The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

7. Ship of the Month - cont'd. was placed on the spar deck midships to accommodate the additional crew she would be required to carry. Coal was not readily available as fuel where GLENCADAM was to operate, so she was converted to burn oil fuel. The oil was to be stored in the former water ballast tanks, and so 100 tons of stone were placed in the old coal bunker as ballast. The ownership of GLENCADAM was transferred on August 24th, 1920, to another of Playfair's companies, the Glen Transportation Company Ltd., Midland. Her Caribbean service, however, did not prove successful and, later in 1920, we believe, she was brought back to the lakes. The kingposts and doghouse were removed, the stone was taken out of the coal bunker, and GLENCADAM was re­ fitted to burn coal once again, as coal was far more readily available as a fuel for lake ships than was oil at that time. After her return to the lakes, GLENCADAM's dimensions were shown on the Canadian register as 244. 0 x 43. 0 x 18. 2, and her tonnage as 1870 Gross and 1118 Net. It is said that GLENCADAM was fitted with new boilers, 14'6" x 11'0", built by the Port Arthur Shipbuilding Company Ltd., but we are uncertain as to when they were fitted. It seems logical that this would have been done when the ship returned from salt water and was reconverted to burn coal, and yet the 1922 Great Lakes register of the American Bureau of Shipping shows the old boilers still in place. This latter listing may have been an error, but we are inclined to doubt this, as the register showed that GLENCADAM and her machinery had been inspected in November of 1921. Unfortunately, few ship­ ping registers of the time showed boiler information, so we are extremely limited as to the sources available to us in this respect. The Glen Transportation Company Ltd. was a bit different than James Play­ fair's other companies, because although Playfair was president of the firm, he did not actually operate its ships himself. Instead, the Mathews Steam­ ship Company Ltd., Toronto, was the managing operator. Accordingly, GLENCA­ DAM did not, as far as we are aware, run on the lakes in Playfair's usual colours (light grey hull, white cabins, and crimson stack with black top). Instead, as will be seen in the 1922 Young photo accompanying this feature, she was painted up in the colours that A. E. Mathews used for his own ships. She had a black hull with a white forecastle rain and white cabins, while her stack was black with two narrow silver bands. Both masts were buff, which was rather unusual for a coal-burning ship, as the mainmast became heavily stained with soot. Before long, the mainmast was repainted black. The ship's name was inscribed in rather fancy black letters across the front of the bridge deck rail. The Mathews-Playfair partnership soon disintegrated, however, and GLENCADAM wound up as a member of the Mathews Steamship Company Ltd. fleet. She was renamed (c) ARLINGTON on December 22, 1924, and her registry was transferred from Midland to Toronto on April 25, 1925. The actual bill of sale conveying ownership of the steamer to Mathews was dated January 18, 1926. Apart from having the new name painted on her, the only change in livery for the ship was that the large Mathews monogram was placed on her bows. Some of the Ma­ thews ships had their forecastles painted white, but ARLINGTON continued to carry a black forecastle and on the bulwarks on the forecastle head were white. As usual, Mathews gave the ship a name ending with the suffix "ton". The rest of the names, however, were of widely varying derivation. It is reported that ARLINGTON was named for Arlington County, Virginia, from whence came the family of Helen Mathews, the wife of A. E. Mathews. ARLINGTON continued in the bulk trades as before, carrying mainly grain and coal, but also hauling pulpwood up from the St. Lawrence. But when things began to go sour for the lake shipping industry during the summer of 1929, Alfred Ernest Mathews found himself in a most precarious financial position, with operating revenues declining. The company had overextended itself with new vessel construction, and even the older Mathews ships had been mortgaged