J., The Emmy 137, 138, supra, p. 47 ; The Hub-
liaise, 9 P. I). SI ; and see per buck, Ad. Div. 'l^ih June, 1887.
M. G G
450
THE REGULATIONS.
Art. 18.
Object of
Art. 18 is to
minimize
damage as
â– well as to
prevent
collisiou.
Art. 18 does
not apply to
steamship
lying dead in
the water.
only half-a-minute before the eollisimi, it seems that the
vessel would not have been held in fault for not stopping
and reversing in so sliort a time {/>).
From a Scotch case before the House of Lords, it appears
that neglect to obey Art. 18 will cause a ship to he held
in fault, if the omission, though it could not have contri-
buted to the collision, might have caused or contributed to
the damage (c). And in The Voonraarfs and The Khedive,
Lord Watson said that the rule (Ai^t. 16 of the Eegula-
tions of 18G3) was enacted " with a view to obviate the
risk and minimize the refiitlfH " of a collision {d).
Ai't. 18 has no application to a steamship lying dead in
the water with her engines stopped. There is some diffi-
culty in saying what, under the Regulations, is the duty
of a vessel so situated in a fog, and hearing the whistle
or horn of another vessel approaching her. Neither does
Ai't. 18 forbid her to set her engines ahead or astern,
so as to get some way on and be to some extent under
command (r) ; nor, on the other hand, does Art. 13 require
her to move.
A paddle-wheel steam trawler, going through the
water (,/') one or one-and-a-half knots with her trawl down,
saw a sailing ship approaching her with both side lights
open for ten or twelve minutes. She stopped without
reversing her engines as soon as danger became imminent.
It was assumed by Butt, J., that Art. 18 applied to
her (f/), and he lield that she had complied with it.
Though Art. 18 does not apply to sailing sliips, it has
been said that a sailing ship in a fog, or under circum-
( i ) The Em my Haase, supra .
(c) Maclaren v. Compagriie Frnn-
qaise de Xariijatinn a Vapeur, The
'Thames and The Lutetia, 9 App.
Cas. G40, 649, G52.
(d) 5 App. Cas. 903, 904.
(e) In The Boskinva Bay and The
Earl of Dumfries, Ad. Ct. 14th
Jan. 1885, this question was con-
through the
sidered.
(/) The Tirerdsdale, 14 P. D. 164.
That she â– was going
water is clear from the facts.
{(/) At least as regards stopping.
As to reversing, probably, she could
not with safety, because of her
trawl warp.
RULE AS TO STOPPING AM) KK\ KHSINCI. tOl
stances similar to those in wliich Axt. 18 applies, is under Art. 18^^
a corresponding obligation to shorten sail aud reduce her
speed as much as possible {/i).
Where a steamship has been in collision, and it is proved The burden
or admitted that she did not before the collision stop or ve" eUhlt
reverse, it seems that the burden is on her to show why 'Iocs not
she did not comply with Art. 18. This burden she may to show why
discharge by showing that she was unable, or had not the f^^^^^ ^^^
opportunity, to stop aud reverse (/), or that the omission to
do so was the one only chance of escaping collision {k).
In America, it has been held by the Supreme Court that
the rule requiring a steamship to slacken does not apply
where, if botli ships continue their courses, they will pass
clear, although, if either deviates from her coui'se, there
will be risk of collision (/).
A steamship being overtaken by another vessel is not Overtaken
" approaching " the overtaking ship within the meaning ^ ^^â„¢"'* ^"
of Art. 18. Her duty, therefore, is to keep her coui'se
under Art. 22, and not to slacken under Art. 18, for that
Article does not apply to her {m).
To comply with Art. 18, a vessel must not only slacken Engines not
or stop, but she must not set her engines ahead again until ahea/until
the risk of collision is past {ii). risk is over.
If a steamship sights another ship or her lights, and Duty to stoii
cannot clearly make out what course she is upon, it is her gnSs'^where
duty at once to slacken until she can ascertain what the the other
stranger's course is, so that she may be able to take the or course
measures required by the Eegulatious (o) ; and she must cannot be
do 80 before altering her helm, or taking any decisive step ;
(;i) See per Brett, M. R., The (m) The Franeonia, 2'P.'D. S.
