Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/363

THE FRANK G. FOWLER. 3e& �negligence in a tug taking a loaded canal-boat in tow from New Lon- don for New York, at an inclement season of the year, to have so short a supply of coal that in case of accident or stress of weather she could not lie over under steam in a place of shelter, in the course of the voyage, for the space of something more than 10 to 12 houra. I have no hesitation in holding that this is negligence. Such acci- dents are ordinary incidents of such voyages, and should be provided against. This want of coal was the immediate cause of the abandon- nient of the canal-boat and of the damage ensuing therefrom to her owners, and on this ground the tug must be held liable. It is sug- gested by claimant's counsel that the tug was not responsible for the breaking of the tiller of the canal-boat, and that this was the cause of the disaster. It does not appear that the tiller was not a good and proper tiller, and the violence of the sea fully accounts for its breaking. This was not the fault of the tug unless she was at fault in exposing the canal-boat to such a sea-^a point to be presently con- sidered. But if the tug was not at fault in thia respect, yet, undoubt- edly, after the canal-boat was disabled, she was bound to use reason- able care in protecting her from the effeets of the injury she had Bustained, and was not justified in being provided with so small a supply of fuel that she could not meet so common an emergency as a detention of 12 hours by reason of an accident to the to/r. It ap- pears that the captain of the tug intended when he left New London to go into New Haven for coal. This seems to have been a violation of his agreement to tow the canal-boat to New York, which, in the absence of an understanding that he was going into an intermediate port, bound him to go directly to New York. The pretenee of a cus- tom of tugs with tows bound from New London to New York stopping at New Haven bas no foundation in the evidence. But whether the supply of coal was intdnded for New Haven or for New York, it was clearly insufBcient. �Another point made against the tug, that when they reached the east end of Long Sand shoal it was so rough that they were bound to go into Saybrook for shelter, is also, I think, made out by the evi- dence. The testimony of the libellant on this point is strongly sup- ported by that of Clifford, the pilot. Neither the pilot nor the cap- tain had any experience in towing loaded canal-boats on the sound, and the reason that Clifford gives for not going into Saybrook is that he was bound for New Haven. It was evident that he had little, if any, knowledge of Saybrook harbor and the outrance to it. Their ��� �