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

£ a Continued from page 2. At the suez rate it will not be completed at much below sixty millions, At present he has raised six millions not including the ‘money required to purchase the railroad There is only one point more te which we need advert. At Suez M. de Lesseps has a monopoly of the traffic, whereas the Foreign Affuirs Committee of the American House of Representatives has already reported in fa- vor of a bill incorporating a company with a Government guarantee to cut a maritime canal through Nicaragua, There may be traffic enough to pay for making one canal from the Ailantic to the Pacific; but what prospect is there of a dividend if there are two?—Pall Mall Gazette. FLOALING STATIONS FOR 'THE ATLANTIC, The old joke about not crossing the At- lantic until there is a bridge over it always raises a smile. Even imigination cannot throwa causeway over that vast Waste of waters. It can conceive of a steam- er which will make forty knots an hour, or. the realization of the aeronant’s dream, a ballon passage of seventy hours, but all, the discoveries of modern tines cannot make it do more. The wonderful inventions, how- ever, Which are being made every day do suggest ideas which, while apparently wild have asubstratum of sound sense. ‘Twenty years ago the telephone was unknown, sear- cely dreamed of, but now we find ourselves surrounded by inventions which seemingly anihilate time and space and add so much to the safety and comfort of life that they lead the mind to consider whether it is not pos sible with such vastimprovements to make the ocean highway a comparatively safe one. The-unstable tumnituotus sea defies _appar- ently all efforts to make safe pathways over it. But the time must come when even that too must suceumb to the wonderful ingen- uity of man. It may raise up in its wrath the gales may howlalong its surface and the twoelements may unite in an implacable’ hatred and determination to destroy the frail vessels which venture forth, but ways will be found for these crafts to evade their fury. Shall it not be said that signal stations will be dotted over the ocean forewarning the navigator of the approaching storm. Who shall laugh at this. proposition? He who laughed at the idea ofan ocean cable? He who laughed at the telephone between places one thousand miles apart? He who largh- ed at the idea of several different messages being sent from opposite directions over one telegraph wire at the same moment? A clever Frenchman not long ago sug- gested the propriety of tapping the ocean cables at different points, connecting them with vertical boxes could be attached and steamers indistress near one of these signal boxes could, by means of them, seud to land notice of their condition position and wheth- assistance was needed. It was pronoune- ed by many a wild idea. But it was dis- cussed. It had tuo much in it to be thrown aside lightly and it does invite attention, It does not seem wholly impracticable and it suygests the idea of signal stations of even greater advantage—those which can warn vessels when and where to avoid dangers. Ineredulity naturally smiles at the propo- sition. But let us see what. bails there for the suggestion, Ifit were possible to give this information now would there not b agreat clamor until the proper means were provided? Andis not the faet that the information is not given, owing prin- cipally to the belief that it is impossible to have avy signal stations in mid-ocean? The first question which suggests itself is what benefit would arise from such stations. The storm paths of the North Atlantic ocean, traced by the United States Signal service during the past year from informa- tion furnished by the ship-masters and others, has been the means of attracting a great deal of attention, Most storm centres have a general bearing northwest after leay- ing our coasts and a great number cross the ocean and reach the coasts of Europe. ‘This is the conclusion deduced from the study of Atlantic storms. From this it is argued that means wil! have to be developed in marine signalling whereby vessels at sea can be warned of coming storms. If such warnings could be conveyed to them, it is quite evident that the loss of life and pro- is perty would be wonderfully reduced, Ex- cellent work is now being done for maritime interest in pointing the way for sate naviga- tion of the North Atlantic, but there is a limit at present to this work. It res from all that can be learned from persons most interested inthe study of ocean meteorology that the day is not far distant for decisive action by international co-operation and many believe that this can be carried so far as to help those who may be at sea at the time when a great storm is on its Eastern path. ‘This can only be accomplished by means of tloating signal s ations, The ad- vantageof these, in view of what has already been accomplished, must be admitted. ‘The question now is, How-can they be obtained and how supplied with competent observers and the most improved meteorological in- send the warnings by cable from one. coun- try to another and from station to station in like manner as is:‘now done on land. It is a question which may well say stamps the matter at once as unanswerable. But were the idea under consideration some plan might be proposed. With signal stations in mid-ocean under international direction the great deep will in the.future be robbed of half its dangers. ‘The meteorological work on the ocean is only inits infancy. Itis now pointing out the paths of storms and made from reports ° furnished by ship-masters. Knowing the courses three destructive meteors take . the duty of the people is plain in this’ matter. The ocean is the highway of the world, in the satety of which every maritime nation is interested, and any suggestion that will help to increase that safety should be needed. In- numerable reasons may suggest themselves why the proposition faintly outlined above is only wortiiy ot ridicule. But before it: is condemned it should at least be earnestly considered. If it is to be condemned let its impracticability be shown, tor its usefulness North Atlantic must go on at an increasing ratio. Wecannot fancy a bridge across the Atlantic, but we can imagine that stormy sea dotted with sentinels who will mark out the paths and warn the voyager of the direction of the coming storm. TORPEDO BOA'TS IN COLLISION. Last year the Italian Government made some very exhaustive experiments at Spezia with the numerous torpedo boats they then had. Some of these were supplied by Messrs. Yarrow & Company of Poplar, which, dur- ing some manenvers round one of the large Italian ironelads, was run into by a similar torpedo boat built by the same firm. ‘The Engineer says, at the time of the collision, which took place inside the breakwater in the Gulf of Spezia, the cwo boats were running at a speed of nearly fourteen knots, which speed was. perhaps reduced to ten kuots at the actual instant of the collision. The Falco Was saved from sinking paruly by the water-tight bulkhead, which happened to be close to where she was struck and partly by her pumping machinery. ‘The tore end of the ram of the other boat not only penetrated the starboard side, but went right through and out beyond the port side of the Falco. However, both the boats could steam on, and reached the dockyard at Spezia in safety. It was satisfactory to find that the engines and all the accessories on board the Falco sustained no damuge whatever by the shock, which was entirely confined to the head of the boat. It is the opinion of the Italian authorities that, had the boats been less strongly and substantially built, one at least must have gone to the bottom, ‘These first-class torpedo boats, which are 100 feet in length by 12 feet 6 inches beam, one ot which, it will be remembered, attained the rerarkable speed of 22.4 knots when tried in London, bave been in commission the greater part of last year, making numerous cruises from Sp! along the coast, and con- stantly at exercise. One important feature in these boats is an arrangement introduced by Messrs. Yarrow & Company by which means, if the stoke-hole* becomes flooded with water through the boat’s side being penetrated or otherwise, the fire would not be extinguished, which on account of the low position of the fire grate in boats of this class, would otherwise almost immediately result from only a very small quantity o struments te note the weather changes and, and advantage will be conceded by _ those, | who will remember that the travel.of the. water finding its way into the stock-hole. The value of this arrangement is clearly evident from such an accident as we now illustrate. HIDDEN DANGER, Since the work of constructing the new exterior breakwater off Chicago harbor began ithas been a constant source of danger to vessels. Late at night or during storms (just when most needed) the lights have gone out, and-as a Consequence vessels and steamers have run on the sunken cribs, in- flicting damage and sustaining damage themselves. Several craft have narrowly escaped sinking, in which event their crews might have perished. ‘This exterior break- water is some distance off the hamper in the lake, and runs southeast and northwest. It is directly in the track of the hundreds of eraft arriving and departing from Chicago daily. Even when the lights are in place and in trim, and a fog prevails on the lake, there is great danger, for there is no fog-bell or fog-horn, as there should be. The Inter Ocean respectfully calls the attention of the Lighthouse Board to this matter in a general way and of the powers that be to a most glaring neglect in the immediate present. Navigation on Lake Michigan has been opened for the season’ of 1883, and large fleets are arriving at "nd leaving Chicago daily and nightly, and as yet-there is no light at all on this-exterior breakwater. The steamer Mackinaw and several sail vessels had narrow escapes before daylight yesterday morning, and the masters request that the matter be ventilated. The light- house board has not yet assumed control of the lights on this structure, but it is high time that it did. With these cribs unlighted and lying a long distance east in the lake, the main lighthouse on the north pier is nothing more nor less than a decoy light, luring vessels to destruction. Seeing the main light and caleulating the distance to it, arriving craft come on, only to fetch up (in deep water, and perhaps during a storm) upon the cribs of the exterior breakwater. At present Major Benyuard, the Govern- ment engineer, located here, has charge of these lights and he should see to it that they are placed and lighted and attended to. But the lighthouse board should assume charge and there should also be a fog signal.