C. CECIL TREVOR, Esq., C.B.
Captain W. J. L. WHARTON, R.N., F.R.S.
J. WADDON MARTYN, Esq., Secretary.

1. (Chairman.) We understand that you have taken a great deal of interest in the subject of the danger to ocean navigation from floating derelicts ?-Yes.

2. Can you give the Committee any information that would assist them in carrying out their inquiry on the subject ?-First of all, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I must beg to thank the President of the Board of Trade for the part he has taken in the matter of the consideration of these floating derelicts and bringing it to the issue at which it has arrived. I am rather in an awkward position in the matter of giving evidence on the subject, and for this reason, that most of the evidence that has been gathered so far has been in the hands of gentlemen who primarily took the greatest possible interest in the matter of derelicts. Since I got a communication from the Board of Trade I have communicated with my friend, Mr. Jaffe, but he being away on the Continent I did not get his reply till yesterday. I understand he also is summoned to give evidence before this Committee. But I have no doubt that most of his evidence will be the same or to a large extent similar to what I have myself to present. Of course, not having been actually in contact with these derelicts myself, I have to refer to the evidence of other people who have seen derelicts, and I have to refer to cases that have been reported in the papers at different times. The Board of Trade and the Admiralty will have had a number of cases that I brought, in my position of Member of Parliament, before the House of Commons in the form of Questions, and they will have the answers that have been given to those questions. In most of those questions, if not all, I have given the exact position where these derelicts

J. C. Macdona, M.P.

were seen in the Atlantic, so that you have that evidence such as it is in your own records here. The only thing that occurred to me that I should do now in 20 April 1894. the matter of putting evidence before you, was to give a list, as far as I could gather it, of some of the cases of derelicts that have been published in different places, notably (and I expect that you have records of this yourselves here) evidence by the Hydrographer's Office in Washington. A chart has been published each month in Washington, which I believe you have a copy of, in which are given most accurately, at least as far as possible, such positions of derelicts as can by accurately placed by taking observations in the Atlantic. That is the position of these derelicts as they float about in the Atlantic. These positions are, I understand, telegraphed to the central office of the Hydrographer's Office in Washington as soon as any vessel reaches a port from which communication can be held with that office. As to the printed list of derelicts, in case you have not a copy of it I have got the chart here with me, though I think you have the charts.

3. We have got them ?--The positions of these derelicts are clearly indicated on that chart. The object of my impressing the matter upon our Government was to see, inasmuch as our mercantile marine is more than that I believe of the whole world put together, that we should not be behindhand or behind other nations at any rate in looking after the interests of our marine, whether it be our navy or our mercantile service in which our passengers or seamen go across the Atlantic every day in the year. I have therefore in my Questions in the House only had one end in view, not by any means that

