PILOT. An officer serving on board of a ship during the course of a voyage, and hav ing charge of the helm and of the ship's route. An officer authorized by law who is taken on board at a particular place for the purpose of conducting a ship through a riv er, road, or channel, or from or into port.
Pilots of the second description are estab lished by legislative enactments at the prin cipal seaports in this country, and have rights, and are bound to perform duties, agreeably to the provisions of the several laws establishing them.
Pilots have been established in all mari time countries. After due trial and experi ence of their qualifications, they are licensed to offer themselves as guides in difficult navi gation; and they are usually, on the other hand, bound to obey the call of a ship-ma's ter to exercise their functions; Abb. Sh. 13th ed. 190; Snell v. Rich, 1 Johns. (N. Y.) 305'; Bussy v. Donaldson, 4 Dall (U. S.) 206, 1 L. Ed. 802; 5 B. & P. 82; 5 Rob. Adm. 308; Lavifs of Oleron, art. 23; Act of Congr. of Au gust 7, 1789, § 4; Pardessus, n. 637.
The master of a vessel may decline the services of a pilot, but in that event he must pay the legal fees; Camp v. The Marcellus, 1 Cliff. 492, Fed. Cas. No. 2,347. A pilot who first offers his services, if rejected, is enti tled to his fee; The America, 2 Am. Law Rev. 458, Fed. Cas. No. 289; Wilson v. Mc Namee, 102 U. S. 572, 26 L. Ed. 234.
The pilot is to conduct the navigation, regulate the course of the ship and the man agement of the sails; 7 Moore, P. C. 171, 134. He is not liable for damages to the ves sel unless caused by his failure to use ordi nary diligence, i. e., the degree of skill com monly possessed by others in the same em ployment; Wilson v. Pilots' Ass'n, 57 Fed. 227. A river pilot is bound to be familiar with the channel of the river, and with the various obstructions to navigation, and is liable for damages occasioned by the want of such knowledge, but not for damages occa sioned by an error of judgment on his part ; The Tom Lysle, 48 Fed. 690. Shipowners are responsible to third parties for obedience to the pilot; his orders ordinarily, are to he implicitly obeyed. In The China, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 53, 19 L. Ed. 67, it was held in ad miralty that 'a steamship is liable for dam ages arising out of a collision with another steamship, due solely to the negligence of a compulsory pilot. In Ralli v. Troop, 157 U. S. 386, 402, 15 Sup. Ct. 657, 39 L. Ed. 742, the rule of The China was followed ; the opinion of the court placing it upon "a dis tinct principle of the maritime law that the vessel, in whosesoever hands she lawfully is, is herself considered as the wrongdoer." (But this responsibility does not include the cargo ; id.) The continental cases are in accord, but the English rule holds that the ship is not liable in admiralty ; Hall v. Troop, 157 U. S. 386, 15 Sup. Ct. 657, 39 L. Ed. 742; 2 W. Rob. 10 (and now by statute in England in all cases). In a common law action the owners are not liable in such a case ; thus, in .Homer Ramsdell Transp. Co.
v. La Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 182 U. S. 406, 21 Snp. Ct. 831, 45 L. Ed. 1155, a steamship, by the negligence of a compul sory pilot, struck a pier ; in an action at common law the shipowners were held not liable. And the rule is the same in England ; Ralli v. Troop, 157 U. S. 386, 15 Sup. Ct. 657, 39 L. Ed. 742.
Of the judgment of the court in The China, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 53, 19 L. Ed. 67, John C. Gray says (Nature and Sources of the Law 47) that "Judge Holmes [in Com. Law 28] speaks of this decision with more tenderness than it deserves." The owner remains liable for the ship's management in all things that do not relate to mere navigation ; The Oregon, 158 U. S. 186, 15 Sup. Ct. 804, 39 L. Ed. 943.
A compulsory pilot differs from an ordi nary employe and may be held liable to the vessel for damages she has been com pelled to pay by reason of his negligence ; Guy v. Donald, 157 Fed. 527, 85 C. C. A. 291, 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1114, 13 Ann. Cas. 947, C. C. A. 4th Circ.
The compulsory pilotage law applies with in the three mile limit; The Earnwell, 70 Fed. 331, 17 C. C. A. 136. As to the place where the pilot ceases to be compulsorily in charge on arrival in a harbor, see  P. 52. Where a steamer in need of a pilot dis regarded the speaking pilot and it appeared that the speaking pilot was within the three mile limit, the pilot was held entitled to re cover his fee ; The Earnwell, 70 Fed. 331, 17 C. C. A. 136, 28 U. S. App. 593.
By acts of Aug. 7, 1789, March 2, 1837, each state has authority over Pilotage on its navi gable waters, though not exclusive; The Clymene, 9 Fed. 164. State laws regulating pilots are valid until congress has legislated on the subject; Olsen v. Smith, 195 U. S. 332, 25 Sup. Ct. 52, 49 L. Ed. 224. Congress has permitted such state regulations and they are valid ; Thompson ,v. Darden, 198 U. S. 310, 25 Sup. Ct. 660, 49 L. Ed. 1064.
A Delaware pilot may recover for services upon the Delaware River and to Philadel phia, although a Pennsylvania act prohibits auy one acting as such without a Pennsyl vania license ; The Clymene, 12 Fed. 346. The state of Delaware cannot exclude pilots of other states, on the Delaware River ; The William Law, 14 Fed. 792. A state law may permit or direct a pilot to tender his serv ices beyond the three mile limit.
The usual signal by which a pilot tenders his services is the Union Jack set at the main truck, by day, and "flare-ups" by night ; The Ullock, 19 Fed. 207.
There is no inherent right of any citizen to be a pilot; Williams v. Molther, 189 Fed. 700 ; Olsen v. Smith, 195 U. S. 344, 25 Sup. Ct. 52, 49 L. Ed. 224.
Captains of naval vessels may employ pilots, wherever, in their judgment, it is nec essary. Coast pilots shall not be employed except on special authority from the Navy Department. A pilot's presence on board does not relieve the captain of any responsi bility.