Case ID: f_12/html/0798-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Butler, D. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Atlas. 
    
    
      (District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.
    
    May 19, 1882.)
    ADMIRALTY—LIABILITY OF TUG FOR GROUNDING OF TOW.
    It is the duty of the captain of the tug, when he sees his tow steering directly into danger, to warn her against it.
    Libel by tbe • owner of the bark Lena against the tug Atlas to recover damages caused by the grounding of the bark while in tow of the tug. It appeared that on November 1, 1881, the tug took the bark in toi^ on the Schuylkill river and proceeded down the river. In making a turn near the mouth of the river the bark grounded. Libellant alleged that this was caused by the negligence of the tug in running too near the shore. Respondents claimed that it was caused by the failure of the bark to keep in the wake of the tug.
    
      J. Q. Lane, for libellant.
    
      Theodore M. Etting and Henry R. Edmunds, for respondents.
   Butler, D. J.

The respondent was blamable in running too near the Pennsylvania shore. The bark kept in her wake until she found herself running aground, or in imminent danger of it, when she sheered off towards deeper water; but was brought up in the mud before reaching it. The testimony of Captain Keller, of the Atlas, that the Lena ported her helm, running to starboard of his course, making a shorter turn than the tug, and thus approaching nearer the Pennsylvania shore, is contradicted by all the witnesses on board the Lena, and unsupported by any evidence in the cause. If it were true, it is susceptible of being proved beyond doubt. It furthermore seems incredible that the captain of the tug should have seen his tow thus steering directly into danger, and should not have warned her against it, although, as he says, she ran on this course 300 feet before grounding. It is unnecessary to enlarge upon the subject. The captain of the Atlas was in fault; and his attempt to excuse himself is unavailing. His reason for keeping towards the shore was, doubtless, the one assigned in his conversation with the Lena’s crew, immediately after the accident — that he expected the wind, which was from the north-east, and the ebb-tide, to drive him towards the other side. The libel is therefore sustained, with costs.