On the morning of November 17, 1889, a collision occurred between the sloop Solferino, of the burden of 19.66 tons, and the steam-boat J. D. Peters. The course of the sloop was W. N. W.; that of the steamer, about E. S. E. The vessels were thus approaching each other nearly end on. Each vessel discovered the other at a distance of two and a half or three miles. The sloop was, as stated by the master of the steam-boat, one point on his starboard bow, three miles off. It is obvious that the collision was caused by gross negligence or mismanagement on the part of one or both of the vessels. In all cases of collision between steamers and sailing vessels, the former are presumptively in fault; for it is the right of the sailing vessel to keep her course, anil the “duty of the steamer to adopt such precautions as will avoid her.” St. John v. Paine, 10 How. 557 ; The Oregon v. Rocca, 18 How. 572 . In Leavitt v. Jewett, 11 Blatchf. 421 , Judge Woodruff, affirming the decision of Blatchford, J., observes:

In the language of the cases cited from the supreme court, the defense must be almost conclusively established.

*270 The account given by

The excuse set up for the steamer in this case is not unfamiliar to the supreme court. In Haney v. Packet Co., 23 How. 291 , Mr. Justice Grier observes:

In the case at bar, it would not be difficult to suggest an explanation of the collision much more probable than that offered by the claimants. But it is unnecessary. It is enough that the claimants are presumptively liable for the accident, and that the burden of proof is on them to show to the satisfaction of the court that the steamer was not in fault. This they have failed to do. Decree for libelants.