1926 — Dec 20, Motor Launch Linseed King hits Ice, Sinks, Hudson River, NYC        –35-51

Compiled by Wayne Blanchard; last edit 3-10-2025 for upload to: http://www.usdeadlyevents.com/

–35-51  Blanchard estimate. No one knows the death toll because no one knows how many men went onboard, either going to work or looking for work. We note 35 deaths as the low end of our death range in that this is the number of bodies said to have been retrieved from the Linseed King (Open Jurist). For the high end of the death toll range we choose to rely on the NYT from Dec 23 and Dec 24, which puts the high end of a death toll at 50 or 51. In 1928 the NYT noted 50 deaths. Given these reports, as well as those noting a lower death toll we choose not to show 58 as the high end of the death toll range.

–51-58  NYT.  “Toll Third Worst…Harbor History…51-58…Linseed King…1926…,” 10Sep32.

–30-51  New York Times. “Hole Found In Bow Of The Linseed King.” 12-23-1926, p. 12.

–30-50  New York Times. “Hudson Disaster Out Of Federal Hands.” 12-24-1926, p. 7.

—     50  New York Times. “Liability Unlimited In Launch Disaster.” 3-17-1928, p. 13.

—   >35  Open Jurist. 285 U.S. 502–The Linseed King Spencer Kellogg Sons v. Hicks Alexander.[1]

—     30  Courier and Freeman, Potsdam NY. “Pierrepont Man Escapes Drowning.” 12-29-1926, 1

—     30  Associated Press. “Asks $100,000 In Ship Death.” Syracuse Herald, NY. 1-9-1927, p. 3.

Narrative Information

Dec 20, 1926, AP: “New York, Dec. 20 (AP) – At least 27 persons were drowned in the icy waters of the Hudson river today when a 60-foot launch, carrying about 100 employes to an Edgewater, N.J., manufacturing plant from Manhattan, was crushed by floating ice. Ten others are missing. Three bodies were picked up floating in the river and 21 others were taken from the partly submerged launch after it had been floated upstream to 254th street, where it grounded.

 

“As the launch, the Linseed King, left its Manhattan pier, it had to plough through a shifting sea of ice, chopped to great slabs by the river traffic, grinding its way upstream on an ebb tide. In mid-stream the craft was caught between great floes which cut its frame and ripped open its sides.

 

“Immediately confusion reigned. As the water came pouring in, the employes…rushed from the cabin and plunged into the frigid waters.

 

“Almost immediately the Linseed King sank to the water level and many of the freezing men clung to its sides while others attempted to crawl onto pieces of floating ice.

 

“Police attempting to check up on the number of persons who had been on the craft received widely varying reports. Some estimates were as low as 40, while several of the men taken to hospitals were vehement in their assertions that there had been at least 150 on board. Most reports said only men had been on the boat, but police investigated unsubstantiated rumors that several women had been among them….” (Associated Press. “Launch Capsizes In Hudson River. 27 known to have drowned and Ten Others are Missing as Result of Vessl being crushed in Ace opposite 129th Street.” Salamanca Republican Press, NY. 12-20-1926, p. 1.)

 

Dec 24, 1926, NYT: “A gaping hole, found yesterday in the bow woodwork, gave added strength to the belief that overcrowding caused the wreck of the launch Linseed King early Monday morning, with the death of at least thirty and perhaps fifty-one laborers in the icy Hudson.

 

“The sunken launch, crumpled by ice and water pressure and looking almost as frail as a cockleshell, was raised yesterday morning from its river bed opposite West 254th Street, where it had drifted after striking an ice floe six miles downstream. The splintered hole in its bow was found to have been driven through the woodwork, two inches above the steel plates which sheathed its hull. This fact alone, according to Assistant District Attorney John F. McGown, proves that the launch was carrying too great a load when it struck the floating ice. If a normal number of men had been carried, Mr. McGowan insisted, any floating ice would have struck the steel plating and would not have harmed the craft. As it was, the bow was pressed down into the water below its load-water line, according to the investigators’ theory, and a jagged ice floe drove through the thin wood.

 

“While Mr. McGowan and his assistants were inspecting the hull yesterday, John Rohweder, operator of the launch, was being arraigned before Magistrate Richard F. McKiniry on a charge of suspicion of homicide. He was released in $10,000 bail for examination on Tuesday. Captain Rohweder, still haggard from his experience, was arraigned on an affidavit which charged that he ‘failed to safeguard the lives of the passengers sailing in the launch,’ and that in consequence the boat sank, with heavy loss of life. Immediately after obtaining bail Rohweder went back to the Knickerbocker Hospital, where it was feared he might develop pneumonia.

 

“The Assistant District Attorney charged that Rohweder had been ‘criminally negligent’ in packing too many men on his little boat. One witness told him, Mr. McGowan said, that the Captain was anxious to avoid a second trip across the ice-filled river, and called to the workers on the pier, ‘Come on! Come on!’

 

“They came- at least eighty of them, Mr. McGowan said. They crowded into the little cabin and overflowed onto the cramped decks, where they stood in the cold of early morning while the launch plowed across on its way to the Spencer Kellogg & Sons oil refinery in Edgewater.

 

“C. W. Clayton, of 745 Undercliff Avenue, builder of the Linseed King, told Mr. McGowan that the total capacity of the boat was sixty men. An attorney for the company disputed this and said that, to the company’s knowledge, the seating capacity was sixty, with room for more outside….” (New York Times. “Hole Found In Bow Of The Linseed King.” 12-23-1926, p. 12.)

 

Feb 2, 1928, NYT: “Hearing on the motion to limit liability of Spencer Kellogg & Sons for the sinking of their launch Linseed King in the Hudson River on Dec. 20, 1926, ended yesterday. Federal Judge Hazel directed that briefs be sent to him at his home in Buffalo. Fifty-eight persons were drowned and injured in the accident, and the damages claimed by the plaintiffs amount to several million dollars.” (NYT. “Linseed King Briefs To Be Sent To Judge.” 2-2-1928, p. 47.)

 

March 17, 1928, NYT: “Federal Court Decides Owners of Linseed King Were at Fault When Fifty Drowned. Claims Total $5,053,992

 

“Claimants for damages caused by the sinking of the gasoline launch Linseed King in the Hudson River on Dec. 20, 1926, will be free of limitation as to payments that can be allowed. Federal Judge John R. Hazel denied yesterday a motion by counsel for Spencer Kellogg & Sons, Inc., owners of the launch, to limit the damages to the value of the launch, about $2,500.

 

“The launch was ferrying about eighty-seven men across the Hudson to the Kellogg oil refining plant at Edgewater, N.J., when it hit something that tore a hole in it below the water line. It sank in two minutes. Fifty of the men on board were drowned and twenty-three were injured, according to Miss Elizabeth Robinson, associate of Silas Blake Axtell, counsel for sixty-nine of the claimants….” (New York Times. “Liability Unlimited In Launch Disaster.” 3-17-1928, p. 13.)

 

April 11, 1932, Open Jurist,: “Argued Feb. 16, 17, 1932.  Decided April 11, 1932.

 

“1 These cross-writs were granted in a proceeding for limitation of liability under section 3, Act of March 3, 1851, c. 43, initiated by Spencer Kellogg & Sons, Inc., owner of the motor launch Linseed King, which sank on December 20, 1926, causing personal injuries and loss of life.

 

“2  Kellogg & Sons is a New York corporation engaged in the manufacture of linseed oil at a number of factories, among them one at Edgewater, N. J., on the west shore of the Hudson river, opposite Ninety-Sixth street, New York. The home office of the corporation is in Buffalo, where the chief executive officers reside. The Edgewater plant employs many workmen who live in New York. In order to ferry these men to and from the factory the company owned and operated the Linseed King, a gasoline launch of a length of forty-five feet and a beam of ten feet, having a small wheel house forward, and behind that an inclosed cabin which occupied practically the entire deck space. The company’s practice was to send the boat from Edgewater, early in the morning, to the foot of Ninety-Sixth street, where the men went on board and were transported to the factory in time for their work. Although the safe load was estimated at not over sixty passengers, she had eighty-six life preservers aboard and had frequently carried more than eighty persons. This number seriously crowded her cabin, the total superficial area of which was two hundred thirty-three square feet, two lengthwise seats occupying about one-third of the space.

 

“3  On the morning in question the boat left the New Jersey pier before daybreak, in charge of one man. As the New York shore was approached drift ice was encountered which had come down the river during the night and been driven to the easterly side by a west wind. The launch passed safely through the ice and reached the foot of Ninety-Sixty street. There another of the company’s employees, who was detailed to give general assistance and may be considered a deckhand, came on board. The launch was immediately filled from a crowd of waiting men. It is difficult to ascertain exactly how many boarded her; but the courts below have found that there were at least seventy-eight. On the return trip the thicker part of the ice towards the New York shore was successfully traversed, and when the master considered himself clear of ice he proceeded at full speed-about seven miles an hour. Shortly thereafter a cake or floe of ice stove a hole in the boat’s port bow and caused her to fill and sink in about two minutes. The result was a panic in the cabin, a rush for the exits, which were small, and one of which opened inward, thus being difficult of operation on account of the crowded condition. Some of the passengers were thrown into the river, reached floating cakes of ice, and were rescued. Thirty-five bodies were found in the cabin, but the number lost was never definitely determined.

