Supreme Court.
3. At about 10 p.m. of the said day a kedge, with a warp attached to it, was carried out from the "Newcastle" by one of her own boats and dropped to seaward, and such warp was afterwards hove taut and secured on board the "Newcastle", with the view of its being hove upon when the flood tide made. Several cobles came to the "Newcastle" from Runswick, and the men in them offered their assistance, but their services, not being required, were declined.
4. At about 2 a.m. of the following morning the steam tug "Emu", whose owners, master, and crew are the plaintiffs in this action, came to the "Newcastle" and offered assistance, which was also declined.
5. The flood tide was then making, and by about 2.45 a.m. the "Newcastle" had floated forward, and attempts were made to get the stern of the "Newcastle" also afloat, and the warp attached to the aforesaid kedge was attempted to be hove in, but the said warp having parted, the master of the "Newcastle" endeavoured ineffectually to make an agreement with the master of the "Emu" to assist in getting the "Newcastle" afloat, and at about 3 a.m. a rope was given to the "Emu" from the port bow of the "Newcastle", and directions were given to the "Emu" to keep the head of the "Newcastle" to the eastward in the same way as it had been kept by the aforesaid kedge anchor and warp. The "Emu" then set ahead and almost immediately the said rope was broken. A coir hawser was thereupon given to the "Emu", and those on board her were directed not to put any strain on it, but to keep the "Emu" paddling ahead sufficiently to steady the head of the "Newcastle", and to keep her head to the eastward. This the "Emu" did and continued to do until about 4.45 a.m., when the "Newcastle", by means of her own engines, was moved off from the ground, and the "Emu" was brought broad on the port bow of the "Newcastle", and the "Emu" had to stop towing and to shift the rope from her port bollard, where it was fast, to her towing hook, but the "Newcastle" continuing to go ahead, the said rope had to be let go on board the "Emu" and it was then hauled in on board the "Newcastle". The "Newcastle", under her own steam, then commenced proceeding south, the wind at the time being N.N.W. and light, and the weather fine. It was afterwards ascertained that the "Newcastle" was making a little water in her afterhold, and her hand pumps were then worked, and they kept the "Newcastle" free.
6. The "Emu" proceeded back with the "Newcastle" as far as Whitby, and the "Newcastle" then continued on her voyage and arrived in the Humber at about 2.45 p.m. of the same day.
7. During the time aforesaid the master, crew, and passengers of the "Newcastle" remained on board the "Newcastle", and no danger was incurred in their so doing.
8. Save as herein appears, the defendants deny the truth of the several statements contained in the petition.
9. The defendants have paid into court and tendered to the plaintiffs for their services the sum of $1,000 and have offered to pay their costs, and the defendants submit that such tender is sufficient.
[CAP. 4
Dated the
day of
19
(Signed)
C.D., etc., Defendants.
309
Page 45
Page 46
Supreme Court.
3. At about 10 p.m. of the said day a kedge, with a warp attached to it, was carried out from the "Newcastle" by one of her own boats and dropped to seaward, and such warp was after- wards hove taut and secured on board the "Newcastle", with the view of its being hove upon when the flood tide made. Several cobles came to the "Newcastle" from Runswick, and the men in them offered their assistance, but their services, not being required, were declined.
4. At about 2 a.m. of the following morning the steam tug "Emu", whose owners, master, and crew are the plaintiffs in this action, came to the "Newcastle" and offered assistance, which was also declined.
5. The flood tide was then making, and by about 2.45 a.m. the "Newcastle" had floated forward, and attempts were made to get the stern of the "Newcastle" also afloat, and the warp attached to the aforesaid kedge was attempted to be hove in, but the said. warp having parted, the master of the "Newcastle" endeavoured ineffectually to make an agreement with the master of the "Emu" to assist in getting the "Newcastle" afloat, and at about 3 a.m. a rope was given to the "Emu" from the port bow of the "New- castle", and directions were given to the "Emu" to keep the head of the "Newcastle" to the eastward in the same way as it had been kept by the aforesaid kedge anchor and warp. The "Emu" then set ahead and almost immediately the said rope was broken. A coir hawser was thereupon given to the "Emu", and those on board her were directed not to put any strain on it, but to keep the "Emu" paddling ahead sufficiently to steady the head of the This the "Newcastle", and to keep her head to the eastward. "Emu" did and continued to do until about 4.45 a.m., when the "Newcastle", by means of her own engines, was moved off from the ground, and the "Emu" was brought broad on the port bow of the "Newcastle", and the "Emu" had to stop towing and to shift the rope from her port bollard, where it was fast, to her towing hook, but the "Newcastle" continuing to go ahead, the said rope had to be let go on board the "Emu" and it was then hauled in on board the "Newcastle". The "Newcastle", under her own steam, then commenced proceeding south, the wind at the time being N.N.W. and light, and the weather fine. It was afterwards ascertained that the "Newcastle" was making a little water in her afterhold, and her hand pumps were then worked, and they kept the "Newcastle" free.
6. The "Emu" proceeded back with the "Newcastle" as far as Whitby, and the "Newcastle" then continued on her voyage and arrived in the Humber at about 2.45 p.m. of the same day.
7. During the time aforesaid the master, crew, and passen- gers of the "Newcastle" remained on board the "Newcastle", and no danger was incurred in their so doing.
8. Save as herein appears, the defendants deny the truth of the several statements contained in the petition,
9. The defendants have paid into court and tendered to the plaintiffs for their services the sum of $1,000 and have offered to pay their costs, and the defendants submit that such tender is sufficient.
[CAP. 4
Dated the
day of
19
(Signed)
C.D., etc., Defendants.
309
Page 45Page 46
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.