636. And necessarily the vessel to be sent there would have to be very large in order to encounter the Atlantic weather ?—Yes.

637. (Chairman.) Do you say you were about eight days out in one case ?-It was about eight days from the time of the report of the vessel being sent to the Board of Trade I believe, or to the collector of customs. It comes to the Board of Trade and from the Board of Trade to Trinity House and down to me at Yarmouth and then I have to get communication with steam vessel if she is away.

638. Did you succeed in finding her ?-No, I believe it was over on the other side by that time-it must have been.

639. Have you experienced much difficulty in finding derelicts that you have been sent to look for ?—I should think we only find one out of three.

640. Do you attribute that to their drifting or to their sinking P-To their drifting I should think.

66

641. (Sir George Nares.) Have you given us any information about the Maron that was floating between Aldbro' and Orfordness in September 1891. Do you remember that case ?-No. Did she go ashore?

642. The return says she was floating and dispersed. --Yes, I am aware of that, but I have no information here.

643. How was it dispersed ?-By cotton-powder. I was on duty in the Harwich district at the time. It came ashore and floated off again; we then towed her ashore again and dispersed her with cotton-powder.

644. What was her cargo ?-I cannot say whether she had cargo or ballast. It did not cost much to disperse her.*

645. In dispersing a vessel like that, how are you sure she has not been scuttled; you do not take that into consideration probably ?-We do not take that into consideration. Generally speaking, there is very little of them to be seen unless they are not loaded, and even then they do not float very high out of water.

646. Can you tell us anything about the "Vandallie" in September 1892, near the Leman and Ower, which was a dismasted derelict P-No; we have done nothing there. I believe she went over to the other side from what I recollect of her.

647. A vessel abandoned near the Goodwins would not be within your district, would it ?—No.

648. (Sir Evan MacGregor.) There was one witness who suggested dealing with derelicts by casting paraffin on them and burning them?-I am afraid they would be too much saturated with water. They would not float high enough out of the water.

648a. Is the powder you use named cotton-powder ? -Yes.

649. (Chairman.) Now, will you give us cases of towage ?—There is one instance in 1881 as to towage of the water-logged barque " Æolus," laden with ice. The masts were gone and she was found about 14 miles S.E. by S. off Southwold at 9 a.m. on September 6th. There was too much sea to board her, and we lay by her till 6 p.m., when the sea having moderated we got a hawser fast, and showed the regulation lights at night. On

* Cost of removal subsequently stated as £180.

the 7th, at 5.45 a.m. we proceeded with the wreck in tow and at 10.50 we beached her at Southwold in four fathoms of water. We salved her starboard anchor and both cables, and at sunset we anchored and guarded the wreck with regulation lights. On the 8th we towed her close in shore and ran her anchor away to secure her. Afterwards we cleared away her spars and sails. We lay by the wreck on the 9th and 10th, and on the 11th she drove ashore and broke up. The ice melted, of course. That is one case of towage and the time occupied was 138 hours. Another case was in 1883 of a derelict brig named the "Uhla," which was loaded with deals. The mast was standing but the bottom was knocked out. She had been ashore and her chains were dragging on the bottom. We cut them with charges of tonite, and took her in tow at 3.10 p.m. on the 9th December, and arrived at Southwold at 1.50 p.m. on the 10th. At that time there was too much swell to beach her and on the 11th, with the assistance of a tug, we beached her at Southwold at 5.35 p.m., and got her anchor ashore and secured her. On the 12th we returned to Yarmouth, but a heavy gale from the N.W. drove the wreck off the beach breaking the fluke of her anchor. The vessel went off, and we had to go out on the 13th, and eventually we beached her at Yarmouth. The time we were employed altogether was about 101 hours. The cargo in the vessel was sold and the surplus was handed over to the underwriters after paying expenses.+ That is my experience with floating wrecks. As to the removal of spars, the spars dealt with farthest away from the land were vessels' masts found floating 99 miles E. of Flamborough Head. That is the greatest distance at which we have picked up spars or dealt with them. We were employed for 30 hours and the time of picking them up only occupied 1 hour and 20 minutes. In another case we dealt with a vessel's masts near Brown Ridges, about 45 miles E. by S. of the Corton Lightship, that is the greatest distance at which we have recovered spars from a sunken vessel.