L

J. C. Macdona, M.P.

of harassing any part of Her Majesty's Government, but I have acted from a purely conscientious view which actuates me strongly, and I have thought that this matter should be very earnestly gone into by the 20 April 1894. Government. I occupy rather an unique position in London commercially speaking-I have about three miles of shipping and some of the largest docks, the Surrey Commercial Docks-in my constituency, and therefore I am personally interested in the welfare of sailors who sail from London to all parts of the world, and meet these derelicts. It is for that reason that I desire in my position in Parliament to urge upon the attention of the Government that we should at least not be behindhand with regard to other nations in taking measures to destroy these derelicts, wherever they are found. To that end I have brought a very short Bill into Parliament which comes on to-night, if I am allowed to bring it in, and that Bill provides that wherever these derelicts are seen, whoever sees them, masters of British vessels should report them, at the first port they come to, to Lloyd's, with a view to their being instantly telegraphed to Lloyd's in London, and I trust that the Board of Trade or the Admiralty, whosever province it falls within, will send forth an intimation to all the mariners and masters of vessels that these derelicts have been seen. It is a very short Bill and I need not go into its provisions now. I candidly confess that it is simply a preliminary Bill, and it will be either for me or somebody else afterwards-the Government I trust to take up the matter and go further with it, and when they see the necessity of destroying these derelicts to take immediate steps to devise some plan within their own province and capability for carrying into effect the measure. We have this to go upon, that the Americans have tried the experiment for some years. They have had two vessels, the "Kearsage and the "Vesuvius," fitted up purposely for destroying these derelicts wherever they meet with them. I am sorry to say that the "Kearsage" since then has been hoist with its own petard, so to speak, it has run upon a derelict, F believe, and been lost, and its place has not, I think, been filled up so far. But I feel strongly that it is beneath the dignity of a great nation like England, with so many interests in all parts of the world, and with so many of our own people in all parts of the world having to travel backwards and forwards to and from England, and with such an enormous commerce as we have at sea, that we should be behind even such an enterprising nation as the Americans. We have the facilities, we have the wealth, we have the interest, we have everything concerned to make us most anxious to take such steps as will rid the Atlantic of these terrible risks, not only to property, but to what I esteem much more valuable, the lives of our sailors and of our passengers, and of our friends travelling backwards and forwards between here and America. With these few remarks, stating, as I do now, that my Derelicts (Reports) Bill is only a stepping-stone, as it were, to what I should like to see achieved afterwards, I will say that if this first Act is passed, and these derelicts are reported at the different ports where the masters of ships may touch, then, I think, a very important step has been taken in the right direction, and one that I am sure the Board of Trade and the Admiralty will see it is to the interest of the country to give all the help they can give towards getting passed into law. As I said before, I would like the Government to go even further. There is no use in adopting this notion about derelicts being discovered in different places unless we go a step further. It is little use telling the master of a ship that there is a derelict in such and such a latitude and longitude when by the time he gets there it may or may not be there, and if it were there if he was passing it in the night there would be no possibility of his being able to see it or guard against it. Therefore it is our bounden duty to take some steps to destroy them altogether. A vessel might very easily be set aside-even chartered, and if not chartered, some of our cruising vessels that we have in the navy might be very well fitted up expressly for that purpose without any very great expense, and they would add, I believe, to the efficiency of our navy if it was known that we had two three ships engaged upon this very laudable work. I believe also that there is a great feeling of chivalry amongst our naval men, and I believe that in our fleet there are many sailors who, in these modern days of ironclads and that sort of thing, on different coasts, more especially the warm coasts, feel it an inexorably wearisome task to fulfil their duties without something, I was going to say, in the way of what is pleasurable or profitable to occupy all their faculties,

or

which would be given scope to by such a ship as I have suggested being fitted out. I believe there would be such emulation amongst the sailors to get on board this ship for the sake of the diversity of occupation, and for the sake of getting something to occupy their energies and minds, that there would be a rivalry amongst them as to who would do the most for their country. These vessels that I am suggesting might be used with profit to the nation by using them as experimental ships in the first instance for practising any new gun which the Admiralty would like to try. It would be very easy, instead of going to such an enormous expense as the Admiralty does go to in providing new targets for ships, to send their ships out to places where they know there is a derelict for it to practise on the derelict. It is very easy to find out where they are, and therefore to practise on them. Then again there is an advantage in this plan in giving to the men themselves an occupation, and, if necessary, they might be paid extra for it. There are many worthy sailors who would like to be promoted to an office of that sort where they could be doing some real good for their country. Then, going on further still than that, you might make these vessels adapted for this one special purpose of being a beacon, as it were, upon the dark waters, to show vessels travelling at night any derelicts about by means of a large electric light from the foremast, so that vessels of all nations travelling round about would know that that vessel was a British derelict searcher searching for derelicts on the great waters far from their own homes. I believe that passing in the night many steamers and many vessels that heard of derelicts would stop on their way, if it was sufficiently caim, and send out a boat to report to the search steamer lying by at night, which it would be advisable it should do, with this large search light at the bow or maintop. I am only going into these details because the Committee represent the Board of Trade and the Admiralty, and I wish to show how feasible the thing is. I would go even further still. This search vessel would be a common communication between the sailors of all nations in the matter of delivering letters and doing things of that kind. I am afraid I have wearied you, but I feel earnestly upon the point, and it may be the only opportunity I shall have of appearing before you. If you will allow me I will read these cases of vessels that are known to have been lost by collisions at sea with derelicts, or shall I leave them with you as read ? 4. You can mention the names, at any rate ?-The "Chilian" is the first.