 

“4  Actions were brought in the New York courts against Kellogg & Sons by certain of the survivors and by the administrators of some of those who had been drowned. One libel was filed in the District Court for Southern New York. Claims were made by others and suits threatened. The company filed a petition for limitation and sought an injunction against all proceedings upon any claim, including those for workmen’s compensation under the New Jersey act, except that no injunction was asked against the mere filing of claims with the New Jersey State Workmen’s Compensation Bureau. The launch was surrendered, its value ascertained as $1,500, proper stipulation entered, and an order of reference made to a commissioner to receive claims. An injunction pendente lite was issued as prayed embracing not only the claimants, but the State Compensation Bureau, service being made upon the secretary of that body. Claims were filed, and the claimants in their answers to the petition denied the company’s right to limitation.

 

“5  Upon the issues so made the cause came on for hearing before the District Court, and at the conclusion of the evidence that court denied the owner’s right to limit and referred all of the claims to a commissioner for report as to their validity and the amounts to be awarded. The latter recommended awards to sundry claimants. On exceptions the District Court confirmed some and altered others….

 

“9  The first question for decision is whether Kellogg & Sons, as owner, was entitled to a decree limiting its liability. The master’s negligence is not denied; indeed the owner proved that definite and peremptory instructions had been given him never to run when there was ice in the river. His disregard of these was the proximate cause of the disaster. The right to limit liability turns upon whether such negligence was with the owner’s privity or knowledge. Both courts below, after painstaking examination of the evidence, found there was such privity or knowledge and accordingly ruled that the claim for limitation must be denied. We accept this concurred finding. There was sufficient evidence to support it.

 

“10  The Linseed King was admittedly unfit to run through ice. This fact was known to the owner’s executive officers, who had instructed one Stover, the works manager and representative of the company in charge of the Edgewater plant, that the boat should never be run through ice, and that as soon as ice showed itself in the river she was to be laid up for the winter. He was also directed that whenever there was a likelihood of the presence of ice all trips were to be made only in broad daylight, and even these were to be discontinued when ice definitely appeared. The decision as to when the ferry should be withdrawn for the winter rested with him.

 

11  In view of the weather conditions and the observation of ice in the river some days prior to the accident by several witnesses, amongst them one of Stover’s own subordinates, he should not have rested upon the mere instruction to the master not to run through ice. Before allowing the ferriage operation he was under obligation to assure himself by inquiries or by personal inspection that the Linseed King should not incur the hazard of colliding, as she did, with ice floes in the river…. The owner was therefore chargeable with negligence in not taking measures for the safety of the passengers which the weather conditions required, Texas & Gulf S. S. Co. v. Parker (C. C. A.) 263 F. 864; The Virginia (D. C.) 264 F. 986, affirmed (C. C. A.) 278 F. 877….”  (Open Jurist. 285 U.S. 502–The Linseed King Spencer Kellogg Sons v. Hicks Alexander.)

 

Sources

 

Associated Press. “Asks $100,000 In Ship Death.” Syracuse Herald, NY. 1-9-1927, p. 3. Accessed 3-10-2025 at: https://newspaperarchive.com/syracuse-post-standard-jan-09-1927-p-3/

 

Associated Press. “Launch Capsizes In Hudson River. 27 known to have drowned and Ten Others are Missing as Result of Vessl being crushed in Ace opposite 129th Street.” Salamanca Republican Press, NY. 12-20-1926, p. 1. Accessed 3-10-2025 at: https://newspaperarchive.com/salamanca-republican-press-dec-20-1926-p-1/

 

Courier and Freeman, Potsdam NY. “Pierrepont Man Escapes Drowning.” 12-29-1926, p. 1. Accessed 3-10-2025 at: https://newspaperarchive.com/potsdam-courier-and-freeman-dec-29-1926-p-1/

 

New York Times. “Hudson Disaster Out Of Federal Hands.” 12-24-1926, p. 7. Accessed 3-10-2025 at: https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1926/12/24/118879669.html?pageNumber=7

 

New York Times. “Liability Unlimited In Launch Disaster.” 3-17-1928, p. 13. Accessed 3-10-2025 at: https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1928/03/17/95561888.html?pageNumber=13

 

New York Times. “Linseed King Briefs To Be Sent To Judge.” 2-2-1928, p. 47. Accessed 3-10-2025 at: https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1928/02/02/issue.html

 

New York Times. “Toll Third Worst in Harbor History; 1,021 Lost on the General Slocum in 1904 and 51-58 on the Linseed King in 1926. Mulrooney Recalls Fire; Arrested Excursion Boat Captain in Hospital Where Observation’s Pilot Died Yesterday,” Sep 10, 1932, p4. Accessed at:  http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30813F7395513738DDDA90994D1405B828FF1D3&scp=54&sq=steamer+Observation&st=p

 

Open Jurist. “285 U.S. 502 – The Linseed King Spencer Kellogg Sons v. Hicks Alexander.” At:  http://openjurist.org/285/us/502/the-linseed-king-spencer-kellogg-sons-v-hicks-alexander

 

[1] The number 35 refers only to the number of bodies found in the launch.