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

THE MARINE RECORD. Aucus?t 17, 1899. a TREASURY DECISIONS. TREASURY p Secnatan | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, WASHINGTON, D. C., August 11, 1899. Special Deputy Collector of Customs, Cleveland, Ohio: $x: In reply to your inquiry, in letter of 8th instant, “« what constitutes a sail vessel?’’ as described in circular No. 96, dated July 17, 1899, you are informed that the department’s definition of a sail vessel, under the act of Congress approved December 21st, 1898, is a vessel depend- ing practically entirely on the action of the winds asa_ motive power. Barges or consorts, so-called, usually towed by a steam vessel and depending practically upon such steam vessel for the motive power, even though provided with auxiliary sail power, for use in emergencies, or for steadying the vessel in a sea way, are not deemed by the department to be sail vessels within the meaning of the act referred to, notwithstanding such barges or consorts may technically be enrolled or licensed as ‘‘schooners”’ as is possibly the case with some of them. Respectfully yours, (Signed) O. L. SPAULDING, Assistant Secretary. LICENSED OFFICERS ON STEAM VESSELS. Full complement of officers on steam vessels is determined by the local inspectors.—All registered steam vessels must carry a licensed master, mate and engineer, but are not re- quired to carry a licensed pilot, TREASURY DEPARTMENT, JULY 17, 1899. Sir: In reply to your letter of the 8th instant, you are informed— First. That a full complement of licensed officers on a steam vessel is determined by the local inspectors, and in- serted by them in the certificate issued by the steamer. (See first paragraph, Department decision 9478, July 5, 1889. ) Second. A person holding joint license as master and ilot, or as mate and pilot, does not necessarily require the indorsement of the inspectors on the certificate of inspection. Third. A person holding pilot’s license cannot act under such license on a steam vessel required by the inspection ’ certificate to carry a licensed mate. Further, it is the opinion of the department that the in- land rules of department decision 16105 govern on the river, harbors, and inland waters of Puget Sound points. The steamer Beaver, referred to by you as having made application for a register, in order to engage in the passenger trade between Puget Sound points and Fraser river, having been certificated by the local inspectors of steam vessels for Puget Sound waters only, should not be registered without first having her new route endorsed on certificate by the in- spectors, said indorsement also stating the number and character of officers and crew required for such new route, your attention being called to the fact that all registered steam vessels must carry a licensed master, mate and engineer, but are not required to carry a licensed pilot. Respectfully yours, O. L. SPAULDING, Asssistant Secretary. Collector of Customs, Port Townsend, Wash. CERTIFICATES OF INSPECTION OF SAIL VESSELS AND LICENSED OFFICERS THEREOF. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, July 17, 1899. To collectors and other chief officers of customs, supervis- ing and local inspectors of steam vessels : Your attention is called to the fact that by an act of Con- gress approved December 21, 1898, to take effeet July 1, 1899, entitled ‘‘An act concerning sail vessels of over 700 tons, and for other purposes,’’ sections 4417, 4438, 4439 and 4440, Title LII, Revised Statutes, have been amended to include the inspection of sail vessels over 700 tons, and all other vessels and barges over Ioo tons burden, carrying passengers for hire, and licensing the officers thereof. Acting under authority of section 4462, Title LII, Revised Statutes, directing the Secretary of the Treasury to ‘‘ make such regulations as may be necessary to secure the proper execution’’ of said title, the department has established the following regulation, deemed necessary to carry out in part the amendments to said title heretofore referred to herein, namely : Supervising inspectors will direct their local inspectors to file with the collector or other chief officer of customs in their various districts a copy of all certificates of inspection of sail vessels over 700 tons, and all other vessels or barges carrying passengers for hire, such copies of certificates to be kept on the permanent files of the collector’s office. Collectors or other chief officers of customs should report quarterly to the Supervising Inspector-General on catalogue No. 240, the names, dates of inspection, tonnage, and name of place where inspected, and of the officers making the in- spection, of such vessels, which names shall follow after the names of steam vessels reported in said catalogue No. 240, in alphabetical order. Supervising inspectors will also report in like) manner in their quarterly statements, Form 2117. Collectors and other chief officers of customs are further directed to require all masters of sail vessels of over 700 tons, before granting clearance tosuch vessels, to submit to their inspection the original certificate of inspection of such sail vessels, as wellas the original license of the master