
    THE O. C. HANCHETT. ROGERS et al. v. THE O. C. HANCHETT et al.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    November 18, 1896.)
    Sauvaob iv Harbors — Oomtiixsatiov.
    In eases of salvage in harbors where tugs are abundant and on the ground or near by, large awards should not be made.
    Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
    
      This was a libel for salvage, filed by Robert Rogers and others against the canal boat O. C. Hanchett and cargo, Nicholas Wiedener and others being claimants of ¿lie boat, and C. H. Abbott claimant of the cargo. The district court entered a decree for complainants for $500, and the complainants have appealed therefrom, on the ground that the sum awarded was not sufficient in amount.
    At the time the salvage services were rendered, the canal boat was lying at a pier at the foot of Amity street, Brooklyn, in the immediate neighborhood of several other vessels. A fire broke out on the pier, and spread rapidly; and, while it was burning, the mate of the canal boat, who was in charge at the time, signaled to complainant’s tug, James W. Husted, which was passing near. A line was thrown, from the tug to the canal boat, and made fast to the stem of the latter, and the Husted backed away under full speed, taking her out into the river. The canal boat had not yét caught fire, though her paint was scorched, and the tug played on her with a hose for a short time. The tug then towed the canal boat to pier 6, East river. The length of time occupied in this service was about 25 minutes, and in the meantime a number of tugs had gathered in the vicinity. The canal boat was valued at $1,600, and her cargo :<t fvi.SOO. In the district court the following memorandum of opinion by BROWN, District Judge, was indorsed on the libel: “In harbor cases, where tugs are abundant and on the ground or near by, in time to give needed aid, large awards are not only unnecessary, but contrary to the principle laid down by Mr. Justice Bradley in The Suliote, 5 Fed. 99. This boat was not on fire. Other tugs were near by. The libelants’ service was very brief, and without the least difficulty or danger. $500 is as much as the analogies of this court will admit on a valuation oí $5,400. Decree for that amount, and costs to defendants since the tender.”
    Peter S. Carter, for appellants.
    James J. Macklin, for appellees,
    Before LACOMBE-and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges.
   Decree affirmed, with costs, on opinion of district judge.  