5. (Mr. Trevor.) Is that the ship that was stranded the other day on Filey Brigg ?--The "Chilian" struck a derelict upon a voyage from Pernambuco to Philadelphia. She is the tenth ship which has struck in seven years. She was examined in Philadelphia with the result that a dent was found in her bottom, and the blade of the propeller was broken. She put to sea again, and had to be abandoned seven days after with 5 feet of water in her.

6. Where does this information come from ?--From the Hydrographer's Office at Washington. Then there is the "Naronic," which was sunk.

7. That has been satisfactorily accounted for, has it not?-No, it has never been accounted for that I am aware of. It has never been heard of. She was fitted out with particularly strong bulkheads, too.

8. (Chairman.) Would you give us the names of the others?-The "Cragside" struck a derelict off Whitehead, U.S.A. on the 20th of May last and foundered. Then the barque "Jan Pietersoon Koen," in latitude 24° 10′ north, latitude 69° 28' west, on February 24th 1892. The "Orrie V. Drisco" was sunk by a derelict in the north of Mexico in 1891. The steamship" Glen Rath" struck a wreck and sunk on October 1st, 1890, Then there was the case of the "Seagull" off the New Jersey coast. Then the Spanish gunboat "Paez" fell in with a derelict at Tarifa and had a hole knocked in her and foundered. Then there was the "Francis L. Godfrey," the "Joseph Baymore," and the "Bayleswood schooners which were all sunk by derelicts From 1887 to 1893 14 ships, 4 of them steamers, were badly hurt by derelicts, 7 slightly damaged, 12 damaged to an extent not ascertained. The steamer "Norman" on the 18th May last ran upon a sunken schooner-the "Booth Brothers" which went ashore on Brigantine Shoals, New Jersey. They managed to clear the hull with the loss of a few spars. The " City of Dublin " on November 11th in latitude 39° 30′ N., long. 53° west, had a narrow escape when she struck

the deckhouse of a derelict but escaped the hull. Then the "Bahama " launched in 1893 at Glasgow was seen off the coast of Newfoundland abandoned. Then the Fanny E. Wolston" abandoned on the 15th October 1891 was last seen on the 15th December 1893 near where she was abandoned. At the end of 1892 she had travelled 3,460 miles in the tracks of vessels. Then there is the "Robert P. Chandler " which was abandoned at Key West on July 7th. She was seen at Christmas last having travelled 1,200 miles close to the Atlantic steamship route. Then the "Lady Lingar" and the "Helena Alma" and "Forrest and another vessel on fire was reported not far from Fastnet.

99.66

9. (Captain Wharton.) These are all cases from the United States records ?—Yes. Then in March last the steamship "Vesta," from New Orleans to Liverpool, reported a derelict on fire in latitude 42° 46', longitude 16. In 1893 the "Star of India," Garibaldi," "Bourgeois,' Lakefield,' 'Wyer G. Sargent" all disappeared. The last one was abandoned in March 1891, and was last seen at the end of 1892, having gone 5,500 miles in 615 days, and when last reported was off Bermuda. In 1888, the blizzard year, there were a great many derelicts; 1889 was worse. In 1888 there

were 22 reported; in 1889, 37; in 1890, 25; and in 1891 there were 23 reported as derelicts.

10. (Chairman.) Reported to whom ?-Reported to Washington.

11. (Mr. Trevor.) With their latitude and longitude given ?—Yes, in most cases.

