common v. ALMY. 361
boat was $1,500; that the boat was delivered to the libelees under the
lease by the libelant, through her said husband, at Pearl Harbor, sit-
uated some 10 miles from Honolulu, and that, under and pursuant to
the terms of the lease, it became the duty of the libelees, at the ter-
mination thereof, to redeliver to the libelant the houseboat at Pearl
Harbor; that the lease was, in accordance with the terms thereof, ter-
minated on.the 29th day of july, 1903, and that the libelant was noti-
fied of the termination thereof that she might take possession of her
boat; and that at no time subsequent to ]uly 29, 1903, was said house-
boat in the possession of the libelees under or by virtue of the lease,
and that at no time after that date were the libelees, or either of them,
in the sole possession or control of the boat under or pursuant to the
terms of the lease; that at the termination of the lease, as set forth
in the answer, the libelant requested the libelees to remove the house-
boat from Pearl Harbor to the port of Honolulu for the convenience
of the libelant, and that thereupon, and solely as a favor to her, the li-
belees agreed to so remove the boat, under the express stipulation
and agreement that they would not be in any manner responsible for
any loss or damage to the boat which might occur while it was being
moved to the port of Honolulu; that such removal was attempted to
be performed by the libelees by towing the houseboat in tow of the
steam tug Kaena, then and there operated and controlled by the li-
belees, and along with two laden scows; that the tow was constructed ·
in a proper and seamanlike manner and with due care; that, when
the tow was so constructed, the tug proceeded from Pearl Harbor to
Honolulu Harbor, at which time a light breeze was blowing, the sea;
smooth, and that there was no appreciable swell; that, when the tug;
and tow had reached a point about one-half mile west of Kalihi en--
trance, the houseboat, without any carelessness or negligence on the
part of the libelees "suddenly went over on one side," and that there-
upon the libelees towed the houseboat into water where it could be an--
ehored, and anchored the same, and proceeded with the tug to Honolulu-
with the persons who had been on board of the houseboat, and with
the said laden scows; that after the arrival of the tug and the laden~—
scows at Honolulu the tug returned to the spot where the houseboat
had been anchored, and started to tow the same into the harbor of
Honolulu, which was done, and a watchman left in charge thereof
by the libelants; "that said houseboat turned over"; that the turning
over of said houseboat was not due in any manner to the carelessness
or negligence of the libelees, but was, as libelees are informed and be-
lieve, and so charge the fact to be, due to the fact that the said boat
was not properly built into the scow, but, when originally construct-
ed, was simply tacked to the scow with tenpenny nails, which be-
came gradually loosened from the rocking of the scow; that the
houseboat is not a total loss, and that the libelant had not suffered
damage in the sum of $2,500.
The evidence shows without conflict that upon the conclusion of
the appe1lees’ work at Pearl Harbor they undertook to deliver the
houseboat to the libelant at Honolulu, instead of Pearl Harbor, as