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

DECEMBER 20, 1900, A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. Mr. Scherzer, Chicago, advocates the improvement of the Columbia and Missouri rivers, so as to make them connecting links between the lakes and the Pacific Ocean. He attacks the isthmian canal project on the ground that foreign na- tions would be benefitted thereby more than the United States. Mr. Scherzer says it is deplorable that we should be outstripped by other nations, and gives the following solu- tion: ‘The only and most rapid solution for the United States is to construct an adequate ship canal from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic ocean or the Gulf of Mexico, wholly within the United States. Then the present large vessels and fleets on the Great Lakes, now idle during the winter, will immedi- ately and prosperously transport our foreign commerce.”’ As the ‘‘father of the barge-canal project,’’ Major Thomas W. Symons, U.S. A. Corps of Engineers, stationed at Buf- falo, was asked by a Commercial reporter whether he had seen Mr. Scherzer’s ‘‘plea.’’ _ “Yes,’”’ answered Major Symons, ‘‘I have seen Mr. Scher- zer’s paper; in fact, the author or some one else did me the honor to send mea copy, and I have seen it also in some newspapers. The paper shows that a man may take up one line of work in this life and achieve eminent success, and then make himself utterly ridiculous in the consideration of another subject. “There have been canal enthusiasts before, but I think that Mr. Scherzer reaches the climax, and his equal in put- ting forth ridiculous propositions and ignoring facts and figures will probably not appear for many a day. “Mr, Scherzer is against building the Nicaragua or Panama canals probably because they do not reach Chicago, but he is in favor of ship canals and water routes of the largest size leading from Chicago eastward tothe Atlantic, south- ward to the gulf, and westward to the Pacific, and some of his statements about the cost of these canals are so at vari- ance with ascertained facts as to bealmost humorous in their absurdity. He says: ‘To complete the drainage and ship canal, improving the Illinois and Mississippi rivers so as to receive either the largest lake or ocean vessels, and form a connecting link between the Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico, will cost the United States but a small part of the cost of either of the above canals (Nicaragua or Panama), and the cost of maintenance would be trifling with the cost of maintaining and defending either the Nicaragua or Panama canal. The difference in the cost of a waterway from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico and the cost of constructing, maintaining and defending either the Nica- ragua or Panama canals would leave a sum of money suffi- cient to construct equally large ship canals connecting the Great Lakes with the Hudson river and the Atlantic ocean, wholly within the United States.’ “The report of the Isthmian Canal Commission shows that it will cost about $200,000,000 to build the Nicaragua canal. The report of the Deep Waterways Commission shows that it will cost about the same amount, $200,000, 000, to build a ship canal from the lakes to New York City, for lake vessels, and over $300,000,000 for a canal large enough for ocean vessels. My arithmetic does not enable me to see exactly where the Chicago-Mississippi canal would come in under these figures. I do not know what this latter canal would cost, but it would probably be as much as either of the others named. “But the crowning absurdity of Mr. Scherzer’s paper is the following: ‘The improvement of the Columbia river, . the Missouri river and the Mississippi river, and the con- struction of a connecting ship canal between the Columbia and Missouri rivers adequate for the largest naval or mer- chant vessels, would be of far greater value to the United States than either the Nicaragua or Panama canal, or any other canal in a foreign country, and its cost of construction would probably be less than the cost of construction, main- tenance and defense of either the Nicaragua or Panama canals,’ jereTt has been my lot in life to spend about ten years in the northwest Pacific states, and I have had in charge the im- provement of the Columbia river, Snake river, and other tivers and lakes in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Mon- tana, and I am possibly as familiar with the general problem of these waterways as anybody else in the country, and I am satisfied that no one with anything like the knowledge that I have of these waterways would ever propose a ship Canal through them as Mr. Scherzer has. _“The cost of the Nicaragua canal would be a mere