—Inter Ocean. MARINE LAW. Judge Walker delivered the three follow- ing decisions in admiralty cases in the United States District Court at Cleveland: Paul C. Ford et al. vs. tug Fannie Tuthill andschooner Wawanosh. . The .libellants are the owners of the schooner Exile which was being towed down the Cuyahoga river on October 17, 1882, about 11 o’clock in the morning through the Viaduct draw. ‘The schooner Wawanosh was lying on the east side of the river, short distance below the Viaduct draw, and ata bend in the river. She was fastened to the dock - with her head up stream, lapping some twelve or fifteen feet of the hull of the schooner Charlie Crawford (also lying at the same dock,) her jibbo .. pointing at an angle with the river. As the ‘Tuthill with her tow came through the draw, and at- tempted to pass the Wawanosh, the Exile swung around in such a manner that she came in contact with the jibboom of the schooner Wawanosh, carrying away her mainmast, and otherwise injuring her, for which the libel is filed. The Wawanosh had her jibboom broken and was otherwise injured, for which a cross libel fs filed by its owners: Held: First, that the tug was at fault and guilty of carelessness in going at too great speed throuh the draw of the Viaduct to pass the Wawanosh and in not using proper care to avoid the collision, Second, that the Wawanosh was at fault and guilty of carelessness in placing itself in the river with her jibboom pointing outward, so as to obstruct the safe navigation of the river. Third, that in so doing she contributed to her own injury, for which she is not entitled to recover on the cross libel; fourth that the Exile was not guilty of any carelessness in ts management, and did notin any way contribute to the injury complained of; fifth, the tug, and schooner Wawanosh, are equally liable to the libelant for the injury to the Exile and a decree is entered accordingly and a reference to Earl Bill, Commissioner, to ascertain and report the damages sustained by the schooner Exile. ~ Goulder & Weh for libellants; Charles L. Fish for tug ‘Tuthill and Mix, Noble & White for schooner Wawanosh. Nicholas Welsh vs. propeller Mayflower, The libellant was employed on the May- Hower part of the season of 1881 as a deck- hand and also as fireman, for which services he sues, ‘he master, before the libel was filed, tendered the libellant, $50 claiming that was all that was dve him for his services, which was refused. ‘The tender was paid into court after the libel was filed. ‘The dis- puted services are the sixteen days’ time in fitting out the vessel, the master claiming that the libellant was working for his board and lodging on the boat, libellant claiming one doller per day for the services. Held: First. That the weight of the evidence shows that libeliant was not to receive wages, but only board, and lodging for the service, and the’ wages were to com, mence whev he was a deckhand, second, that the tender made was more than actually due to the libellant; third, that where tender is made before suit it must be paid into court atter libel is filed to. prevent recovery of costs. Decree for libellant tor $55 with- out costs. Ed 8. Meyer for libellant Willey, Sherman & Hoyt for respondent. Jobn Cy Deveny vs. tug Fannie Tuthill. Libel for damages for sinking scow Kittie. ‘The scow Kittie loaded- with stone was in tow of the tug ‘Tuthill up the river to the dock just above the Seneca street bridge. On the way, as claimed by the libellant, the scow struck the west abutment of the C. C. C.& I. Railway bridge by the tault and carelessness of the master of the tug. Held, first, that the weight of evidence showed that the Kittie struck the deck through the carelessness of the tug; second, that the damages sustained by the Kittie in consequence of the collision catised her to sink on the way to her dock, and she thereby became a total loss, Decree for libellant, and referred to Earl Bill, Commissioner, to ascertain and report damages. Goulder & Weh tor libellant, and Charles L. Fish for respondent. ADMIRALTY—LIABILITY OF TUG FOR GROUND- ING OF TOW. (District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania. May 19, me 1882.) Libel by the owner of the bark Lena against the tug Atlas, to recover Gamages caused by the grounding of the bark while in tow of the tug. It appeared that on November 1, 1881, the tug took the bark in tow on the Schuylki!l river and proceeded down the river. In making a turn near the river the bark grounded, Libellant alleged that this. was caused by the negligence of the tug in running too near thé shore. Respond- ents claimed that it was caused by the tailure > of the bark to keep in the wake of the tug. Butlar, D. J. The respondant was blamable in running too near the Penusylvania shore, The bark kept in her wake until. she. found herself running aground, or in imminent, danger of it, when she sheered off towards deeper water; but. was brought up in the mud before reaching it. The testimony of Captain Keller, of the Atlas, that the Lena ported her-helm, running to starboard of his course, making a shorter turn than the ‘tug, nnd thus approaching nearer the Pennsyl- vania shore, is contradicted by all the wit- nessesses on board the Jena, and unsup- ported by any evidence in the eause. Ifit were truc, it is susceptible of being proved beyond doubt. It furthermore seems in- credible that the captain of the tug should ‘have seen his tow thus steering directly into danger, and should not have warned her against it, although, as he says, she Fanon this course 300 feet before grounding. It is unnecessary to enlarge upon the subject. The captain of the Atles was in fault. His reason for keeping towards the shore was doubtless, the one assigned in his conversa- tion with the Lena’s crew, immediately after the accident—that he expected the wind, which was from the north-east, and the ebb-tide to drive him towards the other side. The libel is therefore sustained, with costs. as — During the last twelve years the opening of navigation at Alpena occurred in April as follows: April 17, 1872; April 30, 1873 ay April 19, 1875; April 19, 1876; April 21, 1877; April 5, 1879; April 29, 1881,