the pilotage authority in the Tyne: 28 & 29 Vict. c. 44; see Orders in Council of 19th July, 1862, and 5th February, 1872; Newport (Monmouth): 24 & 25 Vict. c. 236 (Local); Penarth: see Cardiff; Portcawl: 18 Vict. c. 50 (Local), Parl. Pap. No. 268 of 1879, and Ord. in Council of 6th May, 1857; Rosehearty: 26 & 27 Vict. c. 104; Sandhaven: 36 & 37 Vict. c. 63 (Local), Ord. in Council of 20th March, 1877; Sunderland, North: 28 & 29 Vict. c. 59 (Local); and see Newcastle. was not before the Court in The Hanna. The following cases have been decided under the Newcastle Pilotage Acts: Dodds v. Embleton, 9 D. & R. 27; Tyne Improvement Commissioners v. General Steam Nav. Co., L. R. 2 Q. B. 65. 133 CHAPTER VI. THE REGULATIONS FOR PREVENTING COLLISIONS. to the Rule of MANY years before the Rule of the Road at sea was Legislation as regulated by Act of Parliament, the practice of seamen the Road. had established rules to enable approaching ships to keep clear of each other (a). These rules, which are the foundation of those now in force, were well established by custom, and formed part of the general maritime law administered by the Admiralty Court. In the year 1840 a rule as to the side on which steam-ships were to pass each other was promulgated by the London Trinity House, and enforced by the Admiralty Court. In 1846 the subject was first dealt with by the Legislature, and since that year the law has been altered or added to (b) by three successive Acts of Parliament. The only Act now in force is 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63. By that Act power is given to Her Majesty, on the joint Enactment of the existing recommendation of the Admiralty and the Board of Trade, Regulations. to make regulations for preventing collisions. Under this power the Regulations in force at the present date (January, 1880) were made by Orders in Council of 9th January, 1863, and 30th July, 1868. Other Regulations coming into force on the 1st of September, 1880, in substitution (a) A Rule of the Road for ships on opposite tacks existed in the Navy at least as early as the latter part of the last century. It was to the effect that the ships on the larboard tack should bear up for those on the starboard tack. This rule appears in Admiralty Regulations of (b) As several cases decided under In what waters they apply. To what ships they apply. for those of 1863, were made by Order in Council of 14th August, 1879 (c). The Regulations are headed "for preventing collisions at sea," and appear to be expressly binding only on ships at sea (d). But, except in waters where local rules are in force, it would probably be held that vessels are required to navigate in accordance with them in rivers and harbours, as well as at sea. Many cases have been decided upon the assumption that they apply in rivers (e). The words of Article 25 of the new Regulations seem to imply that, except in the cases mentioned in that article, they apply everywhere. On the sea, everywhere, except where local rules apply, they are directly applicable (ƒ). Their application in winding rivers and in waters where local rules are in force is considered below under Articles 21 and 25. The Regulations apply to all ships and craft whose business it is to go to sea, whether large or small, and whether propelled by oars or not (g). Whether they apply in rivers and harbours to craft never intended to go to sea, as hulks and barges, seems doubtful (h). As to their application to Queen's ships, see Article 26, below. (c) See the London Gazette of 19th Aug. 1879. These as well as the Regulations of 1863 are set out in the Appendix; infra, p. 246. (d) See per Brett, L.J., in The Franconia, 2 P. D. 8. The dictum of the Lord Justice, in this case, to the effect that the Regulations of 1863 are inapplicable in a winding river, cannot mean that they are never applicable in such waters. It must be taken to mean that they are not always applicable in a winding river to ships in such positions that they would be bound by them if at sea. The Admiralty Rules of 1851 as to ships' lights were held to apply in the Thames; Morrison v. General St. Nav. Co., 8 Ex. 733. (e) The Velocity. L. R. 3 P. C. 44; The Cologne & The Ranger, ibid. 4 P.C. 519; and see The Fyenoord, Swab. Ad. 374. In America the Act of Congress embodying the Regulations of 1863 is expressed to be for preventing collisions " on water." By the Canadian Statute 31 Vict. c. 58 the Regulations are applicable over all the inland and other navigable waters of the Dominion. (f) See The Saxonia, Lush. 410, as to the application of a former Act to foreign ships