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

8 MARINE REVIEW. ; Wind Force and Lake Water Levels. Although vessel masters on the lakes have for all time past been of the opinion that marked changes in the water level at the St. Mary's Falls canal and in other connecting channels of the lakes are due to wind direc- tion and force, the weather bureau now tells us that such is not the case. Attention was directed in the REVIEW a short time ago to a circular from the weather bureau giving the results of a study of this question made by one of the officers of the service, and Mr. B. L. Pennington of Cleveland wrote Chief Harrington, partly with a view to learning whether the officers of the bureau were really as emphatic in their claims regarding the theory as the circular would indicate. The answer from Acting Chief Dunwoody to Mr. Pennington's letter states very positively that the rise and fall of water in the canal is independent of wind force and direction. The cir- cular says: "A summary of the results obtained shows that marked rises in the water level attended the passage of acommon type of low areas which move eastward from Manitoba and Minnesota. Forecasts of increases in the stage of water in the canal must, therefore, depend upon the move- ments of low areas which appear west of Lake Superior. As low areas of this class advance fromthe Red River of the North Valley over eastern Lake Supeior in about twenty-four hours, the presence of a well de- fined low area over Manitoba or Minnesota in the morning would gener- ally justify a forecast of a rise in water in the canal of at least .25 foot by the morning of the following day. Forecasts of falls in the water level can be made when the stage of the water is above the average and an area of high barometer is advancing toward the upper lakes," The circular also says that "the wind direction and force are not, ap- patently, active agents in producing the changes in the stage of water, but are incidental to the passage of low and high areas." 'This latter state- ment is referred to particularly by Mr. Pennington, as will be seen by his letter which follows: Major M. W. Harrington, Chief of Weather Bureau, Washington, D.C., Dear Sir:--I duly received your circular of April 30, in regard to the movements of high and low areas of pressure influencing the stage of water. You say the wind is not an active agent in producing the changes in the stage of water but is incidental. There is a general opinion among vessel men, I believe, that the winds are a great factor, perhaps the most important factor, in determining the stage of water at the "Soo." The movements of areas of high and low pressure must largely determine the winds, therefore the movements would result in determining or influencing the stage of water by means of winds which they produce. It is well known that a strong westerly or northwesterly wind down Lake Superior will cause arise of water at the "Soo," and that a strong southeasterly or easterly wind will lower the water. I apprehend such movements as you describe as influencing the stage of water at Sault Ste. Marie canal, would operate as follows: An advancing low barometer area from west or northwest, over Lake Superior, would cause an easterly wind until the easterly rim of the area had passed the "Soo," lowering the water at that point. Meanwhile when the westerly rim of the area struck the lake, the wind would have veered to westerly and would continue to blow from this direction until the whole area had passed the "Soo," raising the water at that point proportionately to the force and duration of the wind. This raise of water would be more obvious from the fact of the fall in the stage of water that preceded it. Iam not an expert in these matters and may be all wrong in attribut- ing so much influence to the winds, directly. If not too much trouble I should be pleased to get further information as to how the stage of water is influenced by barometric pressure wholly independent of the winds that follow. B. L. PENNINGTON. Cleveland, May 21, 1894. The reply from Acting Chief H. H. Dunwoody to the foregoing letter from Mr. Pennington, follows: Mr, B. L. Pennington, Dear Sir:--In reply to inquiries contained in _ your favor of the 21st inst , I would state that a study of records and ob- servations shows that the rise and fall of water in the Saint Mary's Falls canal is intimately associated with the movements of high and low pres- sure areas and is independent of wind force and direction. In the cases of marked rise in the water, the winds have been from the southeast as often as from the northwest at the time the rise occurred, and the direc- tions were due to the cyclonic circulation of air about areas of low pres- sure advancing over Lake Superior. If the rises were due to northwest winds the winds would have to blow with considerable force from that di- rection for some time in order to force the water towards the eastern end of the lake. As a matter of fact the rises occur about the time, or even be- fore, the shift of wind to the northwest. The falls in the water usually attend the passage of an area of high pressure over the lake, and the winds in such cases would be light and variable, shifting to easterly. The changes in water level in the canal seem to be due to differences in atmos- pheric pressure over Lake Superior. When the pressure is low over the eastern end of the lake and high over the western end, the water is ap- acne this difference in pressure from the lake towards its eastern outlet, and- when the pressure is high over the eastern and lower over the western end of the lake, the water is apparently forced from the eastern end by the greater weight of the atmosphere over that portion of the lake. H. H. DuNwoopy, Washington, D. C., May 25, 1894. Acting Chief, Weather Burean, Taxation of Vessel Property. Editor MARINE REVIEW.