Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/375

 TEE FBANK G. FOWLER. 361 �T. E. Stillman and W. Mynderse, for libellant. �W. R. Beebe, for claimants. �Choate, D. J. This is a suit against the steam-tng Frank G. Fow- 1er to recover damages sustained by the barge W. M. MeClave, which was insured by the libellant, and which the libellant has caused to be repaired by reason of her being run on the rocks at the mouth of Sfamford harbor on the moming of the twenty-fifth day of Novem- ber, 1880, through the carelessness, as is alleged, of those in charge of the tug. The barge was in tow of the tug, and bound from ytam- ford, Connectieut, to Norwalk, Connecticut, laden with a cargo of lum- ber. The libel alleges that the tug, on reaching the month of the river off Shippan point, increased her speed to full speed, and instead of following the regular ehannel to the deep water of Long Island sound, kept oflf to the eastward and carried the barge on the ledge or reef of rocks known as "Porked Eeef," and there the barge grounded; that it was then about high water, and as the tide fell the rocks upon which the barge grounded broke throngh her bottom, causing her to fin with water; that the tug was not fitted with a compass, and the disaster was due in some measure to their being no compass on board by which the master could have determined and followed a safe course for bis vessel and the barge, and would have been advised that the course he was on was an improper and dangerous course, also that those in charge of the tug did not keep a good lookout in not heed- ing the lights and landmarks, which were clearly to be seen, and which would have indicated to them the proper ehannel, and their improper course ; that the tug proceeded at too high a rate of speed, and was in fault in attempting to cross the shoals and reef on which the barge grounded, instead of going down the ehannel to deep water, and so around the shoal and reef; that the barge was without fault, and at all times followed closely in the wake of the tug. To the aver- ments of the libel that the libellant, in the regular course of its busi- ness, issued its policy of Insurance in the sum of $6,000 upon the hull of the barge, which was valued therein at that sum, though in fact of greater value, the claimants answered that — �" They have no knowledge as to said averments, and therefore leave the libel- lant to make such proof thereof aa they may be advised, except that they have been informed and believed that the libellants were the underwriters of the hull of the said barge." �The answer admitted that the grounding of the barge was without fault of those in charge of her, and that she at all times followed closely in the wake of the tug. ��� �