650. When you talk of spars being removed from sunken wrecks, does that mean you took them out ?Yes, and after a time they came heels up in deep water, so that we could remove them. The hull was no danger to navigation.

651. You have mentioned getting hold of these wrecks and towing them. Do you think that would be possible on any large scale in the Atlantic P-No, they are very difficult to handle, and it is hard work. The only thing you can do is to get hold of them and watch your opportunity with the tide, and drag them in athwart the tide a little. It is very hard work to deal with them in towing, and you have a difficulty in handling the vessel, and you cannot do it unless the weather is very fine.

652. It is only in very favourable circumstances that you can succeed in towing them ?—Yes.

653. And in very bad weather what do you do ?-We should shift the hawsers and ride by her as long as possible if we could not tow it. You might always ride by a wreck to the leeward of her, because the wreck acts as a breakwater.

"Sir EVAN MACGREGOR, K.C.B. Sir GEORGE NARES, K.C.B., F.R.S.

།་*་

J. WADDON MARTYN, Esq., Secretary.

659. Could you give us an account of each of the derelicts you have seen in turn, with the date, and as near as possible, the whereabouts of them.

Have you got that ?-No, I have not unfortunately. They have been reported at the time to the Company, and I think it would be very difficult to get at that because I have not got any record of them.

660. Could you tell us approximately between what years it was-through what interval of years have you seen those six or seven derelicts ?-The entire period that I have been crossing, and I know that I have gone sometimes more than a year's interval between them; unfortunately we have kept no record of the position or the number.

661. Can you give us roughly where you saw them, I mean in what part of the Atlantic ?-I can do that, I think; two were seen within about 300 or 400 miles of the Fastnet, and two about mid-Atlantic, and the others from 50 to 68 W.

662. With regard to those, you have put in a sketch of one with her masts standing ?—Yes, that is the only one that I have a sketch of.

663. What were the conditions of the others; I mean by that, were they submerged or bottom up?-The ship that I saw bottom up was floating with the bottom of the ship awash from the turn of the bilge. · ·

664. And what about the others ?-One was a foreand-aft schooner; she was almost awash with the water, and the main-mast was broken off below the cross-trees. The other was a brigantine which was afterwards towed into Queenstown; she was reported several times, I think five or six times. rest I do not think that my memory serves About the sufficiently to give a description of them.

666. Have you ever struck ice when your vessels crossed P-No, I have never struck ice.

ふし

667. Have you ever found yourself in the neighbourhood of ice ?-I have been in a field of ice as much as six or eight hours together, and I have seen icebergs; a great number of icebergs.

668. Do you slow down ?-Yes, we invariably, in the ice region before dark, slow the ship down.

669. You, of course, have talked over the matter a good deal with the other captains of the White Star Line. Can you speak from their experience at all with regard to both seeing and striking derelicts ?—No, I have not talked the matter over; I did not know anything about this Committee's inquiry until I arrived from New York last Wednesday, so that I have come totally unprepared. If I had had more notice I should certainly have compared notes with the others. I only heard of this thing last Wednesday when I arrived, and it took me rather by surprise.

66

670. Now, with reference to any derelicts you have actually seen, supposing you had gone over them, do you think that the Majestic" would have been anything the worse?-It would depend, of course, in a great measure upon the derelict itself; there are certain circumstances in which it might hurt the “ Majestic" very much indeed. Supposing she was on the top of a sea or rising on а sea and striking a derelict, there would be the buoyancy of the derelict to press under the water, and rolling along underneath our bottom, it would be very apt to tear the bottom open.

671. That of course refers to a vessel. Have you any idea as to the damage likely to be done by floating spars or baulks of timber ?-I do not think that any timbers can do any harm because the displacement wave always has a tendency to throw them away from a ship. think the displacement wave of the "Majestic " is quite strong enough to throw off any objects; in fact I have watched them thrown off from the ship.