--Great Britain, Germany and France impose taxes on the incomes derived from steamships and vessels as On incomes derived from other productive property. The rate is understood to vary with budget requirements from year to yee but the tax is nota large factor in the expense account of those operating vessels, The North German Lloyd Company, for example, on its fleet of eighty iron and steel steamers of 225,097 tons--larger by 2,000 tons than the entire registered iron and steel steam tonnage of the United States--paid an income tax of 94,000 marks ($22,372) for 1893. For 1898 the city of Bath, Maine, collected $24,026 taxes on 224 vessels of 119,999 tons, mostly wooden sailing vessels, besides taxes on capital stock of corporations owning ferry boats, tug boats and steamboats. On January 1, 1894, Austria exempted all sea-going ves- sels from income tax for five years, and all new sea-going vessels built in Austrian yards are exempted for five years from date of register from this tax. Vessels are not subject to federal taxation in the United States, except in the form of a few small fees on entry and clearance for specific services and tonnage tax. As imposed under the act of June 19, 1886, these taxes do not put vessels of the United States at a disadvantage, compared with vessels of other nations; indeed, for the fiscal year 1893 American vessels paid $70,019 tonnage taxes and foreign vessels $464,920, of which British vessels alone paid $338,674. For purposes of comparison it may be noted that the total British subvention to steamships enrolled as cruisers by the admiralty in this year's naval estimates is £21,972, ($106,839) and that the British post office estimates for this year allow a loss of £62,300 ($302,934) on the cost of mail transportation to the United States over receipts from such postage, which may be taken as a rough measure of subsidy under the form of mail contract. The only taxes, accordingly, on vessel property which may be deemed to place vessel owning in the United States at a disadvantage compared with vessel owning in other countries are imposed by state tax laws. These have been modified by decisions of the supreme court of the United States (see particularly Philadelphia Steamship Company vs. Pennsylvania 122 U. S. Reports, 326,in whichitis held: 'The corporate franchises, the property, the business, the income of corporations created by a state may undoubtedly be taxed by the state; but in imposing such taxes care should be taken not tointerfere with or hamper, directly or by indirection, interstate or foreign commerce, or any other matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Federal government.") Since 1881 New York state has exempted " from all taxation for state or local purposes" all vessels registered in the state, engaged in foreign commerce, and this exemption, drawn in the broadest terms is to continue to the year 1922. - Under the decision of the supreme court of the United States noted above, Pennsylvania levies no taxes on vessels in foreign commerce. Del- aware imposes no taxes on vessels. Alabamaexempts from tax vessels en- gaged in the foreign trade. In the four states named vessels registered for foreign trade, in so far as taxation is concerned, are more advantage- ously placed than those subject to income tax in Great Britain, Germany and France. Massachusetts and Connecticut tax vessels in foreign trade on the valuation of net earnings, not deducting insurance for the preced- ing year, thus placing them substantially on an equality with vessels owned in Great Britain, Franceand Germany. New Hampshire taxes vés- sels as '"'stock in trade." In the remaining twenty-one seaboard and lake states all vessels are taxed as personal property. While nominally assessments are at their full valuation, the valuation varies not only in one state as compared with other states, but also at different ports in the same state. The twenty-one states where this system obtains are Maine, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, California, Oregon, Washington, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota. In North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, more or less elaborate systems of license charges and occupation taxes impose further burdens on shipping. HUGENE R. CHAMBERLAIN, Treasury Department, Bureau of Navigation, Commissioner. Washington, D. C., May 26, 1893. ' parently forced by In the course of the debate on the iron ore paragraph of the tariff bill in the senate, a letter was read from lL. S. Bent, chairman of the Jura- gua Iron Company, Limited, of Philadelphia, in which he makes the state- ment that for the year ending Dec. 31, 1893, the cost of ore from the Cuban properties of this company, free on board ship at Santiago de Cuba, was $1.14 per gross ton. z