Shanghai, Aug. 27,1931. when two junks in tow of a lighter were noticed. The junks were on the tail end of the tug, which attempted to cross the bow of the President Cleveland. Witness sound-Jed his siren twice and. tried avoid hitting the smaller craft and, while" he succeeded in avoiding the tug, he struck the junks, Counsel (Mr, N. E. Turton for plaintiffs and' Mr. C, Franklin for the defence) then entered into Sten Kirton, after thatthe colton was Caneed ft. Lurton, after emphasis
the President Cleveland, said. that ithe junkmen were quite within their rights in using the river og they did. 'They were' not required to follow the rules of navigation like @ big boat because, they were Ihand-propelled craft. The june were on the right side of the river out, in any case, they "had every Fight to be on any part of the river they maintained their course, The bigger boat, which could make 100 feet to the junks five or six; [had to give way to the small, slow moving boats, The Commis seem reasonable Mr. Lurton: their rights so long as they main= tain their course, The Commissioner:—Even in the centre of the channel?
Mr. Lurton:—Even in the cen tre of the channel big vessels have mo proprietary rights, Mr, Franklin dealt with the ques tion of negligence on the part of the pilot and the captain and said that the plaintiffs had to prove there was no contributory, negligence on the part of the junks Signals, were given by the Pre ident Cleveland but the tug stony to the port side and took place, As to argument." concerning right of way, how did the President, Cleveland to get out Jof the way? To hop over them or to dive under them? Counsel subs mitted that, there was contributory, evidence on, the part of "planta Te was a. physical impossibility for ships of the size of the President [Cleveland to get within 60 feet of the Pootung side of the river, plaintitts had alleged that it there the accident had taken place, Jand to have struck the junks.
Mr, Lurton:—Maybg the -junke men were mistaken.
The Court agreed but said that was necessary to find out where exactly the accident happened, 'There was a conflict of evidence lon that point, Tt was necessary for him to determine whether" the President Cleveland could have avoided the accident, 'Mr. Franklin:—How could she avoid' it?
Mr, Lurton:—She could have-tume and she did turn her into these unfor~
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.