404 i'edebal bepobteb. �been heard, but ît would also have been seen that she imme- diately began, upon this signal, to swing to port in a way to involve serions risk of collision with the steamer if both kept on at full speed. I think the sheer of the tug could and should have been observed seasonably to have enabled the steamer, by slowing and stopping, to have avoided the collis- ion. The same inattention or undue sense of security which lel those on the steamer to overlook the whistles intended as a signal for them, lad them also to overlook the movement of the tug to port till she vras so close upon them that it was too late to avoid the collision by stopping and backing. The proof of that inattention which led to not noticing the signal renders very probable the further omission to observe eare- fuUy the movements of the tug, and, upon the whole testi- mony, I think the steamer was in fault in not sooner observ- ing the change of course of the tug, and in not sooner slowing and stopping to avoid the danger produced thereby, �Decree for libellant, with costs, and a reference to compute damages. ���Mason ». Thb Steam-Tug William Muetaugh. {District Court, 8. D. New York. June 17, 1880.) �1. Negligeitck — PnoT op Tug. — The pilot of a tug shows want of ordi- �nary care in attempting to cross the bay of New York with a boat in tow, while the hatches of such boat are uncovered, and the wind is blowing from the west to the north-weat at the rate of about 21 miles an heur. �2. Samb — Samb — OusTOM. — The existence of a custom of thus using a �boat with uncovered hatches, when loaded with coal, in order to save expense in trimming, will not relieve the tug from liability. �8. Samb— Samb — UNSEAWOBTmNBsa — ^The want of such hatch covers was an obvions defect, and will not, therefore, relieve the tug from liabil- ity upon the ground of unseaworthiness, where the boat was lost in direct consequence of such defect. ����
