New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-07-13
THE COURTS.
AN OLD CASE.

Supreme COurt-General Term-Before Judges
CIerEe, lngraham and sutherland.The Arctic Fire In
suIance Company agt jeremiah Austin, President &c
ms was an appeal by the defendants from verdict in
favor Oh the plaintiff in an action by the assgDees Of the
owner OF cargo Of In the canal boat Parsons lost
while being towed down the Hadson River, by collision
IN tne Hsnt Time; between the towing steamer and
other steamer going having barges in both the
upward and downward bound steamers belonging to do
PENDANTS The case has been before the Courts for
years. aud the appeal had been previously argued aud
decided in favor Of tho plaintiffs. rearguInent was
granted aud took place at the April Term Of
Iiver1ng the opnlon) hold that their former decision
erroneous, and reverse the Judgment, granting .
be considered settled that towboat engaged In the
business of towing Is not TOT such purpose common
gagement The defendants, them were liable for negl
gcnce in performing the special duty they had under
taken and not otherwise. The point upon which the re
argument was ordered was whether the master Of the
towboat is chargeabe with negligence because the cap
tain OF the barge did provide watch lights Oh
board the canal boat He did not understand the captain
of the tOwboat 20 have the entire charge control OF
to his vessel, but the captain and crew
on board, and are required to use care
the captain OF the towboat His undertaking TO tow
them. In doing so he is required 10 use skill and
avoid injury but he does not put bis board Of the
boat towed The captain Of that boat must see 10 her
guidance TO steer her when necessary and TO take the
necessary precautions on his part IL he Omts such
and precautiOn, aud injury from such neglect he
and not the tOwb0at 10 bear the consequences Judge
Ingraham concludes, therefore, that it was error "a
charge the july that the captain or OF the prop
erty towed must be decreed In law having surrendered
TO tine as 10 necessary render
that towing SAFE aud that the captain Of the
would have the right to put lights upon herr; and agais
where he 81 charge you matter OF law thatitn
not negligent act the part Of the captain OF the
boat not to keep watch upon bis boat at night" Tina
charge was evidently made under the impression that
the whole charge Of the boat Owed was In the captain Of
the towing vessel and that the former were not required
10 exercise any or caution.
Judge Sutherland, Who the first argument, wrote
tho opinion Of the Court affirming the Judgment, now
concurs with Judge IngTahsm IN reversing II While
Judge Clerke writes able dissenting opinion, h0dBR
that the plaintiff the OF the cargo not answer
able for the negligence Of the master ana crew Oh the
canal boat and that the only inquiry was whether the
master or owner OF either both Of the towing boats the
Mcdonald going down or the Austin gong up lOOtb
owned by defeDdanU caused or contributed TO the In
Jury The in charging the injury as to the question
of negligence OF the captain and crew OF the cahD0at
not being preudical TO the defendant Judge CleiKe
thinks the Judgment should not be reversed on thai
ground