672. Do you think that though they might not hurt the Majestic" they might hurt smaller vessels ?-We had a very singular instance 12 months gone January; we had been going along with a south-west wind and a beam sea, we had one of our orlop deck ports stoved in; the port was well secured, because I saw it myself, and it was backed with what we call a dummy, and that port, although it is one of about 80 along the side, was stoved right in. The glass was broken into fragments, the dummy was broken in two pieces, laid right over, a large quantity of water got into the baggage room through the broken port, and there was a considerable amount of damage. At the time that that was done, or assumed to be done, I saw big planks or deals from a supposed deck load floating by the ship, and presumably one of those had struck that port and broken in. It is a most singular thing, and I have never seen it before or since.

673. What was the thickness of the port ?-The glass would be about an inch thick.

674. It was a glass port ?-But covered with an iron dummy screwed down over the top of it; it was covered with more than a quarter of an inch, nearly half

an inch. The dummy made of cast-iron securely screwed, was broken and turned right back, and the glass smashed into small pieces.

675. It looks as if this glass scuttle, or whatever it was, was actually rammed by the spar?-It seemed to

be so.

676. Did you see the spar?-We saw a part of the planks floating by the ship, that is what started the idea seeing those planks floating by the ship. The manner in which the port was broken and the glass showed that it could not be broken except by a tremendous blow delivered very suddenly.

677. Then that points to danger from floating spars of timber?-Yes, that is a point of danger when the sea is on the broadside of the ship. It is quite possible if you watch it carefully; there are two waves at times, one wave falls off and presses objects from the ship, but there is at intervals a wave of the prevailing sea that overcomes that. I have watched it often.

678. I can understand the broadside wave and the blow of a floating body pressing very heavily against the side ?-Yes, the disappearance of strong and wellfound ships must have a cause of some kind, and I consider that the most probable cause is that of some unknown danger beneath or on the surface of the water, and I think it only reasonable that every available means of saving life and property should be tried with a view of discovering what that cause is.

679. Have you any practical suggestion to make as to how the danger could be guarded against ?-I think, for instance, take a derelict like the one on the drawing I have just passed in, we will suppose that is floating on the water; that vessel was reported by several ships at the time, I know by half-a-dozen steamers-in that case it would be very easy to find her; it would be very easy for a man-of-war to find her, or a vessel assigned to that duty; of course there would be very great difficulty, and it would be almost impossible to keep exploring the ocean.

680. Given as a matter of argument that she is easy to find, what would you then suggest ?-That would depend entirely upon the conditions."

681. Given such a wreck as you see with her masts standing, what would you suggest ?-That wreck could very well be towed, provided it were not too far-that wreck could be very well towed into a place of safety and salved.

682. (Mr. Trevor.) From the middle of the Atlantic? -That ship would not be far from Newfoundland. I do not mean to tow her to England.

683. You do not give the position in which she was seen. Assuming that she was 1,000 miles from either New York or the Fastnet would not towing a thousand miles be rather a long job?-Towing a thousand miles would, but you would have Newfoundland, and that would not be the half of that distance from the ship.

684. (Chairman.) If she was in mid-Atlantic you would have a long way to tow her ?—Yes...

685. (Mr. Trevor.) Assuming that she was in midAtlantic, there is nothing on this drawing to show where she had been seen, but assuming that it was in midAtlantic, what would you suggest?-I could get the latitude and longitude of that derelict.

686. (Chairman.) Of course she does not stay still, she moves her place pretty rapidly ?--Yes, of course that would depend upon whether she was worth towing, but the best thing would be to blow her up, she would not be nearly so dangerous if she were blown up, as floating about in that way.

687. Let us change the ground, and say that you have got a submerged derelict to deal with, bottom up, where you cannot see her, what do you suggest then? To destroy her in the best manner possible.

688. That is just what has puzzled generations to know, how to destroy a derelict. If you could give us any practical suggestion for carrying it out, we should be very much obliged to you?-If the derelict could not be destroyed, she would have to remain where she was, but is it impossible to destroy a vessel with dynamite ?

