Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/324

 312 FEDERAL REPORTER. �the damage. Jnder the statute for limited liability, (Rev. St. § 4283,) it might be impossible to recover the whole loss ; but to the extent of the value of the tugs there would be a remedy in rem. The ownership of the tugs would not be material, except as regards the limitation of personal liabil- ity. If the tugs were owned, borrowed, or hired by the con- tractor, their liability in rem would be the same. If, then, it were proved that the J. C. Cottingham hired the Nabby C, as alleged in the answer of the appellants, it would not, in my opinion, exempt their tug, �Upon the evidence as I understand it, however, the J. C. Cottingham did not undertake to do the work and furnish ail necessary assistance ; Mr. Sprague, who acted for the ship, engaged both tugs. The transaction appears to me, as to the district judge, to be, in effect, several contracts for a joint operation. If, therefore, one tug was wholly in fault, as by a defect of her maehinery or the like, she alone would be responsible. But for their joint action, so far as it conduced to the loss, I hold them to be jointly responsible. And that is this case. �If the usage of the port undertook to throw upon one tug the responsibilities of two or more, it would be void ; but I do not understand that any such usage was proved. The usage is that the captain of the first tug bas charge of the enterprise. Some one must have the sole authority, and it is as convenient and proper a rule as any other, that it should be that one who is first engaged. But this is only a rule of oonvenience, and what it does in respect to the tow is to make the master of No. 1 master, likewise, of No. 2. If Captain Scollay had any doubt of the competency of Captain Chase, the usage would not require him to serve. He might decline to work on those terms; but when he accepts the usage, in the particular case, he accepts a master for bis vessel. �These cases of tow against tug are, in form and fact, very like collision cases. The contraot gives rise to duties very closely resembling those which one vessel owes to othera which it may meet. There is, therefore, an analogy between ��� �