The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

THE DAVID DOWS IN ADMIRALTY, DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, A. G. COXE, DISTRICT JUDGE, 1883. REPORTED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER, WEST PUBLISHING CO., ST. PAUL, MINN, VOL. 16, P. 154. Submitted and Illistrated by Gordon Bugbee This is a collision case. The libel was filed by the owners of the schooner CHARLES K. NIMS, alleging that their vessel, with her cargo, was sunk and totally destroyed by reason of the negligence and unskillful seamanship of the officers and crew of the DAVID DOWS. ^ . The NIMS was a three-masted schooner, 163 feet in length and m-93 tons burden. The DOWS is a five-masted vessel, 265 feet in length, l,Ll8 tons burden, and has two center boards. On the evening of September 10, l88l, the two vessels and a third--the JOHN B. MERRILL--were sailing down Lake Erie, near Point Pelee Island, bound for Buffalo. All three were on the starboard tack, sailing parallel courses, E. by S. S. (sic). The wind was S. or S. by W. (See Figure One). The DCWS was ahead of the NIMS a half or three-quarters of a mile, and the NIMS was about the same distance ahead of the MERRILL. The NIMS was bearing about a point off the starboard quarter of the DOWS, and the MERRILL held substantially the same position with regards to the NIMS. The other two vessels were to the windward of the DOWS. Each was loaded and had all canvas set. About 8 o'clock there was a sudden shift of wind (see Figure 2). A heavy squall from the W. or W. by N., almost without warning, struck the vessels nearly due aft. The first effect of the wind was to make the vessels broach to several points heading them somewhere about S. or W. by S. Immediately thereafter the NIMS commenced to fall away, and at the time of the collision was within a point or two of her compass course. The DCWS, however, did not fall away, but kept her southerly course, and from seven to ten minutes after the first appearance of the gale her starboard bow came into collision with the port bow of the NIMS, making a wound which caused the latter to sink in deep water. Immediately preceding the collision, within a moment or two. the wheelsman of the NIMS put her helm hard a-port, the effect being to bring her up a point or twoj and yet the witnesses substantially agree that the vessels met at an angle of nearly L5 degrees. The night was smoky and there was some rain, but it was not very dark. Lights could be seen on the island and mainland, but vessels could not be clearly distinguished over a half a mile distant. Regarding the foregoing facts there is little controversy. The dispute commences with the attempt of the libelants to fasten responsibility upon the DOWS. They insist that she was in fault for the following reasons: First. She was improperly constructed, being fitted with five masts, --an unusual number, --and "patent halyards,"which are apt to become disordered in sudden emergencies.