66

12. And, of course, with the date of observation ?Yes, I can give some more with the actual position of those that were seen. The "W. L. White" was abandoned on March 13th, 1888, 80 miles from New York. On January 23rd, 1889, she went ashore off the Hebrides, having gone 5,900 miles in 370 days, and was recognised by 45 vessels. In November 1888 two American schooners, "Ethel M. Davis" and "David W. Hunt," were abandoned in the same gale. The latter travelled 4,800 miles in 347 days; the former 440 miles in 370 days. On October 13th, 1887, the barque Telemaque" was abandoned in latitude 37° N., longitude 39° W., having been seen the last time on April 15th, 1889, in latitude 35° 50′ N., longitude 56° 5′ W., having travelled 3,150 miles in 551 days. The "Vincenzo Peratta" was abandoned in the same place a month earlier. She went ashore on Watling's Island on the 4th of April 1889 after a run of 2,950 miles in 536 days. Then there was the schooner "Manantico," which did 2,600 miles in 164 days. The Dagmar” did 1,400 miles in 155 days. The "Petty did 1,700 miles in 97 days. The "James B. Dravy did 1,720 miles in 367 days. The "Carrier Dove" did 2,210 miles in 152 days. The barque "Carricks did 2,420 miles in 314 days, and the "Vesta Linden" travelled 2,230 miles in 151 days. Then the "Countess Dufferin " did 1,300 miles in 90 days.

13. (Chairman.) Are these derelicts ?—Yes.

14. (Mr. Trevor.) Abandoned ?-Yes, and travelling about.

15. (Captain Wharton.) How many years is that ?— These I have given you have been since 1887-7 years.

16. (Mr. Trevor.) The time of drifting is calculated from the latitude and longitude of the different positions, 1 suppose. It gives the number of miles of travelling, and the days?-The object of that is, I presume, to show what a risk vessels cruizing in the Atlantic run in encountering one of these derelicts ?— Yes.

17. (Chairman.) As far as I understand at the present moment, your main object is to take some steps to obtain legislation, that all floating derelicts should be reported P-Yes.

18. And published ?--Yes-in the first instance sent of course to the Board of Trade, to the Admiralty, and to Lloyd's, and then of course immediately published, steps being taken that every one of these positions are indicated to the masters leaving harbour. And I would suggest that envelopes might be sent out by the Board of Trade to all these masters, directed to the Board of Trade, so that no matter what port they called at, they might at once put a letter into the post office and have it sent direct to the Board of Trade.

19. (Mr. Trevor.) Your Bill proposes that the report shall be made to Lloyd's, and that Lloyd's shall forthwith communicate such information as it contains to the

Board of Trade ?-Yes. I do that as a double security, because Lloyd's is a business concern, and even supposing one should not fail, it will make assurance doubly sure. If the Admiralty issue envelopes directed to themselves they would get the information required.

20. (Chairman.) I see you have mentioned Lloyd's, and I suppose it would be satisfactory to you and your point would be equally met, if the information was obtained in whatever was the best way?—In any way that was best.

21. But especially by the Government ?-By the Government-but Government takes such a long time to move in matters of that sort, and Lloyd's being a business concern it might be taken up at once by Lloyd's as far as the Bill is concerned, but it is to the interest of the Board of Trade to have the information themselves as soon as they could get it. Another point that occurred to me was that they should be reported to the Consuls abroad--to the nearest British Consul-but then I found on inquiry that Lloyd's generally appoint, in fact invariably appoint, the British Consuls all over the world as their agents; but in many cases where there are are no British Consuls there are Lloyd's representatives, and they might be made the persons to be reported to. Immediately after landing every sailor has to go to Lloyd's, and it occurred to me that Lloyd's agent being on the spot the information could be sent more quickly and much more direct to headquarters, but at any rate it would be a safeguard and additional security if the Board of Trade were to issue envelopes directed to themselves so that every master at once could forward any information as to a derelict having been seen.

22. Then I will not ask you any further questions on the individual cases you bring forward as I quite understand that you are simply informing us of the information you received from other sources ?—Yes.

23. Could you give the Committee any idea of where they could best get information from personal experience ?-I think the best information I could suggest would be that which could be obtained direct from the Hydrographer's Office at Washington. Then I think you will find when you have Mr. Jaffe before you that he has a large amount of original information, because he took great pains when the subject was before the Belfast Chamber of Commerce to give them all the information he could, and he has that with him. That

is the reason I have not got that information.

