Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/358

 344 FEDERAL REPORTKB. �narrow channel, and being thereby strained and hogged, is to be attributed to the fact that she was not equipped with an anchor, and to the negligence of her owners in not sooner getting her ont of the dangerous place in which she was lying, or in not finding for her in Guilford creek a safer place to lie in ; and that this subsequent dam- age ia not properly attributable to the casting of her adrift on the sound, even if the tug is responsible for the damages direetly arising from so leaving her adrift. No doubt it was incumbent on the mas- ter of the oanal-boat.who was also one of the owners, to take all reasonable measures for the prompt rescue of his boat from the per- lions position in which she had been put. But, without going at length into the evidence, it is enpugh to dispose of this point to say that upon the proofs he acted with diligence and roasonably good judgment in his endeavors to rescue her, but before he could succeed in doing so a severe southerly storm came on, whioh drove the sea into Guilford creek, caused her to drag her anchor, and was the means of her getting across the channel, so that when the tide fell she was badly injured, her center sinking down some three feet as she lay across the channel, with her bow on one bank and her stem on the other. Upon his discovering her in Guilford creek, her master returned to New Haven and endeavored to get the aid of a small tug which should be able to enter Guilford creek and tow her out. It is evident that the Fowler could not do this. She drew too much water to enter the creek. And it is evident, also, from the testimony of the master of the canal-boat himself, that he knew this, and did not ex- pect or ask the captain of the tug to render this service, and that all the further aid he looked for, if any, from the Fowler was to tow her to New York after he had succeeded in getting her out of Guilford creek and had brought her to New Haven, which he gave the captain of the tug to understand that he was going to do. Nor does the evi- dence sustain the contention of the claimants that there was any safer place for the canal-boat to lie in, in or near Guilford creek, than that in which the salvors put her and where her master found her. As to the want of an anchor, assuming that a canal-boat upon a ■Voyage from New London to New York is hnseaworthy if she bas no anchor, which is the contention of the claimants, — although there is a very considerable weight of evidence in the case that a custom or usage has grown up for the tug to carry ground-tackle enough to hold herself and the tow in case it becomes necessary to anchor, and for this class of coal-boats navigating the sound to go without an- ��� �