689. It has always been held that if you break a vessel up, especially a vessel laden with lumber, you add very much to the danger by multiplying the wreckage, and that is a greater danger to navigation than one single derelict P-I do not think so, because I think a log of timber, while in the case I have just

mentioned it is dangerous, that is a very exceptional case. I do not say that a log floating on the water is not dangerous, but I have seen deals and logs and timber coming to a ship without any injury to the ship, and they have always gone away from her. Supposing a ship is in a field of ice, which is very similar, you will see that the ice never falls in upon the propeller of the ship.

690. You talked about a number of vesseis lost from unknown causes, do not you think that ice is much more likely to be an unknown cause than a derelict?— I do not. These things occur when there is no ice or when ice has not been reported, and we have every reason to believe that there is no ice on the track; you see we have only got one period of the year when there is ice on the track.

691. I suppose you will admit that if a vessel runs into the ice, the effect upon the vessel would be very much more disastrous than if she ran into a floating derelict-Experience is the surest guide in that respect. We know very well that two or three vessels have gone into icebergs, notably the "Arizona"; she ran in full speed end-on, and she had 30 feet of her bow cut off; only as far as the first water-tight compartment, fortunately.

692. But would you anticipate a tremendous hole made in the bow by striking a derelict?-It is not unusual for a ship to be almost in a sinking condition through striking an iceberg. I believe there are some instances known; I do not remember them for the moment; I should have made a note of all those things at the time had I known, but I am sure there have been at least two ships almost abandoned through striking icebergs. Then there is one of the German steamers, the Augusta Victoria or Furst Bismarck."-I do not know which, it was on her first voyage-collided with icebergs. I know that some of the plates in the run were started.

66

66

་་་

693. All that points to the great danger of ice if the ship happens to be struck. In your experience, have you had more authenticated cases of vessels striking ice than striking derelicts?--I certainly have heard of more cases of striking icebergs than derelicts.

694. What we are very anxious to get hold of are authenticated cases of collision with, floating derelicts, and so far we have not heard of very many. There has been a memorial signed very largely by masters and captains of vessels asking for an inquiry, but I think that is not from any known dangers or any actual experienced dangers, but rather from the idea that there may be a danger ?--Yes. I suppose that it is suggested by the fact of vessels disappearing without any well-assigned causes.

695. Quite, and it is assumed that derelicts are the cause ?-It is assumed that derelicts are the cause. 696. Though without any actual knowledge ?--It is assumed, I think, with very strong probability.

697. (Sir Evan MacGregor.) I think you were one of those who headed the petition to Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government ?-Yes, I signed the petition.

698. And your suggestion is to employ a special vessel, I think you stated ?--I do not think I have any suggestion to make because the Government will decide upon the best means; it might be a vessel from the North American Squadron which would undertake it, or it might be a special vessel.

699. Supposing it to be a special vessel, what should you consider would be a good year's work? How many derelicts would you be satisfied with? How many derelicts should she be likely to deal with PThat is such an exceedingly uncertain quantity; it would depend in a great measure upon, first of all, the timber trade-they are mostly timber vessels-being old worn-out ships that carry the timber. It is not the good ship that becomes a derelict; they are those vessels that have done their legitimate work in other trades and which have been sold to either Norway or Sweden, and that is a question that it is almost, in fact it is almost impossible to enter into. I could not even form an idea of the number of derelicts that have been seen at present on the Atlantic during the year; but I certainly could very soon find out from the Hydrographer's Office in New York, and I would be very happy to get any information for you on my return to New York, from the Hydrographer's Office.

700. (Mr. Trevor.) Why go to New York ?-Well, you see, there is a chart there. The American Government

take so much more interest in meteorology and things connected with the Atlantic.

701. Than our Government ?-Yes, than we do. There is the proof; there is that chart; you can go back with that chart issued by the American Government for 15 or 20 years, and that chart shows the derelicts floating on the Atlantic.

702. (Sir Evan MacGregor.) What steps have the American Government taken to show that they take so much interest in this question?-They have not yet, but they are seriously talking of removing derelicts from the ocean.

703. (Mr. Trevor.) You mean from their own coasts? --I think credit should be given where credit is due.