Dordoffne, 10 P. D. 6, 12. and 866 (») In Doicell v. General Steam
supra, p. 40o. Navigation Co., o Ell. k B. 195,
(i) See The Khedive, 5 App. Cas. under the old law, it was held that
876, 902. a ship Was in fault if she did not
[k) The Benares, 9 P. D. 16. continue to exhibit a light so long
[l) The Free State, 1 Otto, 200 ; as dan<rer of collision existed.
Brown, Adm. 251. See, however, (o) The Hona and The Ava, 2 Asp.
The Manitoba, supra, p. 444, 15 Mar. Law Cas. 182 ; 'The General
Da-ins, U. S. 97. Zee, 3 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 201.
CI (J
o
452
THE REGULATIONS.
Speed of a
steamship
approaching
other craft.
Art. 18. for if she does not, aud by altering her helm without
knowing the other ship's position and course, causes a
collision, she will be held to be in fault ( 7;) .
Steamers navigating at a high rate of speed are required
to slacken their speed when approaching other ships, when
there is difficulty or danger in passing them. In America,
it has been held by the Supreme Court that a large steamer
approaching a tug with a number of barges in tow, and
siuTOunded by other vessels, was bound to slacken, and
not " hurl herself like a projectile in the midst of them "
at the rate of seventeen miles an hour, taking the chance
of clearing them {q). And in another case, it was held by
the same Court that a large steamer entering a harbour or
narrow channel was bound to go at such speed as is con-
sistent with the safety of other vessels (r).
A steamship in the North Sea on a clear night, going
eight or nine knots over trawling ground, and running
into a smack which showed no light astern, was held not to
be in fault for going too fast (.s). In an early case {t), it
was held that, on a dark night in the Bristol Channel, ten
knots was an improper speed for a steamship.
Stopping and Jq applying Art. 18, it must be borne in mind that re-
versing the screw, whilst the ship has headway through the
water, always diminishes the turning power of the helm.
In the case, therefore, of a screw steamship, stopping and
reversing her engines is not always a necessary, or even a
prudent, step for her to take when at close quarters with
another ship. On the other hand, the common excuse that
the engines were not stopped and reversed because of the
deadening effect of the reversed propeller upon the port
helm is viewed by the Courts with suspicion (»).
reversing not
always a
prudent
measure.
{p) The Bougainville and The Jas,
a. Stevenson, L. E,. 5 P. C. 316.
As to ships in a fog, see The
Franldand, L. R. 4 P. (J. 529 ; The
Kirby Hall, 8 P. D. 71 ; and mpra.
Ijp. 399, 403, 445.
{q) The Syracuse, 9 Wall. 672.
{r) The City of Paris, 9 Wall.
634 ; and see The Corsica, 9 Wall.
630.
(6) The Pacific, 9 P. D. 124.
{i) The Rose, 2 W. Rob. 1.
(?/) As in The Arratooii Apcar,
15 App. Cas. 37.
EFFFXT OF VnOPFTJJ'.R TIFVRRSING. '4o3
It may be convenient liere to state shortly the effect, Art 18.
under ordinary circumstances, of reversing the propeller Effect of
whilst llic sliip lias headway throuorh tlie water, an effect reversed
' , . , . ficrew whilst
wnicli must always be taken into consideration in deter- the ship has
mining- the application of Art. 18. The behaviour of a ^'^^^^y-
stearasliip under these circumstances was not so generally
known in the year 1SG2, when the stopping and reversing
rule Avas framed, as it is at the present day. The propeller
exerts considerable turning power on the ship, whether
going ahead or astern, but more particularly when going
astern (x). The effect is most strongly marked when the
l^ropeller is going astern and the ship has headway through
the water, the circumstances under which Art. 18 is usually
applicable. The turning effect is in the one direction or
the other, according as the screw is riglit or left-handed.
A right-handed screw revolves, when the engines are going
ahead, viewed from astern, from left to right; a left-handed
screw from riglit to left. When the screw is not dee2:)ly
immersed, and froths air into water, it exerts, when re-
versed, considerable power to turn the ship's head, inde-
pendently of the rudder, the ship tmniing to starboard or
port, almost irrespective of the helm (//), according as the
screw is right or left-handed. This effect is produced
even whilst the ship has headway through the water ; it
increases as the ship's way is stopped. It nearly dis-
appears when the screw is so deeply immersed that it does
not churn air into water. Under the same cii-cumstances
— that is to say, whilst the ship has headway tlu'ough the
water, and the engines and screw are working astern — the
action of the rudder is tlie reverse of that which it has
whilst the engines and screw are going ahead. This re-
verse action of the rudder is always feeble, and is different
for different ships, and even for tlie same ship under differ-
(x) This seems to depend upon the upper,
the fact that the lower blades of {;/) tSeo an account of expori-
the propeller being more immersed ments with 7'Ac Tabor, Nautical
have a greater turning power than Mag. 1880, p. 323.
