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

MARINE REVIEW. ; DEVOTED TO THE LAKE MARINE AND KINDRED INTERESTS. JoHN M. MULROONEY, F. M. Barton, ‘ HOMER J.CARR, - - - Associate Editor and Manager Chicago Office, 210 South Water Street. Published every Thursday at No. 510 Perry-Payne Building, Cleveland, O. SUBSCRIPTION—$2.00 per year in advance. Advertising rates on applica- tion. \ PROPRIETORS. The books of the United States treasury department contain the names of 3,510 vessels, measuring 1,063,063.90 tons in the lake trade. In classification of this fleet the lakes have more steamboats of 1,000 to 2,500 tons than the combined ownership of this class of vessels in all other sections of the country. The classification is as follows: Class. Number. Tonnage. PSU TIA VERSES s6assccdosscisikevssuatiestisdewrvetss 1,527 652,922.25 PUBMUDM SR WERGEISS. Lvsvss ssi seels acdavessessenestene 1,272 328,655.96 RSHIAR ODHUS ssh sessed dh055s 4605 i cbssveavsbuveseds cos 657 67,574.90 RIB caahes Sects sven lisadacstecdcueslenadvsiadcvis< 54 13,910.09 AMOUR So euub oe sae sad iueaat hin cencs sine: 3,510 1,063,063.90 According to the report of William W. Bates, United States com- missioner of navigation, 46 per cent of the new tonnage of the country was built on the lakes during 1889. This is a percentage greater than the work of the Atlantic coast and western rivers combined, and almost equal to the whole work on the Atlantic and Pacific coast. In 1890 the tonnage built on the lakes is but very little less than that built on the Atlantic and ‘Gulf coasts. Tonnage built on the lakes during the past five years was as follows : No. of boats. Net Tonnage. MESO sliaceivnsicscasuheskntens chsh ce rbssoasicscsaos 5 20,400.54 Bea geeriscee besa siuaitsscescchcbuseccsscokusess 152 56,488.32 BIRO ponk cane ues Ga vncnss sess odes jecvesiccks sc 222 101,102.87 RiP) heal sce vsciciesateieiisiadeslaovacsceass 225 107,080.30 “LOIC CR Sa a a ce 218 108,515.00 EE) Oa ees go2 393,597-03 St. Mary’s Falls and Suez canal traffic: Number of boats through St. Mary’s Falls canal in 1890, 234 days of navigation, 10,557; tonnage, net registered, 8,454,435. Number of boats through Suez canal during 1890, full year, 3,389; tonnage, net registered, 6,890,014. Annual tonnage entries and clearances of the great seaports of the world, for 1889: New York, 11,051,236 tons; all seaports in the United _ States, 26,983,315 tons; Liverpool, 14,175,200 tons; London, 19,245,417 tons. Tonnage passing through Detroit river during 234 days of naviga- tion in 1889, amounted to 36,203,606 tons. Ten million tons more than _the entries and clearances of all the seaports in the United States, and three million tons more than the combined foreign and coastwise shipping of Liverpool and London. er Entered at Cleveland Post Office as Second-class Mail Matter. ————————————— THE IRON TRADE REVIEw is desirous of knowing why this journal opposes the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie ship-canal scheme while speaking favorably of the plans for a canal or ship-railway from Owen Sound toLakeOntario. The answer is simple and is in accordance with the most forcible arguments that has been pre- sented on the lakes against the Pittsburgh scheme. Who would not admit that the construction of a canal like the Welland be- tween Owen Sound and Lake Ontario would be the means of building up a very large commerce, through the saving of distance around the St. Clair and Detroit rivers to the Welland before Lake Ontario is reached as at present? Such a waterway _ would be suited to the class of craft now engaged in Welland canal traffic and would greatly shorten the water haul to the sea- board. On the other hand, what use could be made of a water- way of Welland canal size between Lake Erie and Pittsburgh, where traffic is in coal and ore, for which the general govern- ment has wisely laid down.a policy of providing a channel 20 - feet deep between Duluth, Chicago and Buffalo. ‘To provide business for this Pittsburgh canal, Mr. J. M. Goodwin, of Sharps- ville, Pa., would have the ship owners of the lakes discard an _ experience of almost a century that has brought them to the ownership of the finest freight steamers in the world and return ' to the tow barges, now almost extinct in the ore and coal trade, or the canal schooner, the history of which in the same trade will soon be forgotten. Mr. Goodwin’s entire report is based on this inferior class of craft, although one