704. (Sir Evan MacGregor.) How do you arrive at that knowledge-that they are going to do something? -Simply by report from the Hydrographer's Office in New York that they are entertaining the idea. I do not say that they are going to do it.

705. To remove derelicts from their own coasts, is it not?-1 believe they intend to extend their care over the entire route.

706. Supposing you do see a derelict, do you make any report when you come to the end of the voyage, or should you ?-We always report.

707. To whom?-We report to the Company in our abstract.

708. Only to the Company ?-Only to the Company. 709. Then there would be considerable delay ?—The abstract is always posted in Lloyd's room and the derelict would be known. And not only do we do that, but supposing I pass one on the passage out, immediately we arrive in New York the position of that derelict is cabled over to our office in Liverpool; it is then posted in Lloyd's rooms by the orders of the managers of the Company, and we have it posted up in our office, and we are all obliged to initial that report. An iceberg or a derelict or any obstacle that is seen is cabled over at the Company's expense, and it costs us a great deal every year to do that.

710. Do you receive this wreck chart?-We receive the United States wreck chart. We receive a very large amount of data issned every month; we have a regular printed catalogue, and every iceberg and every derelict and every obstruction that has been seen on the route between New York and this country, in fact, on all the American coast.

711. Then is any practical use made of this chart ?-Certainly. I always have that chart before me when returning and sailing over the ocean. I take that chart, and I consider that it is a very great guide, and an exceedingly great advantage to me. It tells me the limit of fog reported, every derelict on the ocean, and almost every iceberg seen. It is issued on the first of every month.

712. But then what is the practical effect with regard to the derelict?-The practical effect with regard to the derelict. You are aware that the exploration of the Atlantic began with the" Lightning" and the "Challenger." They told us the sets of the current, and if you notice on that chart you will see the position of the derelict and the line that she follows; a very good idea can be formed from that.

able

713. But I meant what particular steps are you to take on account of that knowledge? You do not stop or go slow at night when you are near the supposed position of the derelict-you do not really make any difference?-Of course I know that this was in a certain position at a certain date. I see how far that was from our track, and it must be somewhere near our track because we all have specified tracks, at least the leading lines have specified tracks. I know that if a derelict is reported at a certain date, that when I get there it will not be there; it will be out of my way, going upon the old principle of steering for a doubtful danger.

714. (Sir George Nares). You mentioned about the United States going to extend their work in clearing the ocean. Do you know that they are clearing their own shores of derelicts or sunken wrecks ?-That I am not prepared to say, nor am I prepared to say that they are going to do it, but I know that it is under contemplation to do it.

715. Do you know what has been done for the last 20 years on the British coast in that direction ?-No, I do not.

716. When you say that the United States are taking more interest in these subjects, it must be in connection with some other country. What is the other country? Is she taking more interest in it than Great Britain?-I think that you have rather misunderstood me. I meant with regard to such works as the chart and reports; I do not mean to say in sounding or exploring. We have not issued anything to correspond with that chart which is before you now.

717. On that chart, which is a monthly chart, there are a great number of sunken wrecks on the coasts of the United States ?-Yes.

718. Do you know of a single sunken wreck on the British coasts dangerous to navigation at the present moment ?-I do not.

719. Would you be surprised to hear that there is not one; that we have evidence that there is not one ?-I suppose that you have evidence. Within what limits do you mean?

720. We have evidence that immediately any sunken wreck or floating wreck is within a reasonable distance of the shores of Great Britain, the lighthouse authorities send out at once and search for it; and actually within the last five years, through their instrumentality, 14 have been towed into harbours, for instance; 40 have been searched for but not found. I only put it forward for you to see that there is something going on off the British coasts that is not generally known?—I am quite aware; I suppose that if we limit it to a distance of 20 miles off the British coast that every effort is made to remove obstructions to navigation.

721. It would be news to you that some of these vessels have been searched for 100 miles off?-That would be the extreme limit.

722. You say that you know pretty well within 20 miles; it would be news to you to know that they sometimes go out 100 miles ?-Yes, that is news to

me.