454
THE REGULATIONS.
Art. 18. ent conditions of loading. When there is wind sufficient
to heel the ship, the advancing end of the ship, whether
head or stern, will always seek, or fly up into, the wind.
The combined influences of (1) the reversed screw,
(2) the wind, and (3) the rudder, severally acting in the
manner ahove described, determine the course of the ship
until her way is stopped. Their utmost effect, when all
acting in the same direction {e.g., screw, right-handed;
helm, starboard ; wind, on the starboard side), is small
compared with the influence which the rudder exerts when
the ship and engines are going full speed ahead. A circle
of at least double the radius of that in which the ship will
turn, when going ahead, is required for her to turn in
when the engines are going astern imder the circumstances
above described. So marked is this diminution in the turn-
ing capability of a ship with her screw suddenly reversed
from full speed ahead, that, under some circumstances, a
vessel running at right angles upon a straight coast at full
speed might avoid going ashore, by keeping on full speed
ahead with her helm hard over, when she could not keep
off the shore by stopping and reversing her engines.
It follows from the general rules above stated, that, with
engines going astern whilst the ship has headway through
the water, the position and direction of the rudder with
reference to the ship's keel is of paramount importance.
Under such circumstances, a vessel with a right-handed
screw will turn her head much C|uicker to starboard (her
helm being to port, and her engines reversed) than it is
possible for her to turn her head to port ; and rice rersd
with a left-handed screw (z).
(z) The authority for most of the
statements in the text is the Re-
port, published in 1875, of a Com-
mittee (J. R. Napier, Esq., Sir W.
Thompson, W. Froudc, Esq., J. T.
Bottomly, Esq., and Professor Os-
borne Reynolds) ajijioiuted by the
British Association to investigate
the effect of propellers upon the
steering of vessels. Further in-
formation upon the subject wiU bo
found in Naval Science, 1873, p.
89 ; Nautical Magazine. 1879, pp.
529, 608; ibid. 1880, p. 323; Trans-
actions of the Institute of Naval
Architects, 1879, a paper by A. J.
WHISTT.TXr, STOXAI.S.
455
Article 19 (a).
In tahuKj any courae authorized or required by these Rerju- Art. 19.
lations, a uteam-ship under ica// may indicate that cour.se to Optional
any other ship which she has in sight by the foUoiciny signals ^^^\^]!^
on her steam uhistle, viz. : — the course of
One short blast (b) to mean " / afn directing my course to steam""
starboard"
Two short blasts to mean " I am directing my course to
port:'
Three short blasts to mean ^"I am going full sp>eed astern.''^
The use of these signals is optional (c) ; but if they are used,
the course of the ship must be in accordance with the signal
made.
This Article was not contained in the Regulations of
1863. It is in the same terms as Art. 19 of the Regula-
tions of 1880. It applies only where a ship intends to
comply with the Regulations, and is desirous to call the
attention of the other ship to her intended course. Such
signals have heen in use in America for many years. It
has heen there held that a vessel cannot, by means of these
signals, dictate to the other ship a depai'ture from the
Regulations (r/). Care must he taken that the " short"
blasts of Art. 19 are not confounded with the " prolonged "
fog-signal blasts of Art. 12.
It wUl be observed that Art. 19 applies only where the
Mati-innis, Esq. In connection handed. Wlicn going ahead at a
with this subject, the following moderate or full .speed she answers
facts, collected from the above her port helm quickest with a
soui'ces, may be not without iute- right-handed, and her starboard
rest: — A screw steamship usually helm with a left-handed screw,
answers one helm quicker than the (a) Correspouding to Art. 28 of
other, whether going ahead or the Washington Regulations,
astern ; but ditt'ereut ships behave {/>) Of about one second's dura-
ditlerently in this respect. "Wlien tion : Washington Regulations,
just starting a tteamship will (c) By the Washingtou Regula-
answer her starboard hehn quickest tions they are compulsory,
if her screw is right-handed, aud (d) The Milicaiikee, Brown Ad.
her port helm if her screw is left- 31:5.
456
THE REGULATIONS.
Art. 19.
