588 FICDKJIAL KEPOnTBR �Urne about seven knots. The following night it became rainy and squally, and the wind getting arouiid to the south-west, they proceeded under steain alone. The Gresham sustained no damage to her machinery in consequence of the towage, and suffered no loss of eœployment by reason of the delay. The Leipsic paid $150 to the tug which towed her from the place where the Gresham left her to her dock in Hoboken. This was on Sunday, and there was no other tug there. �On the foregoing facts my conclusions of law are that the service was a salvage service; that the court ought to award a proper com- pensation on a quantum meruit, notwithstanding the agreement; that the ^3,000 is an excessive amount ; that the proper amount is $5,500; that of that the owners of the Gresham should have $4,125; that of the remaining $1,375 the master of the Gresham should have $150 ; that the remaining $1,225 should be divided among the master, offi- cers, and erew of the Gresham in proportion to the rates of their re- spective wages; that the $1,375 remain in court till applied for; that the libellants have their costs in the district court, taxed at $54-; and that neither party reoover any costs of this court. �Sam'l Blatchfoed, Circuit Judge. �Blacthfoed, C. J. The district court awarded ;p3,750 to the own- ers, master, and crew of the Gresham, of which three-fifths was to go tothe owners of the Gresham and two-fifths to her master and crew; the master to have one-tenth of the two-fifths, and the oiBcers and crew, including the master, to have the remainder, in proportion to the rates of their respective wages. This gave to the owners $2,260 ; mas- ter, $150; master, ofEcers, and crew, $1,350. The libel was filed by the owners alone, on the agreement, and not as in a cause of salvage, for owners, master, and crew. The court ordered the $1,500 to remain in the registry to await an application for it by the master, officers, and crew. The libellants have appealed to this court because the dis- trict court set aside the contract and did not allow the £3,000, The claimant has appealed on the ground that too much was allowed. �The district court held that the agreement was made subject to the approval of the court "as to the amount therein named, £3,000, as the amount to be paid for the towage service;" that the amount suggested by the agreement was very greatly in excess of the amount which the court would award for the same service ; and that, under the circumstances, the service was a salvage service. �It is contended for the libellants that what the parties agreed to leave to the court was, not to approve the sum of £3,000, but to ��� �
