OPAWA IN COLLISION.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 14334, 26 June 1917, Page 5

OPAWA IN COLLISION.

OWNERS AWARDED DAMAGES. MISHAP IN MANCHESTER CANAL. Damages Avere recently awarded to the Ncav Zealand Shipping Company, m the Admiralty Division, agaiinst the owners of the steamer Manchester Inventor, as a result of a collision between that vessel and the plaintiff company's steamer OpaAva m the Manchester ship canal on , December 24, 1915. Claims AA'-ere made agttinst the Manchester Liners, Limited, mvilel's of thfe Manchestei' Inventor, and the Manchester Ship Canal; tlie Court iheld tlie latter defendants not responsible foi' the collision and gave judg- . ment for them. The collision took place m tlie canal,-' [ betAveen Barton SAving Bridge and Barton Locks,' Avhen the OpaAva Avas m . course of a voyage from Manchester to , -Australia ?jnd NeAv Zealand via Liverpool, laden Avith general cargo, and the Manchester Inventor Avas bound for Manchester, Avith general merchandise, from Halifax (N.S.). As against the Manchester Inventor the plaintiffs alleged that she Avas negligent m not gi v ing way or tying up until the Opawa had passed, and it Avas said that the servants of tbe Canal Company wei'e negligent m failing to cause tlie Manchester" Inventor to take those precautions^ Tlie I owners of the Manchester inventor, dit the other hand, attributed the collision to those on the OpaAva alloAving the bead of their A'essel to fall to port. The Cdnal Company denied that its servants earn* mitted any breach of duty or negligent act or default. i In tlie course of A lengthy Judgment, Mr. Justice Hill said the vessels met, i and their poi't boAvs collided .and they scraped dowii each other's side, And did one another considerable damage. The l Court held that the Manchester Inventor" Ought riot to have attempted to pass the ;v)paAva. at all m Avhat is called the straight of the canal, but ought to have waited m the neighborhood of tile Bar* ton Locks until the OpaAva had passed down. Instead of that, the Manchester .Inventor Avent on, so. that the A'Cssels 'aa-ci'o bound to pass m the straight. [ There Avas not sufficient space or them to pass. With the greatest care — sup* posing no mistake at all Avas made — the on© ship might have scraped past the '. other at a distance Avhich one Avitness puts at 6ft and apother at 10ft. The slightest , error, the slightest deflection by either ship, Avould bring about a collision. ' , Continuing. Mr. Justice Hill said the Manchester Inventor kneAv the Opanva Avas passing doAvn the canal, and that the former, by the canal - regulations, , must gwe Avay. The Court, therefore, held that negligence on the part of the ' Manchester Inventor Avag the primary cause of the collision. The Manchester Inventor AA'as alone to blame, and the action against the Canal Company failed. There Avould be judgment for the Csinal Company A\'ith costs, and for the plaintiffs against the oAvners of the Mainehester Inventor Avith costs.