Meaning of
the words
"I am
directing my
course to
starboard"
(or port).
otlier vessel is in sight. In a fog so dense that the other
vessel cannot be seen, it seems that it has no application,
Douhts have been raised as to the meaning of the words
" I am directing my course to port" (or starboard). It is
submitted that these words mean " I am putting my helm
to starboard" (or port, as the case may be). The reason
why these latter words are not used is indicated in a former
page, where it is pointed out that in Art. 15 similar words,
" alter her course to starboard," are substituted for " the
helms of both shall be put to port," the words in the
Regulations of 18G3. It has been suggested that " I am
directing my course to starboard " is ambiguous, and may
mean " my present course will take me on your starboard
side." It is submitted that this is not the intention or
meaning of the Article. The object clearly is to apprise
the other ship of an alteration of the helm at the earliest
possible moment. It is of the greatest importance, when
ships are at close quarters, that each should know of any
alteration of the helm of the other at the moment it is
made, so that she may act accordingly. In the absence of
some such indication as is provided by Art. 19, the ships
may be approaching each other dangerously close, whilst
they are endeavouring to ascertain how each others' helms
are acting. The size and length of modern steamships,
and then- consequent slowness in answering their helms,
makes this a matter of increasing difficulty.
Art. 20.
Ship over-
taking
another ship.
Article 20 {().
NotwitJistandiny ani/tlthig contained in any preceding
Article, every ship, u-Jicthcr a miling-ship or a â– ^tea)n-s/rip,
overtaking any other, shall keep out of the way of the over-
taken ship.
This Article is identical with Art. 20 of the Eegulations
of 1880. It corresponds with Art. 17 of the Regulations
r) Corresponding to Art 24 of the Washington Regulations.
OVERTAKING SHIP. 457
of 18G'3, but its operation is larger. The opening words, Art. 20.
"Notwitlistanding, &c.," are intended to meet a difficulty,
wliicli existed under the Regulations of 1863, as to the
duty of a sailing ship overtaking a steamship, and as to
tlie duty of a sailing ship or a steamship overtaking
another sailing or steamship from abaft the beam of the
latter, and crossing her com-se. In these cases there was
an apparent conflict between Art. 15 and Art. 17 (./'),
and between Art. 12 and Art. 17 {(j), of the Eegulations
of 18g;j.
Art. 20 is express as to the duty of a sailing ship over-
taking any other ship to keep out of the way. It is
therefore the duty of a sailing ship overtaking a steamship
to keep out of the way of the steamship.
The Regulations do not prescribe any particular course
for the ship to take whose duty it is to keep out of the
way. She may go ahead or astern of the other, or on
either side of her, as she thinks best (//). The duty of tlie
overtaken ship is considered below (/).
Under the Regidations of 1880 a ship may be an " over- Art. 20 over-
taking " ship within .\rt. 20, when, if her speed were not "^j^^'ie^
greater than that of the other vessel, she would be a "cross-
ing" ship within the meaning of Art. 16, or approaching
the other so as to involve risk of collision within the
meaning of Ai't. 14. The " overtaking " ride (Art. 17) of
the Regulations of 1863 seems to have left a doubt in some
cases as to the relative duties of two ships, one of which
was at once crossing and overtaking the other; and the
existing Art. 20 was framed in its present terms in order
to remove such doubt. Therefore the overtaking, and not
the crossing, nde is to prevail when there is any doubt (/.) .
(/) See The ThUotaxe, 2 Asp. conia, 2 P. D. 8.
Mar. Law Cas. 512; The Wheat- [h) See Art. 14, p. 409, above.
sheaf and The Intrepide, 2 Mar. (<) Art. 22, p. 471, below.
Law Cas. 0. S. 292. (X) Sec per Butt, J., iu The Sea-
{(/) See The Teckforton Castle, 1 iou, 9 P. D. 1 : suyrn, p. 426.
P. D. 222 ; 3 P. D. 11 ; The Fran-
458 THE REGULATIONS.
Art. 20. The observations of Sir 1\. Phillimore in The Breadalbnne (/),
to the effect that where the ships are crossing Art. 14 is to
prevail, appear not to be well-founded.
What is an There is nothing: in the Regulations to indicate how one
"overtaking'"
ship? ° ship must bear from another in order to be an "over-
taking " ship. A ship dead astern of another, or on her
quarter, is no doubt an " overtaking " ship, if coming up
with the other ahead. Whether a ship a point or two on
the beam of another is "overtaking" the latter, if going
at a greater speed, is not clear. Under the Regulations