in the Solent. (g) Ex parte Ferguson & Hutchinson, L. R. 6 Q. B. 280; and see 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, ss. 25, 27, and 28, where the Regulations, including those for fishing boats, are spoken of as regulations for ships. (h) Such a hulk was held not to be a ship within 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 55; European, &c., Mail Co. v. P. & O. St. Nav. Co., 14 L. T. N. S. 704. The Regulations apply to British ships everywhere. To foreign ships within British jurisdiction they apply directly as forming part of the municipal law of the country (i). They are also applicable to foreign ships out of British jurisdiction, and, in the case of a collision on the high sea, or in foreign waters, are applied to such ships by British Courts by virtue of a special provision of the Act of 1862. Under that Act Her Majesty has power by Order in Council to direct that the Regulations shall be applied by British Courts to the ships of foreign countries which have adopted them (k). The regulations of 1863 were adopted by, and by various Orders in Council have been declared applicable to the ships of, the Argentine Republic, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Chili, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, the Hawaian Islands, Hayti, Italy, Morocco, the Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, the Republic of the Equator, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Uruguay, and to the ships of the United States of America, both at sea and on the inland waters of America. The Regulations of 1880 are, by Order in Council of the 14th of August, 1879, declared applicable to the ships of the above-named countries, except the Argentine Republic, Brazil, Morocco, Peru, the Republic of the Equator, Turkey, and Uruguay. national character. The Regulations of 1863 form part of the municipal law Their interof this country, of many foreign countries (1), and also of Canada (m). In the United States, it has been held by the Supreme Court that, having been adopted by all maritime nations, they are of universal application, and are part of international or general maritime law (n). (i) And expressly by 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 57. (k) See 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 58. (1) Amongst others, the United States, Act of Congress of 29th Ap. 1864, c. 69; France, Décrets of 25th Oct. 1862, 26th May, 1869, and 28th Oct. 1873; Germany, Penal Code, (m) 31 Vict. c. 58 (Canada). They furnish the rule for determining which ship is in fault, except where stances make them inappli cable. Their international character and the safety of navigation require that they should be understood by the seamen of different nations in the same sense. It is therefore of importance that the construction placed upon them by the Courts of different countries should be uniform. This has been distinctly recognised in America. The following observations occur in a judgment of a Circuit Court of the United States: "The paramount importance of having international rules, which are intended to become part of the law of nations, understood alike by all maritime powers, is manifest; and the adoption of any reasonable constructruction of them by the maritime powers named affords sufficient ground for the adoption of a similar construction of our statute by the Courts of this country" (o). Where no special circumstances exist to make the Regulations inapplicable, they furnish the paramount rule for the decision of the question as to which ship is in fault in every case of collision. "Public policy, as well as the special circum- best interest of all concerned, requires that they should be enforced in all cases to which they apply" (p). Departure from them is justifiable only in one event; namely, where it is necessary in order to avoid immediate danger. If a ship cannot take the step required by the Regulations without going ashore, or endangering herself or other vessels, the Regulations do not apply; and in such a case the question which ship is in fault is tried, without regard to the Regulations, by the ordinary rules of seamanship. Provided they are not inconsistent with the Regulations, the rules or practice of seamen, although they have not the question arose in this case whether (0) Per Benedict, J., in The Sylvester Hale, 6 Bened. 523; and a similar opinion was expressed by the Court in The Free State, Brown Ad. 251, 261. (p) New York & Liverpool U.S. Mail Steamship Co. v. Rumball, 21 How. 372, 383; and see The Byfoged Christensen, 4 App. Cas. 669, infra, p. 209. |