24. Mr. Jaffe will be able to give us that?—I think he will be sure to be able to give you that. Then again at a moment's notice yesterday, I sent down to the East End of London, where I could amongst the sailors there, to try to get any direct information of men who had seen derelicts, so that they might report to your Committee here not only where they saw them and the like, but that they might give you an idea of the terror derelicts seem to convey to sailors on board a ship. Sailors are very superstitious, and the least danger of that sort, although very brave men in an emergency, affects them greatly. An unseen danger that they cannot guard against causes them an amount of terror which is very painful.

25. You cannot give us any direct information of loss of life from collisions with derelicts can you ?-1 am afraid I cannot. There are so many vessels that have gone down and that one has never heard of, that the only presumption is that the loss cannot be accounted for otherwise than by their having run against a derelict. 26. That of course must be more or less hypothetical ? -Yes.

27. Have your informants given full value to the danger from floating ice in the North Atlantic?Yes, but the great difference is that ice can be guarded against. There are indications from the difference of temperature that icebergs are near.

28. (Sir George Nares.) That is an exploded idea altogether. In the Arctic Expedition of 1875-76 it never warned me of my approach to ice ?--When you are always in the Arctic regions it cannot make the same difference, but if you are in a warm climate and the ice comes upon you then you feel the difference.

29. When commanding the "Challenger" in the south seas the thermometer was useless in that respect. 30. (Chairman) One more question. As far as I gather at present, your proposal with regard to the destruction of derelicts refers to the North Atlantic routes only?—We are exposed to the danger of derelicts

J. C. Macdona, M.P.

in all parts of the world. I should be glad to try the North Atlantic first. But there are a tremendous number of derelicts with which English commerce is jeopardised in the Chinese seas, and the Baltic, and 30 April 1894. other seas; and wherever our commerce takes us to we are liable to meet with them.

31. There is naturally some difference between derelicts that are in territorial waters and those that are in mid ocean ?-Certainly, and I should agree with your opinion as I take it to be, and the opinion of a great many others, that the greater risk is on the Atlantic coast, because the greater passenger traffic goes across it, and the routes are defined routes, and if one of these things gets in the way of a passenger steamer the risk is something awful. It would be a terrible thing to find out the power of a derelict after a collision if anybody ever survived to tell the tale, and of course there should be steps taken against it, and to provide a way of escape. In the China trade and the Australia trade routes there is a great number of them. and I had a long letter and a very interesting one -a copy of which I sent to the "Times"-which I have with me, from the captain of a ship in the Gulf of Mexico off Galveston, saying that he had, since this question of the derelicts was raised in the House of Commons, seen reports from American papersChicago and other papers-of it, and he has now written saying that although he did not know me, and had no personal motive in it, he had gathered together no less than 30 captains of ships in Galveston who happened to be there at the time, and they held an impromptu meeting, and banded themselves together to thank me for having taken the matter up, and in one instance offering to gather all along the coast as many cases of evidence to support this movement as it was possible to do, and these 30 captains signed this letter and sent it on to me to the House of Commons. I only mention that as indicating how our English sailors abroad feel in the matter.

32. Those were Englishmen, were they?—Yes, Englishmen.

33. (Mr. Trevor.) Along the American coast ?-Yes, along the American coast.

34. Why did not they send it to the American Government instead of to the British Government ?-I do not know.

35. Or both ?-I do not know. They did not do so, but they started from England, and they happened to be out there, and they naturally felt that we would have much more interest in them than the American Government would have.

36. (Sir George Nares.) Are the cases you have mentioned cases in which the vessels have struck a derelict or cases of a ship being a derelict?-All those cases I gave are cases of absolute derelicts.

37. How many cases have you in which within the last few years a vessel has certainly struck a derelict? -There is one case I have not mentioned there, but which I mentioned in the House of Commons a short time ago, of a Southampton steamer, a Royal Mail steamer, striking a derelict.

38. An actual floating ship ?-An actual floating ship. It was floating matter of a ship, whether the whole ship or not I cannot tell. It is very hard to prove when you have struck an actual derelict, but there is one case in the list which I gave of a vessel from Pernambuco which put in at Philadelphia with an indentation in her bottom, but she put out again after being repaired and had to be abandoned afterwards with 5 feet of water inside of her.

