Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/379

Rh

I. & J. M. Lawson, for plaintiff and libellant.

Charles E. Crowell, for defendant and respondent.

The tug Sears, having two mud-scows in tow, proceeded down the river on the east shore, at a time when the tow of the steam-boat Connecticut was mainly broken up, and the various canal-boats composing the tow were being carried off by tugs or were awaiting tugs to carry them off. The Tracey, the libellant's boat, had been fastened to the Gerow while the tow was intact, but when the tow commenced to break up the Gerow unfastened from the boat ahead of her, and then the Tracey unfastened from the Gerow. The canal-boats, thus detached from the tow and awaiting tugs, were comparatively helpless, and those navigating the tug Sears had ample opportunity to notice this condition of affairs and conduct the tug accordingly. Nevertheless, the tug proceeded in the direction of the tow, without shortening her 200 feet of hawser with which she was towing her scows. As the Tracey lay at the stern of the Gerow, her stern being somewhat to the eastward of the Gerow's stern and about 35 or 40 feet from the dyke on the east shore of the river, the Sears steamed past; but the first of her two scows struck the starboard bow of the Tracey, inflicting serious damages.

I think the Sears was in fault in this: Unless there was sea-room to pass safely with her scows she should have shortened her hawser, and got her scows under more complete control, before attempting to pass between the tow, as it was circumstanced, and the dyke. If there was sufficient sea-room there was no excuse for a collision, as the