723. Would it be news to you that sometimes men-ofwar are sent out on special cases ?-I know there have been cases of valuable ships reported broken down. I have known a man-of-war taking out provisions to ships before now.

724. We must not take it that Great Britain is doing nothing?--I said that the United States was doing more in sending out papers. I would be sorry to admit anything against my own country, and putting the United States before it.

725. Supposing the work of Great Britain is extended, do you think it would be a practical thing to keep a vessel patrolling the North Atlantic to search for derelicts? Do you think she would ever see one, when you have only seen six or seven in the course of 20 years. I do not mean to send out specially to look after derelicts, but to keep patrolling and looking for derelicts. You say you have only seen six or seven in 20 years now do you really think that this vessel would see more ?-I do not think she would see more. 728. How far was this derelict off that you saw from the "Britannic "?-She was quite close to.

727. Then you think in a case of that kind that it would be reasonable to take some steps to endeavour to find a well-known vessel like that?-I do.

728. And that that kind of vessel might be found ?.I think so.

729. What would you give as the length of life of an ordinary derelict in the rough weather of the North Atlantic, not taking a timber-laden ship?-Well, you see, that is one of those questions that no mere supposition could settle, and you have no experience to guide you. Take, for instance, this vessel, I do not know if I remember rightly, but I think that vessel was spoken continuously for some three or four months after I saw her first. I am almost sure of it, and you see that is in the summer in July. At that season of the year that ship might drift about for a year.

730. But would not the seas break on board of her? She is lying here as you see her now.

731. But supposing the "Majestic" were lying like that, would not seas break on board of you?—No, I do not think so. I am sure they would not.

732. Not at that moment, but taking the rough weather of the North Atlantic, you would not like to lie in the Majestic" for a month in the Atlantic without moving ?-At that season of the year the North

Atlantic is pretty calm, especially if she drives down between the trade winds.

733. I did not ask you about calm weather, I am speaking of the route between England and New York-Well, if a derelict were there in the winter the Atlantic rollers would very soon smash her up.

734. Two days ago there was news of a vessel on her beam ends, a four-masted barque, I think, laden with coal?-Yes.

735. How long would a vessel remain like that before the sea drives in her hatches and sends her to the bottom?-That vessel was practically sinking when the crew left her. I looked into all the details of that. She shifted her cargo and put her lee rail under water; it was only a question of time, for she was laden with coal, and bound to founder.

736. What would be the ordinary life of a vessel coming to grief in that way, a week ?—I would not give

her 48 hours.

737. Therefore, you would make a special case of special derelicts? Yes, a special case of special derelicts, you have to come to this. As I believe I have said before, the principal number are those timber-laden ships.

738. In the statistics which we have of the derelicts and floating timber that have been struck by British vessels in the last three years, there have been 103 cases all over the world, and it comes out that in the North Sea, away from our coast, 16 logs of wood or derelicts have been struck, but on the North Atlantic track route only 8, so that if responsibility is to come on the Government to undertake patrolling any sea we must also go to other seas than the North Atlantic PThe same thing applies to the North Atlantic as across to the Straits of Gibraltar.

739. Precisely, where there is a larger trade than crossing the Atlantic to New York --Not a larger trade.

740. Surely there is a larger trade passing down the coast of Portugal ?-Yes. I am speaking of the exclusively American trade. Of course if you take into consideration the trade of the Suez Canal it is much

more.

741. If Great Britain undertakes to patrol one sea she must patrol several where there is equally large trade. You rather confine it to the one route, the North Atlantic-Well, I think there is not the necessity to explore that coast. I have some experience of the coast of Portugal, the Straits of Gibraltar and Suez also, and considering that vessels keep very near the coast and that the prevailing direction of the wind and current drives everything on to that coast, I do not think there is the necessity for patrolling that part of the ocean as much as the route that we follow.

742. You keep such a splendid look-out now, it is impossible for you to take extra precautions, because you have been told of the derelict by the chart ?-To keep a more vigilant look-out than we do is impossible. We have a lock-out continually, consisting of two men on the foremast and the officer on the bridge.