and mate of the vessel. Collectors and other chief officers of customs are further directed not to issue any license, register, or enrollment to sail vessels such as decribed herein unless they have satis- factory evidence that all the provisions of Title LI, Revised Statutes, as amended by the act approved December 21, 1898, have been fully complied with. a oe oe SUN’S AMPLITUDES. The following approximate amplitudés of the Sun’s rising will be given each week in this column during the season of navigation. A second bearing may be taken by compass at sunset, by reversing the east bearing given for the nearest latitude, as the change in declination for a few hours makes but a slight difference in the true bearing of the Sun’s set- ting. The bearing may be taken when the Sun’s center 1s on the horizon, rising or setting. The three elements which may be obtained by taking these amplitudes are the quanti- ties known as local attraction, variation and deviation. LAKE ERIE AND S. END LAKE MICHIGAN, LAT. 42°N. Sunrise. Amplitudes. Bearing P’ts. Bearing Comp. AUG y LSE ete nes EB. 17° N. =N. 6% E.=E. by N. ¥N. SUAS #20 nee wer cote B. 16° N. =N. 6% E. = E. by N. 4% N. WOU 22 Be EB. 15° N. =N. 65% HE. =E. by N. 4 N. AMD OAc ots EB. 14° N. =N. 63% E. = E. by N. KN. LAKE ONTARIO, S. END HURON AND CENTRAL PORTION LAKE MICHIGAN, LAT. 44° N. Sunrise. Amplitudes. Bearing P’ts, Bearing Comp. AMOS ccs isa BE. 18° N. =N. 6% E.=E. by N. X%N. AUG 20k e caat eo E. 17° N. =N.6% E.=E. by N. ¥N. NUS 226 ieee EB. 16° N. =N. 65 E. = E. by N. 3% N. BMG ROA oe sss E. 15° N. = N. 65 E. = E. by N. ¥%N. N. END LAKES HURON AND MICHIGAN, LAT. 46° N. Sunrise. Amplitudes. Bearing P’ts. Bearing Comp. AUS AES Ros ae E. 18° N. = N. 6% HE. = E. by N. #N. Aug 208.00 .8% E. 18° N. =N 6% EH. =E. by N. #N. AUP 22e hs eat B.17°N. =N. 6% E.=E. by N. ¥N. AUS. 24 Were E. 15° N. =N. 65% HE. =E. by N. XN. LAKE SUPERIOR, LAT. 48° N. Sunrise. Amplitudes. Bearing P’ts. Bearing Comp. AnguIG a E. 19° N. = N. 6% B. = E. by N. % N. AUe 2020s, E. 18° N. = N, 63% HE. = EH. by N. % N. AUS 22 ne FE. 18° N. = N. 6% BE. = E. by N. 4 N. INU OAR ic E. 16° N. =N. 6% E. = E. by N. YN. With a compass correct magnetic, the difference between the observed and true bearing or amplitude will be the vari- ation for the locality. Should there be any deviation on the course the vessel is heading at the time of taking the bear- ing, the difference hetween the observed and the true ampli- tude after the variation is applied will be the amount of de- viation on that course. If the correct magnetic bearing is to the right of the compass bearing, the deviation is easterly, if to the left, the deviation is westerly. aA Ria he Cs eR, “ VISIBLE SUPPLY OF GRAIN As compiled for THE MARINE RECORD, by George F. Stone Secretary Chicago Board of Trade. CITIES WHERE WHEAT.| CORN. Oats. RYE BARLEY STORED. Bushels. | Bushels. | Bushels. | Bushels. | Bushels. Buflaloier ca: i 1,300,000 557,000 110,000 52,00¢ 52,000 Chicago.. eer ee 5,926,000} 1,971,00¢| 1,029,000 165.000 21,000 401,000 44,000 11,000 TSLOOO| Saracee ses 3,798,000 244,000 85,000 45,000 33,000 Kortowilliaim “Onmtys| 211500; 000|s'ciunsscee | iy meniamen lila cornered pega eae Milwaukee..... .... 58.000 BiOOO|S sareutie ey 1,000 Iu,000 Port Arthur, Ont.... 200,000).......... Hace gees een mereihuakaner oe eee POA. . psig scene 2, 16y, 000 512,000 245.000 TT O00) es. TOTOULO Wing eie eats gI,00c aun WQOO| ert suas 14,000 On: Canal cations. 747.000 26,006 2p OOO cick cies a apekie| alte vist ease On -akessin.s pteos 310,000] 1,546,000 478,00u 25,000 62,000 Grand Total.....] 36,306,000] 10,181,000} 3,887,000] 572,000] 361,000 Corresponding Date, 1898.... .... -..+.| 6,897,000] 16,017,000] 3.081,000 449,000 2/,3,.000 THCTCASE scales ts Pal iseae 5 fae ahi a He Biareae aes aa ea oa a DECKERSE Roar shee 860,000 280,000 624,000 21,000 55.000 While the stock of grain at lake ports only is here given, the total shows the figures for the entire country except the Pacific Slope. OO oe Marine Insurance—Against Ljability for Collision.—A policy insured the owner of a steam tug against such loss or damage as the tug might ‘‘ become legally liable for from accident caused by collision.’”? It contained a provision that the insured warranted that the tug, with her tow, should not go out of her regular or usual channels, ‘‘and also warranted free from loss, damages, or expense caused by or arising from so doing, or from ignorance on the part of the master and pilot as to any port or place the steam tug may use, or from want of ordinary care or skill.’» Held, that the expression ‘‘from want of ordinary care or skill” would not be construed to apply to the contract generally, which would render it nugatory, but only to the preceding provision as to the action of the master or pilot in going to any port or place the tug might use. Rogers vs. A‘tna Ins, Co., of Hartford, 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 103. SHIPPING AND MARINE JUDIC AL DECISIONS. 4 (COLLABORATED SPECIALLY FOR THE MARINE RECORD). Shipping—Injuries to Seamen—Liability of Ship.—It seems that, under the general admiralty practice,.a seaman injured through the use of defective appliances furnished by the owners of the ship may proceed against the ship for dam- ages. Lafourche Packet Co. vs. Henderson, 94 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 871. Unseaworthiness.