of the modern ore carriers will deliver in a season as much as fifteen canal schooners. MARINE REVIEW. TH possibility of profit in the Lake Superior tourist busi- ness during the summer months through the building of boats with movable cabins, so that they may be used for freight pur- poses in the spring and fall, is discussed in the Chicago corres- pondence of this issue. The idea is not new by any means, as it has been so thoroughly considered as to be pronounced entirely practicable. In fact, Mr. John F. Pankhurst, of the Globe Iron Works Company, Cleveland, has been at work on plans for such a boat for some time past, with a view to the organization of a company for their construction and operation. His idea of such a boat #8 to combine great speed with an equivalent of strength in the hull, and to have cabins and everything above deck so constructed as to cope with bad weather. It would be necessary also to add elegance and the best of modern accommodations in order to secure the patronage desired. THE war department seems determined to delay matters in its efforts to evade the responsibility of ordering the removal of the Canal street bridge obstruction at Chicago, although the sec- retary has been informed by the highest law officer in the land that such is its duty under the last river and harbor act. Capt. W. IL. Marshall, the engineer officer in charge at Chicago, made a report declaring the bridge an unreasonable obstruction to navigation before an answer was received from the attorney general on the point of jurisdiction, and now the war department asks this officer for another report going over the same ground. The actions of both Gen. Casey and Assistant Secretary Grant in this matter have been very strange. UNLIMITED wrecking privileges in Canadian and American waters on the lakes and equal rights to the transhipment of grain destined for export by way of Montreal, are matters that should demand not only the attention of those who are directly interested in these lines but of all lake vessel owners. These differences will be considered at the conference in Washington in September and the lakes should be represented. No Light for Eleven-Foot Shoal. Through earnest work on the part of Hon. T. E. Burton, of Cleveland, there was secured at the first session of the last con- gress an appropriation of $60,000 for a light at Eleven-Foot shoal, at the entrance to Green bay, Lake Michigan, the gateway to the immense ore and coal traffic of Escanaba, Gladstone and Green bay. It was found later that this appropriation of $60,000 was inadequate for the construction of a permanent light and an effort was made to have the money applied to the construction of light-ships but this plan failed. An effort was also made to have the appropriation increased and it was thought by some Cleveland vessel owners who are greatly interested in the Escanaba traffic that a small appropriation had been secured for the maintenance of a temporary light, pending construction. Even this latter was -not obtained, however, as will be seen by the following com- munication, received by a Cleveland vessel owner, who had written naval Secretary Coffin, after another vessel had been aground at the shoal referred to: SiR: Your letter of May 26, 1891, relative to the need fora light at Eleven-Foot shoal, entrance to Green bay, Lake Michigan, has been received. The Act of August 30, 1890, appropriated $60,000 for the establish- ment of a light at that point, but it was found to be inadequate, The board in its last annual report recommended that congress appropriate an additional sum and that $2,500 be provided for the maintenance of a tem- - porary light on a light-ship near that shoal, pending the construction of the light-house. The appropriation was not made, however, and the hoard is now unable to place any light at that dangerous point. The board has done all in its power to obtain adequate legislation on this sub- ject, but thus far without success. It will, however, in its next annual report, and also in its annual estimates, press the ma ter still further upon the consideration of congress. The board is glad to find that your attention has been drawn to this subject. Vessel owners can do much in obtaining consideration for this important subject. Public opinion often — compels congressional action where it otherwise would not be had, Gro. W. CoFFIN, Commander, U.S N., Naval Secretary. ces Office of the Light-House Board, Washington, D.C.; May 28,