baga- telle compared to the cost of such a Columbian-Mississippi THE MARINE RECORD. canal and waterway. If sucha waterway were deemed to be physically possible, which is extremely doubtful, its execu- tion would be the most stupendous work ever undertaken by man. The pyramids of Egypt, the Great Wall of China and all the trans-continenal railroads put together would be a small job compared to this. ‘‘Such a route would consist of at least 3,000 miles of canal and improved rivers, and the average cost per mile would be at least the average cost of the Nicaragua canal, or about one million and a quarter dollars. This would make the cost of the route something like four billions of dollars, and when it was done it would be almost absolutely useless, for it would take a ship with the best luck over a month to tra- verse it, longer than the time required to go from Portland or San Francisco to Europe via the Nicaragua canal! “Tt seems to me that there are two great canals of vital importance to the people of this country, one is the Nica- ragua or the Panama canal across the Isthmus, and the other is the barge canal across the state of New York from Lake Erie to the Hudson river. Both of these have been carefully studied for years, and the details worked out and the canals adapted to the natural and artificial conditions to be met with, and the commercial needs to be subserved. They have passed beyond the realms of the dreamer and irresponsible enthusiast, and their final fate is now under consideration, one by the people of the United States, and one by the peo- ple of the state of New York, and it is very much to be hoped that in this consideration. no one will permit himself to be befuddled or have his attention too much attracted by such wild and glittering statements as those contained in this arti- cle of Mr. Scherzer. “I have neyer given any study to the deep waterways route from Lake Michigan through to the Gulf by way of the Mississippi river, and do not care to express any opinion about it.’’ V9 oe BRITISH EFFORTS TO EXTEND FOREIGN TRADE. That Great Britain intends to make every possible effort to retain her present great foreign trade and to still further develop it is well understood by those who study commercial matters in this country. Her merchants and manufacturers are up and doing in many directions, and the London Times in to-day’s issue proclaims a new movement, announcing that the commercial expedition organized by the Bristol Chamber of Commerce to visit the West Indies, in order to promote British trade in those islands, left Southampton yesterday on the Royal Mail steamship Orinoco. Continu- ing, the Times says: The expedition, which is under the charge of Mr. de- Courcy Hamilton, who has had an extensive connection in the West Indies, is taking over 100 cases of samples of all descriptions of merchandise, most of the chief manufactur- ers within 100 miles of Bristol being represented. It is pro- posed to open an exhibition in Jamaica, to hold references, or- ganize lectures, and in any possible way bring under the no- tice of the population of the West Indies the merits of the English goods shown. The opening of the new fast mail and fruit service between Bristol and Jamaica in January next has stimulated the merchants of the west of England in the direction of improving the: export trade to Jamaica and the neighboring colonies, and itis hoped that a large increase in this business will result from the present ven- ture. : MARSHAL HALSTEAD, Consul. BIRMINGHAM, September 20, 1900. A RECENT issue of the Journal of the Franklin Institute contains some notes referring to riveting and flanging pres- sures, by Mr. H. V. Loss. According to the author, for riveting 3/-inch and 7%-inch rivets, pressures of 60 to 70 tons are required on the rivets, the work done being about 7,200 foot lb. for 3/-inch rivets and 9,500 foot lb. for 7%-inch rivets. These figures, however, refer to bridge rivets; in boiler work, where rivets are shorter and the holes are usual- ly better finished, less power is needed, and the pressures required are about as follows:. For 5-inch rivets, 25 tons; for 1-inch rivets, 66 tons; for 11-inch rivets, 75 tons; and for 14-inch rivets, Iootons. For cold;flanging of \%-inch steel plates a pressure of 600 Ib. to 740 lb. is needed per run- ning inch, whilst with ;5,-inch plates 710 lb. to 750 lb. pres- sure per running inch for %-inch plates and 380 Jb. for %4- inch plates, though much will depend upon the heat of the plate at the time the work isdone. For cold riveting, pres- sures of 300,000 lb. per square inch are needed. Very high pressures are needed for removing waves and wrinkles ona flanged surface, amounting to as much as 1,400 lbs. per square inch of surface. Pd —————_S:>:ree SHIPPING AND MARINE JUDICIAL DECISIONS. (COLLABORATED SPECIALLY FOR THE MARINE RECORD.) Clause in Charter Party Providing for Lien.