a series of important facts. It would also be the means of placing in the hands of the Wreck Commissioner, trustworthy records in the event of the disappearance of a ship.

There is a society called "The Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom;" a society which usefully occupies itself with questions affecting ships. We have noticed from the reports of the proceedings of that Society, that its members take great interest in making attempts to get rid of the payment of light dues by shifting the burthen on to the great body of taxpayers; in attempts to abolish certain shipping and discharge fees; in concerted opposition against the proposal of Mr. Plimsoll that grain cargoes shall be carried in bags; but we have not noticed that they have as yet taken any steps with the view of mutual agreement or concerted action in such matters as overloading, undermanning, food scales, health of crews, &c., &c. We have, however, no doubt that they will do so. If they do, the result will be of first-class importance. It is through neglect of action on these questions and subjects by such a competent body as the Chamber of Shipping, that Mr. Plimsoll's agitation is regarded by the multitude as a necessary protection to "our seamen."

These excellent reports of the Wreck Commissioner in the cases of the Marlborough and Kensington will, we believe, do more good than sessions of legislation. It is by publication of statements of facts such as he has so ably made that continued and systematic disregard to common means of safety will become impossible.

We would, in conclusion, call the attention of our readers to a letter in this month's issue, signed "ONYX," from a trustworthy and accomplished practical sailor.

FOUNDERING: ITS CHIEF CAUSE.

(Communicated.)

P

UBLIC attention has of late been aroused in an unmistakable way to the disastrous total losses of ships in the open ocean: nor is the interest likely to slacken so long as these losses recur with such alarming frequency. Very probably the new Parliament will before long be engaged in attempts at legislation in this direction, and every one, possessing any special knowledge on the subject, should render what aid he can to throw light on it. With this object I desire to point out that, whilst on all sides there is an undoubtedly earnest desire to put a stop to this wholesale loss of life and property, yet so numerous and various are opinions as to the cause and as to the methods for removing it, that it seems not unlikely, that in the multitude of counsellors, we shall not have wisdom but confusion.

I propose to endeavour to show that, underlying almost every suggested cause, there is one general one which applies to all, and that if that one did not exist, the others would not be such important elements of danger.

I shall not fill your space by attempting to give statistics of the number and size of the vessels lost, nor of the description of their cargoes. That information has already been supplied in the pages of the Nautical, and of several other periodicals and public documents. Sufficient for my purpose is it to enumerate some of the various causes to which, so far as I can ascertain, their disasters have been attributed. We have, 1st. Faulty material in construction of ship, or weakness from age or other cause. 2nd. Faulty shape of the vessel. 3rd. Insufficient steam-power. ballast tanks. 5th. Grain cargoes carried in bulk. hatches, skylights, &c. 7th. Explosion of cargoes. cient freeboard and spare buoyancy. 9th. Insufficient or inefficient crew. Every one of the above have I heard described, by different sailors of long experience, as the main cause of the recent losses.

4th. Water6th. Insecure 8th. Insuffi

Each having probably dire experience of one or more of the number and only hearsay knowledge of the others.

Now, is there not one evil which may always, and often undoubtedly does, exist together with any or all of the above enumerated causes ? and which lies at the bottom of all, and may be summed up in two words, "improper loading." To load a naturally slight or weak vessel, or a very old vessel with a heavy cargo of pig-iron would be improper loading. To load a deep and tender ship with a full cargo of equal specific gravity throughout, without placing sufficient ballast below it, would be improper loading. Grain is so liable to shift, that it runs almost like water, and to load a full cargo of it in bulk, without giving extra care and time to the stowage, and without taking extreme precautions in fitting the vessel with every appliance needful to prevent its shifting, is improper loading. To load a vessel so deep that her freeboard and spare buoyancy are reduced to a minimum, so that she cannot rise to the seas, and they fall on board with a force and volume such as no ordinary hatches or sky-lights can resist, is improper loading. To load a vessel with coal of an explosive nature, without means or appliances for its efficient ventilation, is improper loading. To stow a vessel's cargo so that it gets adrift, and thus the crew are worn out by continually securing and trimming it, thereby neglecting other duties necessary for the ship's safety, is also improper loading. Much nonsense has been talked about water-ballast tanks, and I am glad to see that Mr. Martell pointed this out in his paper read at the Naval Architects' meeting. If a vessel is built with water-ballast tanks, it is done because it is a saving when shifting port, and the raising of the cargo is an advantage with heavy dead-weight cargoes, whilst with a general mixed cargo there is convenience in stowage and less dunnage required. If when the ship has to carry what are called homogeneous cargoes (if I may coin a word I would call them homobaric) it is discovered that the ship is tender and requires ballast, it should be provided. If this is not done it is improper stowage. Years and years before water ballast was thought of there were crank ships and homobaric cargoes, such as tea, rice, cotton, &c., &c., with all of which ships required more or less

