.office ofa disclaimer is to enable the patentee to save himself from the peril of such a defense. Matters which have been prop. i:!rly disclaimed cease to be a part of the invention, and, as was said by the supreme court in Dunbar v. Myers, 94: U. S. 194:
"It follows that the construction of the patent must be the same as it would be if such matters had never been included in the description of the invention or the claims of the specification."
THE IODINE. HUDSON v. THE IODINE. (District Court. E. D. Pennsylvania. No. 79.
1:lAI,VAGE-AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION-THE ELENA
February 18, 1895.) G., 61
This was a·libel by Joshua H. Hudson, master of the tug S. A. against the bark Iodine, to recover for services rendered. John F. Lewis, for libelant. Alfred Driver and J. Warren Coulston, foJ' respondent.
THE CITY OF HAVERHILL.
BUTLER, District Judge. This case arises out of the facts stated in the suit by Neal v. The Elena G., 61 Fed. 519. A repetition of the statement made in that case is unnecessary. It is not denied that the libelant rendered salvage services, and should be compensated accordingly. The only dispute respects the amount justly due. After full consideration of all the circumstances I believe the payment of $1,000 will be a fair compensation. The Iodine and the bark Munch were lying side by side, and were removed together. For the services to the latter $500 were tendered and received. The former is a much larger vessel, and was somewhat differently situated. I think double the sum paid by the Munch is sufficient for the services rendered the Iodine; and a decree may ' be prepared accordingly, with costs.
THE OITY OF HAVERffiLL. KNICKERBOCKER STEAM-TOWAGE CO. v. THE CITY OF HAVERHILL. WATROUS v. THE ICE KING. (DIstrict Court, S. D. New York. March I, 1895.)
SALVAGE-TuG AND Tow-DANGEROUS LEAK-DEVIATION.
The City of H., a flat-bottomed river boat, while in tow from Boston to New York, with other barges, In December, sprang a dangerous leal;: not far from Gay's Head, In weather not unusual for the season, and without any fault of the tug. The tug was obliged to anchor the r of bel' llt tow, and take the H. Into Newport; and she preserved the latter from sinking by the use of the tug's pumps: Held, that the service of the tug in the rescue of the H. was outside of the contract of towage, and entitled the tug to extra compensation on salvage principl but upon a ll, lower basis of compensatIon than mIght be awarded to an Independent tug, and $800 was allowed.
This was a libel in rem by the Knickerbocker Steam-Towage Company, owners of the tug Ice King, against the steamship City of Haverhill, to enforce a claim for salvage. A cross libel was tiled by Warren P. Watrous, owner of the City of Haverhill, alleging fault on the part of the tug which contributed to the injuries sustained by the salved vessel, and rendered her liable therefor under the contract of towage. Wing, Putnam & Burlingham, for Knickerbocker S. T. Co. and the Ice King. Goodrich, Deady & Goodrich, for the City of Haverhill and War· ren P. Watrous. BROWN, District Judge. 1. I do not find sufficient evidence to support the claim in the cross libel that the hawser was fastened in an improper manner, or that the mode of fastening caused any damage, or contributed to produce the leak; or that there was any