—A clause in a charter party for cesser of the liability of the charterers, coupled with a clause creating a lien in favor of the ship- owner, is to be construed, if possible, as inapplicable toa liability with which the lien is not commensurate. George W. Crossman et al. vs. William Burrill et al., 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. (U. S.) 38. Admiralty—Suit for Limitation of Liability—Costs.— . Where the owners of a vessel, in proceedings instituted by - them for a limitation of their liability on account of the sinking of the vessel, deny any negligence or any liability, as they are permitted to do by admiralty rule 56, and that issue is decided against them, they may properly be taxed with the costs arising on such issue. The Longfellow, 104 Fed. Rep., (U. S.) 360. Evidence of Seaworthiness.—Where all the direct evi- dence was to the effect that a steamer was seaworthy when she entered on her voyage, it cannot be inferred from the fact that a short time before she bad met with two acci- dents, in one of which she was slightly injured, that her seaworthiness was thereby impaired, in the absence of af- firmative evidence that she wasin fact injured thereby in her hull or machinery. The Longfellow, 104 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 360. Carriage of Passengers—Duty of Inspection.—Where a steamship had a portion of her guards torn away by colli- sion with a bridge pier, but an examination by competent men disclosed no injury to her hull or machinery, and only slight repairs were necessary, and she had been regularly inspected and pronounced staunch and seaworthy only three months before, the fact that no inspection was applied for after the accident does not constitute a failure to comply with Rey. St. 4 4417, regarding inspection, which will ren- der her owners liable for injuries to passengers or their ef- fects under section 4493, creating such liability, where they have failed to comply with any of the provisions of that title, when it is not shown that any injury in fact resulted which impaired the strength or safety of the vessel. The Longfellow, 104 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 360. é Shipping—Sinking of Vessel—Limitation of Owner’s Lia- bility.—The Longfellow, a large river steamer, carrying passengers and freight between Cincinnati and New Orleans, on leaving Cincinnati at atime when the water was high and the current swift, struck against the stone pier of a rail- road bridge, and was broken in two and sunk, with the loss of her cargo and some of her passengers and crew. The owners had held her a day to await the clearing up of a fog; had provided her with competent officers, crew and pilot, and with a powerful tug to aid her in passing the bridges at the city. Held, that faults in her navigation producing the collision could not be imputed to her owners, as having oc- curred through their ‘‘privy or knowledge,’’ within Rev. St. % 4283, so as to prevent the limitation of their liability under said section to the value of the vessel and pending freight. The Longfellow, 104 Fed. Rep. (U. S.) 360. rr — ——————— 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, 4,625,000} 713,000] — 335,000 eis 1,391,000 910,000 222,000 .| 11,524,000] 1,340,000] 3,040,000 509,000 130,000 35,000 5,642,000 276,000 650,000 Fort William, Ont..| 1,168,000]..........|.......... Milwaukee.......... 880,000 176,000 126,000 Port Arthur, Ont.... 165000] ).ehie ss totale ce asaeta| Om meree ee Toledo. nee 949,000 Toronto 3.000 On Canals iii og oeae| soto. Gh opis [petanias 5 as alae oe me ereneatae QOnulakes. oar sours |e coumarins snot Chait nen alia On: Miss River ie ove eee 119, 000! 3 cas ERIE ee Grand Total..... 61,082,000] 8,138,000} 9,988,000] 1,290,000] 3 482,000 Corresponding Date, i are Tenn gee NoreS 57,153,000] 11,585,000] 5,382,000] 1,422,000! 2,891,000 PU CECHSEL. cctareteatenienielliste aerators Disraeli ae ek 6,000 209,000 DECREASE) oa iiciee cciecciss 412,000 624,c00 887; 000s: w0sll eee rouseeee 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. . $< MARINE PATENTS. Patents issued December 11, 1900. Reported especially for the MARINE RECORD. We furnish complete copies of patents at the rate of 10 cents each. 663,348. Device for launching life-boats. William K. Kennedy, Jersey City, N. J., assignor of five-fifths to Henry Brinkman, James B. Morse, James Thompson, and Wm. Heavey, same place, and James Carnegie, Passaic, N. J. 663.493. Marine engine governor. Charles W. Gould, New York City, and Odin B. Roberts, Dedham, Mass., said Roberts assignor to said Gould. .