743. You need not go into the particulars. What I was aiming at was that the chart partly frightens you, but it cannot help you to get out of the way ?-It cannot help us to get out of the way at all. The great value of the chart is to give us an idea what derelicts have done on a previous chart and what they are doing on this chart, and we are always comparing the one chart with the one of one or two months previously, and we are speculating on the probable drift of those derelicts.

744. I suppose when you leave Great Britain you have presented to you at the Custom House the Board of Trade Notice to Mariners, a monthly summary, and there they warn you about derelicts much in the same way as that American chart does ?-Yes, any known danger on the route. There have been instances, in fact several, of, say, a steamer broken down. I know one instance of one of our own being broken down, and other steamers starting off from the Fastnet, steering for her, finding her, and picking her up. She did not tow her back because one of our other steamers had fallen in with her.

745. She was completely broken down ?--She was a whole week; I think, 10 days.

746. Was she making way through the water ?--Yes, slowly.

747. With some sails, and therefore keeping on the line of route?-She kept as well as she could on her

line of route, but I know this vessel went off with the idea of picking her up, and succeeded in finding her.

748. (Mr. Trevor.) You said that the Board of Trade's Monthly Summary is given to you at the beginning of each voyage P-Yes.

749. Do you think that gives you useful information ? ---Yes, undoubtedly it does.

750. Is it about equivalent to the United States chart in utility ?-It is, excepting that the printed matter is not so good as the graphic description of the American chart.

751. But still the seaman can put his written information on to his chart very easily in his own mind?— Yes.

752. And, therefore, the monthly summary of the Board of Trade is nearly equivalent to the United States chart?-Yes, nearly equivalent.

753. Therefore, with the two, you think you have got the guide to all the dangers that you require ?--I think The Board of Trade Monthly Summary is chiefly devoted to the buoyage and lights.

So.

754. But I am speaking now, of course, on the question of derelicts; it gives you every derelict that has been reported in this country ?—Yes.

755. And the United States chart gives every derelict that has been reported in the United States ?Yes.

756. Therefore, between the two you get a very large amount of information?-We do get a very large amount of information, and very valuable information

too.

757. I think you told us that, although it was necessary, from your point of view, that whoever is to undertake this duty should patrol the North Atlantic, it was not so necessary to patrol the route by the Mediterranean and by the Coast of Portugal, on account of the prevailing winds sending anything on shore? I merely said that the presumption was that those things should be taken into consideration in considering the necessity for patrolling that part of the

ocean.

758. Therefore, on the whole, you thought it was not so necessary to patrol the route to the Mediterranean as the route to New York; that was the tendency of your evidence ?-That was the tendency.

759. What should you say about the North Sea and the trade to the Baltic?-I do not know anything about the North Sea; it is so many years since I was in the North Sea; I have not been in the North Sea for about 45 years.

760. But still is not it conceivable that, if there are derelicts in the North Atlantic, there might also be derelicts in the North Sea?-It is quite probable that there would be derelicts. The question then would arise." Do we have similar casualties in the North Sea to those that we have in the North Atlantic."

761. There are a good many reported, but my object in asking the question was this, that if one ocean is to be looked after, must you neglect all the others?I should think that a route requires supervision specially in proportion to the very vast amount of human life that is carried over it. You see there is more life carried across this route over the Atlantic than any other route in the world.

762. More than to India and Australia?-The emigration to the United States certainly exceeds that of every other country in the world, and consequently it must exceed that of Australia.

763. The emigration is only one passage; it is not the continual journeying backwards and forwards?Yes, there is the continual going backwards and forwards. I am sure I know very well, in fact I am positive, that nearly 45 per cent. of the numbers return across the Atlantic in ordinary times.

764. I will take another part of the subject. You told us very properly that you would like submerged derelicts destroyed in the best way possible ?--Yes.

765. Could you give us any idea, from your own views, what is the best mode of destruction of the derelict when you come to it?-As I said before, the best way would be to blow her up by some explosive. That would depend entirely upon the ship herself. Now I should think that it is not impossible to destroy a derelict with our modern appliances, no matter although she was awash.