39. Do you remember whether you have given us the case of the "Glenrath" or the " Cragside "P-Yes.

40. Do you know that at the Board of Trade Inquiry it was found she had not struck a derelict at all, but the South-west Bull Rock?-No, I do not know that. That was a case which happened on the 20th May last. 41. Do you know that in fact we must not take the charts furnished by the Hydrographer of the United States as being certain guides, because in analysing even one chart we found that there was a mistake in the case of two British ships. The " Glenrath" was said to have been totally lost through having struck a wreck, but was found by the Court of Inquiry to have struck the Bilge shoal, and the "Cragside" had struck the South. west Bull Rock probably ?-That is a matter of detail.

42. Are we to confine ourselves in the matter of fitting up ships for this purpose to one or two men-of

war -I do not think a man-of-war would be suitable at all for it.

43. One or two ships tnen ?-I think you will find after you try one or two ships that it would be so much to your advantage that you would be very glad to try others in other parts.

44. But we have to consider these things on financial grounds? I know.

45. However, that is about how far you propose to go now ?-Two ships.

46. Then have you thought, with a possible sight of about eight miles on each side, and only being able to journey during the daytime, about what expanse of sea one could search ?-I have not gone into those details, but I would suggest the proper steps to take would be to go on the tracks of our ocean-going steamers.

47. Still, we shall have to consider all those questions now in connexion with the case ?-No doubt.

48. Are you aware of the decision that was come to by the delegates that attended the Washington Conference on the subject?-I have heard about it-that they were anxious to get the other Maritime Powers of the world to join the Washington Gevernment, and take united action in the matter.

66

66

66

66

66

66

66

66

66

66

66

66

49. But you have never read this Blue Book, publishing the decision come to there by the delegates. I will read it. It is from a Blue Book entitled "Commercial, No. 7 (1891). Protocols of Proceedings of the Inter"national Marine Conference held in Washington, "October 16th to December 31st, 1889." This is at the Conference held at Washington on Tuesday, December 31st, 1889, on the subject of "Reporting, marking, and removing dangerous wrecks or obstructions to navigation." It says: "Marking other obstructions. At present it seems impracticable to mark shoals, "reefs, &c., whether they be well known or only newly "discovered, with the exception of those lying near the coasts of countries having a maritime commerce, " and we consider it unnecessary to press for their being marked in other localities where they can be readily avoided by the exercise of ordinary skill, and "the usual precautions known to navigators. For this reason the Committee have no proposition to submit "to the Conference beyond the introduction, as far as possible, of a uniform system of buoyage. The President: The subject before the Conference for dis"cussion is, 'Marking other obstructions.' The Chair "hears no proposition with regard thereto. The Secretary will proceed to read the next division of the programme. The next division of the programme is as follows: (b.) The division of the labour, cost, and responsibility among the several maritime Nations, either by geographical apportionment or otherwise, of the "removal of dangerous derelicts; and of searching for doubtful dangers with a view of removing them from "the charts. 1. Derelicts, &c., on the high seas. A geographical apportionment of the waters of the globe amongst the different maritime Nations, in order to "divide the labour and cost of removing wrecks and derelicts, or searching for doubtful dangers, cannot "be recommended for adoption. In the open sea, with "the exception of a part of the North Atlantic, dere"licts and dangerous wrecks are exceedingly rare, and as these parts of the ocean are, comparatively speaking, not much frequented by vessels, the danger accruing from such obstructions is not one to warrant the expenditure of such sums of money as "would be necessary to institute a regular service, sufficient to ensure their removal from regions of "such enormous extent. The news of having sighted 66 a derelict, is often a week or more old before it is "received by the authorities; a rescuing steamer can "often not be on the spot for another week; the posi "tion given is in many cases not accurate; and in "most parts of the sea the drift of the derelict is exceedingly uncertain. It is, therefore, a most diffi"cult task for a vessel sent out to search for a derelict to find it; and the expense incurred by such expedi"tions may often be out of all proportion to the "small chance of finding and removing one.

66

66

66

66

66