Summary

Samuel Blatchford The Blue Jacket — Opinion of the Court

If the collision does not result as a consequence of neglecting to keep a proper lookout, the vessel is not thereby made responsible for the consequences of the collision; and the exemption of the tug necessarily results from the finding as a fact that the absence of the proper lookout in no wise contributed to the collision.
As it is found as a fact that no special circumstance at any time existed which rendered a change of course on the part of the ship necessary or excusable, under article 23 of the statute, she cannot have any benefit from that article.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford The Blue Jacket — Opinion of the Court

In the case of The Manitoba the courses of the two steam-vessels were not such as to make it the duty of the one more than of the other to avoid the other, or to make it the duty of the one rather than of the other to keep her course; and there was, in regard to the courses of both the steam-vessels, such risk of collision that the obligation was upon both to slacken speed, or, if necessary, stop and reverse. But in the present case the duty was wholly on the ship to keep her course, and wholly on the tug to keep out of the way of the ship
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford The Blue Jacket — Opinion of the Court

It is also urged that if the ship was moving in a swinging path, and was in fault in so doing, the tug had been afforded ample opportunity of observing the ship's course, and had many miles of sea room in which to give her a wide berth, instead of which the tug held to her course with her engine at full speed until the vessels were brought near to each other, and that such conduct on her part, with the fact found in finding 25, that she had no such lookout as is required by law, while an unlicensed mate had the sole control of her, and her captain was asleep, showed the grossest recklessness.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature