
    The Parthian. The Ayr. Boston & Philadelphia S. S. Co. v. Scott, (two cases.)
    
      (Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.
    
    November 28, 1891.)
    Admiralty Appeals — Question op Fact — Conflicting Evidence.
    On appeal in admiralty, the circuit court will not reverse the decision of the district judge on a question of fact depending upon conflicting evidence, unless it clearly appears to he against the weight of evidence.
    In Admiralty. Libel by Nathaniel C. Scott against the steam-ship Parthian for damages for a collision with the schooner Ayr, and cross-libel by the Boston &'Philadelphia Steam-Ship Company as owners of Parthian against the Ayr. Decree in the district court for Scott against the Parthian. The steam-ship company appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Shattuck & Munroe, for appellant.
    
      O. T. & T. II. Bussell, for appellee.
   Colt, J.

These two cases are cross-libels involving the sanie collision between the steam-ship Parthian and the schooner Ayr, and they come here on appeal from the district court. The cases turn wholly upon questions of fact concerning which the evidence is conflicting. The district judge, having the advantage of seeing the witnesses and judging from their appearance, ordered a decree in the first case in favor of the libelant, and against the steam-ship Parthian, in the sum of $1,750.15, damages, and costs of suit, and dismissed the cross-libel. It is the established rule of this court that it will not reverse the conclusion reached by the district court upon a controverted question of fact, where the evidence is contradictory, unless it clearly appears to be contrary to the preponderance of evidence. The Grafton, 1 Blatchf. 173; The Sampson, 4 Blatchf. 28; The Florida, Id. 470; The Sunswick, 5 Blatchf. 280; Guimarais' Appeal, 28 Fed. Rep. 528; Levy v. The Thomas Melville, 37 Fed. Rep. 271. Upon a review of the testimony, I am satisfied that the decision of the district court was correct, and therefore the decrees are affirmed.  