—Seamen who have signed shipping articles, if they have reason to believe the vessel to be un- seaworthy, may demand a survey; but they are not per- mitted to determine for themselves the question of sea- worthiness, or to leave the vessel on the ground of unsea- worthiness without having required a survey. The C. F. Sargent, 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 179. ; Maritime Liens—Supplies Furnished in Home Port.— Where a vessel is owned by resident citizens of a state, and her headquarters are at a port therein, such place must be treated as her home port, and no lien is given by the gen- eral maritime law for supplies furnished at such port, which are presumed to have been furnished on the credit of the owners, and any liens asserted for such supplies must rest upon the laws of the state. Learned et al. vs. Brown et al., 94 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 876. Towage—Negligence of Tugs—Navigation of Hudson River.—It appearing by the evidence that it has not been the custom in navigating the Hudsun river to send tugs ahead as scouts in stormy weather, before venturing with’ tows which are incapable of withstanding heavy seas, as is the practice in the larger waters opening into the ocean, and that the customary method is ordinarily safe on the river, a tug cannot be held in fault for proceeding with a tow in the customary manner without taking such precaution. The Victoria, 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 184. Forfeiture of Wages.—Shipping articles by which seamen contract to serve on a ship during a specified voyage, and until she reaches a certain port, not exceeding a stipulated term, constitute a lawful contract; and on a desertion of the ship by the seamen, without sufficient cause, before she reaches the port of discharge, or the expiration of the stated term of service, the penalty for which is a forfeiture of their wages for the time served, they are afforded no relief by the act of December 21, 1898. The C. F. Sargent, 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 179. Collision—Liability of Tug for Injury by Tow.—A tug with three barges in tow, singled on hawsers 175 fathoms in length, which without excuse passed dangerously near an anchored vessel, against which one of the barges was swept by the tide, cannot shift the burden of responsibility for the collision on the tow, merely because she herself passed in safety, as it was her duty to make due allowance for the effect of the tide on her tow, and her own fault was the proximate cause of the injury, though there may have been error of judgment in the management of the barge in extremis. The America et al., 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) Ig1. Shipping —Injury to Cargo After Discharge— Care Re- quired of Carrier. — The essence of every contract of affreightment is the engagement to deliver the goods to the consignee in good order; and provisions of a bill of lading that the goods shall be received by the consignee as fast as the steamer cen deliver them, and that they shall be ‘‘at consignee’s risk afier they leave the ship’s deck,”’ cannot be so construed as to relieve the carrier from the duty to exer- cise reasonable care to protect the goods from ii jury under all circumstances until their actual delivery, and until the consignee has had a reasonable opportunity to remove them after their discharge from the ship. The St. George, 95 Fed. Rep. (Mi-S.) 172: Towage—Contract—Towage of Vessel.—The amount due for the towage of a French vessel in and out of port de- pended, under the contract, on the tonnage of the vessel. Her French papers gave the net tonnage as 1,709 tons ; but the United States customs authorities refused to accept such measurement, and had her re-measured, which gave her a net tonnage of 3,106 tons. No proof of the method by which she was measured in France was given, but it ap- peared from her carrying capacity and gross tonnage that the net tonnage stated in her papers could not have been reached by any rule of ordinary maritime measurement. Held, that the measurement made here would be accepted as correct, and governed the contract for towage. The Quevilly, 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 182, _ Marine Insurance—Limiting Time for Suit.—A policy insuring a steam tug against liability for loss or damage arising from collision provided that suit thereon must be brought within a year after the date of the loss. It also provided that the insured should not be liable, unless the liability of the tug should be established by suit, and that losses should be payable 60 days after proofs of such loss or damage and of the amount thereof. Held, that such provi- sions must be construed together, and that, so construed, proofs of loss could not be made until after a judicial deter- mination of the liability of the vessel, and the limitation commenced to run 60 days after such proofs were furnished, unless they were waived. Rogers vs. Atjtna Ins. Co., of Hartford, 95 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 103. CaS eS ee a 5 ¥