GEAY f . BTEAM-TUG JESSIE EUSSELL. 639 ���Gbat ». The Steam-Tugs Jbssib EossEiit and 'Atalanxa. �{Dùtria Court, E. B. New York. , 1881., �1. CoiiLISION— STOPPnSG— iîoTrcE. �Stopping by a tow is not necessarily equivalent to notice to an approachmg tow to come on. �2. Samb— Naekow Channbl — Tow — Long Hawbbb. �It is not negligence in a tug having in tow, in a narrow channel, a lighter with a bowsprit some 14 feet long, to use a leugth of hawser which brought such bowsprit within 40 feet of the stem of the tug. �3. Same— Newtown CnKEK. �Easy and cautions movements are the ruie in the navigation of Newtown creek, and those who adopt a different method do so at their own risk. — [Ed. �W. W. Goodrich, for libellant. �Ludlow e Carter, for claimant of the Jessie EuBsell. �Davies, Work, McNamee, and Hilton, for claimant of the Atalanta. �Benedict, D. J. This action is brought to recover of the tugs Jessie Eussell and Atalanta the damages oaused to the canal- boat Herrick by a collision that occurred in Newtown creek on the thirteenth of February, 1879. At the time of the collis- ion the canal-boat was beingtowed astern of the Russell down Newtown creek. The tug Atalanta was proceeding up the creek, having the lighter Mickle in tow astern, when the canal-boat was just clearing the fourth bridge. She was struck by the lighter in tow of the Atalanta, and sustained the injuries complained of. �I have little hesitation in concluding that this collision is to be attributed to fault on the part of the Eussell, in that, knowing of the bend in the river below, she pushed on through the bridge instead of stopping. This she did in hope of reaching a bight in the river below the bridge, where the tows could pass in safety, and with the knowledge that if she failed to reach the bight in time escape from collision would depend upon the ability of the lighter in that time and dis- tance to keep herself out of the way. The prudent course, under the circumstances, was to wait above the bridge. The ����
