Mr. GRAY: But if each sees the other's green light, and if the course on which they are proceeding will carry them clear of each other, then the rule does not apply, because the rule says "if they are approaching nearly end on, so as to incur risk of collision." Captain CURME: Who is to form a judgment? Captain CURME: But we must make rules for stupid people-for wrongheaded people. A MEMBER: Your rule is, if you see a green light you starboard your helm; if you see a red light you port your helm? Captain CURME: Yes. Mr. LACON: Surely such a rule as proposed by Captain Curme would be understood by the most ignorant man. Legislation should be, not for the intelligent captain only, but for the half-instructed man, who has honestly puzzled over the Merchant Shipping Act, with its upwards of 500 clauses, and the Admiralty regulations and diagrams. He honestly tries to understand them, but he cannot, and surely such a rule as that proposed by Captain Curme would meet the dullest comprehension. Captain CURME: Mr. Harper will bear me out that there are numberless cases where ships have run into each other because they thought it was an inflexible rule that when they sight each other they must port their helms. Commander HEATHCOTE: There is one case in which I think the simple rule might act not beneficially, that is, supposing one vessel sees a red light on her starboard bow, then, according to the rule, the vessel seeing the red light is to port her helm, and the vessel seeing the green light is to starboard her helm. The rule as simply stated just now was, that a red light being seen by a vessel she should port her helm; and a green light being seen by a vessel she should starboard her helm. That is very simple. Captain CURME: That was an hasty attempt of mine at summarising it; but I did not intend to alter the rule that one ship making out another on her starboard side is to give way, and that the other is to hold on. Commander HEATHCOTE: Then that is not the rule. Captain CURME: I confess that is the case, but I ought to have put it in this way: When a ship, by making out another on her own starboard side, is bound by the present law to give way, she shall give way, and when a ship making out another on her port side is entitled to hold on by the law as it is now, she shall hold on; so that my alteration would merely be, that ships making out another in such a direction, that it is incumbent upon them to give way, shall give way, by putting their helms to port if they see the red side light only; but by putting their helms to starboard if they see both the side lights, or the green side light only. Captain BAKER: You mentioned the case of the "Pacha" and "Erin," in the Straits of Malacca. That was a peculiar case. They made each other out about five miles distant; it was a hazy night, fine weather. They made each other out about half a point on their bow, not more than that, or nearly right ahead. They were steering S.E. by E., and N.W. by W. The "Pacha" was coming N.W. by W., and the captain being, I presume, rather a timid man, put his helm a little a-starboard. The other commander, whom I know very well, had it reported to him that a steamer's light was ahead. He came on deck and gave the man at the wheel the order, "Just keep that steamer clear on your port bow." "Aye! Aye!" In the meantime time the "Pacha" was edging off with a starboard helin; the captain of the " Erin" looking up could not see the light, and he said, "Do keep her clear on the port bow." He had not the slightest idea that the other steamer would starboard her helm, the rule being to portthere being a rule now that two ships, meeting nearly end on, should port as they approach. The captain did not think for a moment that the other would be starboarding, therefore he did not look at his compass; and the man at the wheel did not tell him the ship had gone off four or five points, until it became actually a case of contact. As they approached each other one put his helm hard a-starboard, and the other hard a-port, and they ran into each other. If there are too many rules, the system will become too complicated, it must be either "port" or "starboard." If you have too many rules men will get confused. That is my impression from an experience as commander of a steamer for many years. The rule to port appears to me to be a very good one, no doubt, meeting either end on, or nearly end on. I merely mention this, having been perfectly aware of the circumstances of these two ships. It was a peculiar case; I suppose there is scarcely another on record like it. One man was timid; he put his helm a-starboard, and kept edging off a little; the other put his helm a-port, according to the Admiralty regu lations. Captain CURME: There are already two rules, the 13th and 14th, and I only propose to omit indefinite expressions in Article 13, and supplement Article 14 by directions how the giving away is to be performed. Mr. LACON: Will you allow me to say, from what we have heard to-night, and also from what we heard in the two nights' discussion on Captain Heathcote's paper, that it more and more convinces me that the great loss of life at sea, and the great destruction of property, arise from preventible causes. I hope that men like Captains Heathcote, Curme, and Colomb, will go on with the agitation of these subjects; and by and bye we shall have a Reform Bill which I believe will be of great advantage to the country and to the public generally. But I believe that the mischief of the existing state of things lies in the want of responsibility. Just now you heard Mr. Gray wishing to repudiate additional responsibility being thrown on the shoulders of the Board of Trade. Mr. Gray says it is ridiculous to make the Board of Trade responsible. We had an instance of a ship that had a hole in her boiler. It was impossible the Board of Trade could know it, they were purposely kept in ignorance of it; yet an Irish jury brought in a verdict of manslaughter against the Board of Trade. It is not at all surprising, therefore, that the Board of Trade should wish to throw the responsibility off their shoulders, and throw it on the shoulders of the proper persons, the owner, and (through the owner) the captain, his mates, and the engineers. The CHAIRMAN: We may also say of this paper that we are very much. obliged to Captain Curme, and also to the gentlemen who have favored us with their remarks. The more these subjects are agitated, the nearer we shall get to the truth. I think we have pretty nearly come to a conclusion that something is wanting, though we may disagree as to what the exact wording should be. It will, I think, take a little trouble and attention to make out the exact wording which will be required for meeting the various points. I can see that something is wanting; yet, we must always be very careful in making regulations that we do not make that which we shall have to unmake shortly afterwards. Therefore I should like this subject to be well thought over before any alterations are made. We may see an evil, and may make an alteration which we may find afterwards not to be the exact thing. At the same time we are indebted to those gentlemen who have pointed out to us that some alteration is requisite, and also the direction in which that alteration should be made. Monday Evening, July 16, 1866. REAR-ADMIRAL A. P. RYDER in the Chair. ON "THE LOSS OF LIFE AT SEA." By WILLIAM STIRLING LACON, Esq. This being the last evening of the season I will now, that I have received the permission of the Chairman and the meeting, explain to you what may be considered the result of our several deliberations upon the "Loss of Life at Sea," and the various subjects incidental to it. I shall represent the matter to the Council that the papers and discussions upon them may be brought together in one pamphlet, that the public and authorities may judge of the value of this Institution, and award the merit where merit is due. It was after the discussion upon Captain Curme's paper on Monday evening last that I went home and pondered deeply upon what I had heard, and it was that night, from 12 to 3 a. m., that I lay awake during the very time that the "Amazon" and "Osprey" were sinking, and the next morning I carried to the Admiralty a diagram of which that below is a copy. I said then (twenty-four hours before we received intelligence of the collision) that vessels meeting in that position would, in all probability, come to grief. At the same time 1 deposited what I considered to be a remedy for the future, which I will presently explain to you. The present state of the law is not sufficienly explicit, and can be best described by "the Rule of the Road," which I noticed this week in the "Notes and Queries:" "The Rule of the Road is a paradox quite, When sailing your vessel along; If you go to the left, you'll be sure to go right, In the inquiry that is about to take place I have the greatest confidence that the honor of all parties will be safe in the hands of those in whose custody it will be placed by law, and that one man may not be acquitted or fond guilty at the expense of another, but that if the law is at faultthe law will be found guilty. |