258 riSDEBAL BKPOBTEB. �slackened between the seas in consequence of the force of wind and sea. Whether the line was slackened from any other cause does not satisfactorily appear. As to the distance west from the end of the south pier when they turned to corne in witnesses do not agree, and this fact does not seem to us at ail controUing. �The evidence establishes, in our opinion, that there would have been no difficulty in bringing the tow in safely had the Bchooner carried no part of her mainsail, and the question of liability appears to us to turn upon whether the tug or the schooner is responsible for so much after sail being carried from the time when the turn was made to corne in. �The tow was from 120 to 180 feet in the rear of the tug. It was in the night, and in our opinion, unless the tug had assumed to take entire control and direction of the vessel, it was the latter's fault if she had up part of her mainsail. To apply Buch rule is to do no more than to require of the cap- tain of the schooner the exercise of that measure of care and skill which is incumbent on the tow. The Margaret, 94 U. S. 496; The Margaret, 5 Bissell, 357. In the latter case it is said there are certain duties incumbent on those who have the management of the tow. It is the duty of the tow to be steered properly ; to foUow in the wake of the tug, and to per- form ail those duties which nautîcal skill demands in order to properly manage the tow. �It is manif est that if the tow, at a critical point, when about to enter the harbor, carries such sail as to take her out of the control of the towing craft, either as to her headway or course, the tug should not be held at fault for any disaster that en- Bues. �We entertain the opinion that the libel should be dismissed, and deoree accordingly, with costs to claimant. ����
