The Halcyon

(after stating the facts as above). [1] The appellant, the owner of the schooner, in his answer to the libel, to show that the steamer did not render efficient service, alleged that when the hawser broke, and the schooner’s remaining anchor was cast to await another towline to be sent from the steamer, “although more than an hour elapsed, during which time the said Niihau had sufficient opportunity to give the Halcyon another and additional lines, yet the said Niihau made no effort whatsoever to supply any line, or to give to said Halcyon any assistance whatsoever until, when the claimant observed the Halcyon very close to the breakers and in danger of running ashore, he hoisted the signals for immediate assistance, and it was only after the hoisting of said signals that the Niihau rendered any further assistance,” and the answer alleged it was the duty of *842 the steamer to have supplied other hawsers “immediately upon the breaking of the hawser during the original tow.”

■ The service rendered by the steamer was clearly a salvage service, attended with some danger to the steamer and to the members of the crew who went in the boat to take lines to the schooner. The serious…