also being used with the sail. I think it is rather consistent with other existing laws.

In the matter of life-saving devices for motorboats, the Department of Commerce has had considerable difficulty in the past few years with this question of buoyant cushions. The present motorboat law permits buoyant cushions to be used and does not authorize the Board of Supervising Inspectors nor the Secretary of Commerce, nor anyone else, to approve those devices or to deny approval. If a boat has on board buoyant cushions or cushions which are said to be buoyant cushions, the inspector comes right close to having to accept them, unless he has time to make tests for buoyancy. The test for buoyancy takes 24 hours and it is manifestly impossible for the inspectors to make such a test of the buoyant cushions on every motorboat that they inspect.

About 2 years ago, or a little more, the Department promulgated a regulation requiring that buoyant cushions and other devices of that type which are not approved by the Board of Supervising Inspectors must carry a tag giving the name and address of the manufacturer, the weight and size of the device, and a statement that the cushion or other device did comply with the law and was a proper buoyant cushion. Shortly after that regulation was promulgated, we began to pick up cushions which we knew were not buoyant and those cases were referred to the Federal Trade Commission and that Commission has issued, I believe, several cease-and-desist orders prohibiting certain manufacturers from making buoyant cushions, and in the case of other manufacturers, reputable manufacturers of such devices, they have complied with the law, with the regulations of the Department, and they manufacture cushions which, when sold, are good lifesaving devices.

During the past year some inspecting officers, mainly in New York, I believe, principally in New York State, have made a great number of tests of those buoyant cushions as they were found on motorboats and I understand a great majority of the cushions so tested failed to have sufficient buoyancy to comply with the requirements of law and the regulations. In many cases, those cushions were proper cushions when they were sold, but some of them had deteriorated to such an extent in 3 weeks that they could not be accepted as lifesaving devices. We have made tests in the Department and I believe we have found the same thing to be true. It appears that the buoyant cushion which is generally used on small boats as a seat cushion, because of the compression from sitting on it, will lose its buoyancy, simply through that compression, in a matter of 3 or 4 weeks in some cases, and in a greater length of time in others. In addition, cushions, especially in open boats, are exposed to the spray and dampness and moisture, and they absorb moisture as I understand it, very rapidly. And because of the absorption of moisture rapidly, they lose their buoyancy.

Having that in mind, we are very much concerned about the use of buoyant cushions. A substitute cushion was developed. I believe, within the past year, a substitute for kapok, being a rubber device made of sponge rubber, which I understand, in tests, has shown that it does not lose its buoyancy either through compression or through

dampness, or wetting. Apparently, though, it has one serious fault; at high temperatures the rubber melts and runs, and I believe in a liquid state is considered to be nearly as inflammable as gasoline, and we do not know yet whether the Board of Supervising Inspectors will approve a device made of that material, or not.

The CHAIRMAN. Now tell me this right here, Captain Sweet: If we omitted "buoyant cushion" from this bill, could it still be used if it could be so developed that it had not lost those qualifications and came within the language of the bill, "or other devices of the sort prescribed in the regulations of the Board of Supervising Inspectors"?

Captain SWEET. We would so consider it, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. So that when a manufacturer of a particular buoyant cushion has been able to produce an article that would not be subject to this rapid deterioration, then the language "or buoyant cushion" would not be necessary in the bill, but it could come in under the general language?

Captain SWEET. I think that is correct, Mr. Chairman. At least, that was our intention here. We deliberately and intentionally omitted the words "buoyant cushions" because of their poor buoyant qualities and rapid deterioration, feeling if the words were included it would be in the nature of an order or command to the inspectors to approve some cushion, even though it was not quite proper.

On the other hand, we are in this position: We know of no loss of life occasioned directly by the use of these buoyant cushions whether good or bad. Whether it is just a matter of luck, we cannot say; but, as far as we know, we have no reports of loss of life due to buoyant cushions.

In the matter of small boats, such as outboard boats-small, open outboard boats and even some of the small cruisers-we are rather concerned about what is going to happen if no buoyant cushions are permitted. The average life jacket or life belt is large; it is cumbersome; it is difficult to stow and it takes up a lot of room, especially in a 12-foot or 14-foot outboard boat. I do not know whether it is going to be possible for people ot get sufficient life preservers in there to take care of the passengers and still get the passengers in.

Mr. KEEFE. And in the small boat, if it tipped over, it has been my experience you would not have time to get one of those life preservers anyway.

Captain SWEET. Well, I do not know. In the small, open boat the life preservers are right there with the passengers. In the cabin boat, you do have difficulty; but, in the small, open boat, I think if it upsets or sinks, even if you do not have a chance to get one before you go out, the life preserver floats out with you. But there is that difficulty. I cannot say what the solution is, except it seems to me that it is up to the manufacturers to turn out a proper buoyant cushion that will have sufficient buoyancy after use to be a proper lifesaving device.

I am told by one manufacturer that the so-called box-type kapoc cushion has not been found to lose its buoyancy in the tests which were made in the various motorboats in New York State, and it may be that that particular type of cushion, with some changes, may meet the approval of the Board. I do not know.

Aside from the remarks about those two sections, I think I might say, in general, this bill was designed to relieve the motorboat owner and operator of what seemed to us, in the Department of Commerce, to be unreasonable and unnecessary burdens. It imposes three additional requirements, I believe, on the motorboats. It requires bilge ventilation on new boats, the construction of which is begun after the passage of the bill, if passed, or on existing open boats which are decked over and materially altered after the passage of the bill. The expense of installation of a small ventilating system in a new boat, or in an existing boat which is being materially remodeled, it seems to us to be negligible as compared with the expense of the boat itself and should not impose any burden on the owner.

In the case of gasoline engines, the bill requires that all carburetors be equipped with flame arresters. Our records show many casualties, many explosions, many fires, with an attendant loss of life on motorboats due to backfires. A proper flame arrester removes to a great extent the hazard due to the back fire. I think it is safe to say that today all marine engines which are now being manufactured and sold, except outboard motors, are equipped with proper flame arresters, and I think the present-day automobile as it is delivered is equipped with flame arresters, and the bill proposes to set up that requirements only on new vessels or boats which have new engines installed after the passage of the bill. In that way, I see no way in which it could impose any burden, because the engines. are so equipped when they are delivered. It does not require present installations to be equipped with those flame arresters. We feel such a thing would probably be desirable to cut down the fire hazard, but it would require an enormous number of such devices and the manufacturers are not equipped to furnish them immediately, and I think probably it would be difficult to equip many of the engines anyway and would impose some financial burden on the owners. that we have not recommended that.

So

Mr. KEEFE. Does that apply to outboard motors? Captain SWEET. Outboards are specifically exempted in the bill. We are told by the outboard manufacturers it is impracticable to furnish flame arresters for outboards. The third, I might say, burden which is placed on certain vessels by the bill is the requirement in section 7 for a licensed operator. The present motorboat law requires that every motorboat carrying passengers for hire be operated by a person duly licensed by the board of local inspectors and then goes on to provide that no examination shall be required to obtain such a license. The result has been that since 190 our local inspectors have issued licenses to all persons who came in and made application. It made no difference whether they had any experience on the water, whether they were fit to be trusted with the operation of a boat, or what qualifications they had, they received a license and, if they carried passengers for hire. they usually framed the license and stuck it up in the motorboat. The public came aboard the boat and, seeing the license, assumed these men were proper men. In many cases, they

were not.

The CHAIRMAN. How about a fisherman taking somebody else out in his boat to fish and charging for carrying them out there?

Captain SWEET. I would presume, Mr. Chairman, he would be considered to be carrying passengers for hire if he made a charge for it

and would be required to be licensed. I would not expect any fisherman would have any difficulty in getting such a license. The examination for such a license

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; but the difficulty is in going to the place where the examinations are held. He may be removed from there. Where are they held-at the customhouse?

Captain SWEET. At the office of the local inspectors, or in any port where local inspectors may be at any time.

The CHAIRMAN. Still a lot of the fellows are away from the ports, at a distance, and it is a sort of a burden that is put on them.

Captain, SWEET. Of course, that is true; but, of course, they have, for the past 30 years, been required to have licenses if they carried people out when they went fishing, and it was necessary for them to present themselves to the offices of the locals or to make arrangements to meet the locals when the local happens to come to their city. The CHAIRMAN. A lot of them do not live in the city. That is the trouble; you people are always thinking in terms of the city.

Captain SWEET. Well, the local inspectors do not reach every small community, but they do go to various towns and communities in the district, where they are within reasonable reach of the people who live in the outlying small towns and communities.

The bill further provides

The CHAIRMAN. Have you had many accidents as a result of failure to pursue the present system with respect to getting those licenses? Captain SWEET. We have had a great number of cases, I believe, Mr. Chairman, in which it has been charged that these operators were guilty of misconduct or negligence leading to casualties, and sometimes with loss of life and sometimes without, such as groundings and losses of vessels because they did not know their business. They had no knowledge of the job that they were holding.

Mr. KEEFE. Is that true on the waters generally, or on the inland waters is that true?

Captain SWEET. Both places. These licensed operators carry passengers almost everywhere where there is a body of water, and that extends wherever they happen to be today. They run out on the high seas, they run out on the rivers, they run on the lakes, they run on the bays and sounds. They seem to be about in the same class on all those waters. Some of them are good men; some of them know nothing about their business. Those that know nothing about their business do have accidents rather more frequently than the people who know their business. Of course, you will have accidents at times both with the good man and the bad man.

The CHAIRMAN. I have no objection to anything for the proper protection of life, but you must remember that many of these people are remote from the opportunity, and you are imposing a burden on them to go around and take all of these examinations.

Captain SWEET. Well, Mr. Chairman, I do not think in that respect this bill imposes any more burden on them than there now is. They are at the present time required to be licensed, and in order to obtain the license, even though there is no examination, they are still required to present themselves to the local inspectors to obtain the license.

The CHAIRMAN. Now you are requiring a written examination. Half of these people can satisfy, many colored men can satisfy, the

inspector or anybody else down my way as to their knowledge of the water and their ability to operate a boat; yet, if you put them down with a pen and ink and a piece of paper, they could not do a thing in the world about it; they would get jittery immediately you undertook to hold an examination.

Captain SWEET. I agree with you fully, Mr. Chairman. The bill does not propose a written examination; it does not state definitely what the examination shall be. It is my understanding that the Board would provide for an oral examination or a written examination. I believe they would prefer written examinations from those people who are able to take them.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; and they will provide for it, too, believe me. Captain SWEET. It is also my understanding they would provide for oral examinations. We have no objection to a definite statement in the bill that the examination should be oral. As I understand, it is their intention to examine applicants on rules of the road, on the proper method of handling small boats, and perhaps on fire control on small boats and motors of that type-simply on those things which any man operating a boat carrying passengers for hire should know before he takes the boat out. The examination is not intended to be a very searching and rigid examination to determine whether a man is able to navigate at sea or any matters of that kind, but simply to show that he knows his business.

Mr. KEEFE. Do I understand the provisions of section 7 refer to every motorboat that is covered by the act?

Captain SWEET. No, sir; simply those motorboats carrying passengers for hire.

Mr. KEEFE. I understand that, but I mean as to size?
Captain SWEET. Oh, yes.

Mr. KEEFE. A little boat 16 feet long propelled by an outboard motor, if some farm boy living along a lake knows a fishing ground and some friends come up there and say, "I will give you $3 to take me out fishing and show me where the best fishing is," he has to have a license under this act?

Captain SWEET. I think probably the bill would go that far; yes. The CHAIRMAN. It goes too far.

Mr. KEEFE. I live in a community, Mr. Chairman, where there are hundreds of such situations.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; and Mr. Nelson, of Missouri, called my attention to the same situation out there in his section

Mr. KEEFE. I have a 16-foot boat with an outboard motor. My son knows that lake as well as anybody in the world; he knows every reef and every place about it. Now, if some friend came up there, and somebody stopped off at an adjacent cottage, or something of that kind, and said, "Here, I will give you $3 to take me out fishing," he could not do it unless he had a license; is that the idea?

Captain SWEET. I think that is correct; yes, sir. I think from that point of view, as you have stated the case, it seems rather foolish to take the other view of it; but suppose you knew nothing about a beat and went to a strange community and found a little outboard motorboat and a fellow there running it and said, "How about taking me out fishing." and he undertook to take you out and a squall that came up and, because of his ignorance of the use of that boat, he upset it and you have to swim for it?