2. There are four possibilities under which an accident of this sort may occur. 1. It may happen without blame being imputable to either party, as when the loss is occasioned by a storm, or any other vis major; in that case the loss must be borne by the party on whom it happens to light, the other not being responsible to him in, any degree.
3. - 2. Both parties may be to blame, as when there has been a want of due diligence or of skill on both sides; in such cases, the loss must be apportioned between them, as having been occasioned by the fault of both of them. 6 Whart. R. 311..
5. - 4. It may have been the fault of the ship which ran down the other; in this case the injured party would be entitled to an entire corapensation from the other. 2 Dodson's Rep. 83, 85; 3 Hagg. Adm. R. 320; 1 .How. S. C. R. 89. The same rule is applied to steamers.. Id. 414.
6. - 5. Another case has been put, namely, when there has been some fault or neglect, but on which side the blame lies, is uncertain. In this case, it does not appear to be settled whether the loss shall be apportioned or borne by the suffering party opinions on this subject are divided.
7. A collision between two ships on the high seas, whether it be the result of accident or negligence, is, in all cases, to be deemed a peril of the seas within the meaning of a policy of insurance. 2 Story, R. 176; 3 Sumn. R. 889. Vide, generally, Story, Bailm. 607 to 612; Marsh.. Ins. B. 1, c. 12, s. 2; Wesk. Ins. art. Running Foul; Jacobsen's Sea Laws, B. 4, c. 1; 4 Taunt. 126; 2 Chit. Pr. 513, 535; Code de Com. art. 407; Boulay-Paty, Cours de Dr. Commercial, tit. 12, s. 6; Pard. n. 652 to 654; Pothier, Avaries, n. 155; 1 Emerig. Assur. ch. 12, 14.