ballast, and the less ballast the more profitable the ship; but no one thought of going without it, at the risk of the vessel being dangerously crank at sea. Why should it be done now? So it is with the spare buoyancy and freeboard of a vessel. Never till of late years have ships been loaded so that in an ordinary gale the decks would be always under water. The mere necessity for the crew to move about the decks to work the sails would have prevented that, to say nothing of the fact that wooden ships would not have borne the weight of such cargoes, such as the great strength of iron ships now enables them to carry, more particularly when not shallow built. The vessels which were looked upon as the finest merchant ships afloat (I mean the fine frigate-built East Indiamen) would not have lived out their first gale, had they been laden as vessels are now. To talk of the construction or the type of modern vessels as the cause of their foundering is to raise a side issue distracting atten tion from the main one. Great has been the outcry against long vessels; my experience is that the long vessels are the easiest at sea when not improperly loaded. Insufficient steam-power is unquestionably a source of danger when a vessel is running, but it becomes infinitely more so when she is like a half-tide rock, and consequently so sluggish that it is difficult to move her. There is, however, one type of modern vessel which though doubtless safe when not improperly loaded, yet I think ought to have more freeboard, and should not be laden with such heavy cargoes as flush deck vessels, I refer to the so-called well-decked ships. Not only are they more dangerous from the fact that a sea once on board cannot so easily be got rid of, but the nature of her construction in two halves, as it were, lessens her longitudinal strength, and in my opinion to load a well-decked ship as deep as a flush one is improper loading. Although grain in bulk is by its nature a dangerous cargo, we know that many vessels have constantly so carried it in safety; but if all vessels were compelled to go to the expense necessary to provide appliances, and to incur the loss of time and expense of stowage needful to render their full bulk cargoes secure from shifting, I venture to think that owners would soon find that the carrying the grain in bags would be the cheaper method.

Now, if improper loading lies at the bottom of all the trouble, how many different opinions shall we not get as to the measures to be taken for preventing it? I for one am inclined to say, take none, at least not in an overt way. But, if on proper investigation a vessel is proved to have been lost from improper loading then let the blame be brought home to the authors of it, and let there be no mistake as to who the authors are. Don't make a scapegoat of some poor wretch of a master who has only been carrying out the instructions, either direct or implied of the owner. If the owner desires not to have his ship improperly loaded, depend upon it he will take as much pains to find the master who will not do it, as he now does to get the man who will carry the largest cargo, at the risk of his life and regardless of consequences.

It is as easy to calculate the stability of a vessel with a homobaric cargo, as it is to calculate her displacement, and the difference of opinion as to what should be the minimum percentage of spare buoyancy and freeboard is not so great but that some standard might be fixed by the Board of Trade and the Underwriters. At any rate it could not fail to be in excess of 10 per cent. spare buoyancy, or 1 inch to the foot of hold for freeboard, with which small margin of safety many vessels are now sent to sea.

ONYX.

OFFICIAL INQUIRIES.-COMPASSES.

ROM some recent decisions of the magistrates and their assessors with reference to the magnetic courses. steered by iron ships, it would appear to be necessary

that they should have before them, when considering their judgment in cases of inquiry, a simple and plain statement as to the compass deviation of iron ships and the usual method of tentative compass adjustment as practised in the Mercantile Marine.