negligence on the part of the crew of the sloop in failing to comply with the navigation rules.

It is a rule now well established that when fault on the part of one vessel is clearly shown and such fault is sufficient to account for the disaster (as it was in this case), it is not enough for such vessel to raise a doubt with regard to the management of the other vessel, and any reasonable doubt with regard to the propriety of the conduct of such other vessel should be resolved in its favor. The City of New York, 147 U.S. 72, 85; The Binghamton, 271 Fed. 69; The Victory & The Plymothian, 168 U.S. 410; The Oregon, 158 U.S. 186.

The Estrella Marina has been shown to be guilty of numerous faults, any one of them sufficient in itself to cause the collision. The Panamanian Government has failed to show any faults on the part of the Fulton, and the sloop, therefore, must be held solely at fault for the collision, and the Fulton absolved of all responsibility for the damages sustained by the sloop.

DECISION OF THE COMMISSION

THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA,

ON BEHALF OF

FRANCISCO AND GREGORIO CASTEÑEDA, Registry No. 20 AND JOSÉ DE LEÓN R.,

V.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

This is a claim by the owners of the sloop Estrella Marina for the damages which they suffered in a collision between that vessel and the U.S. destroyer Fulton. The collision occurred in the Gulf of Panama near Pacheca Island before daylight in the early morning of July 10th, 1931. On the grounds stated in the case of Walter E. Noyes (Registry No. 5) the Commission holds that it has jurisdiction to decide upon this claim. The evidence shows that the Fulton was keeping an adequate look-out and that 13 minutes before the collision she sighted a yellow light

carried by the sloop. This light as seen from the Fulton seemed to be passing to starboard. The Fulton changed her course somewhat to port to give a wider clearance when the approaching light suddenly changed direction and a collision occurred. Testimony from the crew of the sloop shows that she changed course sharply to starboard just before the collision, that she was keeping no regular watch and that she did not make out the sailing lights of the destroyer. The testimony of the sloop's captain also indicates that the port light of the sloop was not burning. It is the opinion of the Commission that the collision was due not to any negligence on the part of the Fulton, but to an unlawful change of course by the Estrella Marina just before the collision (International Rules of Navigation, arts. 20, 21).

DECISION

The Commission decides that the claim just be dismissed. Done at Washington, D.C., this 22nd day of May, 1933.

D. W. VAN HEECKEREN

Presiding Commissioner ELIHU ROOT, Jr.

Commissioner

H. F. ALFARO

Commissioner

COMMENT

It will be noted that this Decision rests not upon the general principles of international law but upon the International Rules of Navigation. Whether these rules were considered to be applicable because a part of the municipal law of Panama (within whose jurisdiction the collision occurred), or because, by their common acceptation by the nations, they were considered to represent the law of nations in this respect, is not made apparent, either in the pleadings of the claimant Government, which relied upon them as a basis for its claim to international responsibility, or in the Decision.

CLAIM

on behalf of

JUAN MANZO

DOCKET REGISTRY NO. 21

Syllabus

1. The responsibility of the Government of the United States for an injury resulting from "the negligent conduct" of a foreman of a construction crew in the Canal Zone depends not on the municipal law of Panama or of the United States but "directly upon the terms of the treaty which provides inter alia for decision by the Commission [in accordance with the principles of international law, justice and equity] upon ‘all claims for losses or damages originating in acts of officials or others acting for either government and resulting in injustice . . .'”

2. In computing the amount of indemnity, there is taken into account "the seriousness of the injury and the length of time for which compensation has been delayed ".

SUMMARY OF FACTS

In 1905, when the claimant was a boy of between ten and thirteen years of age he was employed as a water carrier by the Municipal Engineering Division of the Isthmian Canal Commission. On September 4, 1905, while attempting to oil a pulley his right hand was caught by an allegedly defective cable, resulting in the loss of four fingers and half of his palm.

The Government of Panama contended that the accident was due to the negligence of a foreman of a gang of laborers in allowing the use of a defective cable, as well as

177402-34

-44

679

permitting so young a child to do such hazardous work. Panama alleged further that the provisions of the Civil Code of Colombia regulating the relationship between the Government and its employees had been adopted as law in the Canal Zone and was applicable to this case. The United States denied liability on the ground that negligence had not been established, that official responsibility had not been shown, that the municipal law of Colombia regulating relations between the Government and its employees had not been continued in force in the Canal Zone, and that under the applicable law of the United States there was no liability on the part of the Government in such circumstances.

EXTRACTS FROM BRIEF OF PANAMA

The Agent of the Republic of Panama respectfully files this Brief in the claim presented on behalf of Juan Manzo against the United States of America.

The case is simple. The facts set forth in the Memorial were duly proven by the annexes filed. No evidence has been adduced in refutation of the same.

The grounds of the claim can be summarized briefly. Juan Manzo, 10 years old, was working in the service of The Panama Canal as water carrier. One day he was ordered by his immediate foreman, Mr. Lafayette Trowbridge, to grease the pulley on which a steel cable passed. Due to a defect of such cable, his hand was caught between the pulley and the cable. As a result of this, Manzo lost four fingers of the right hand. Its amputation reaches to the middle of the palm.

Manzo's age is established by the certificate issued by the Gorgas Hospital. The same document proves unequivocally the mutilation which he suffered (annex C). The injury sustained on account of a defective cable while he was doing work, which was improper for his age, by order