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

ig 12 MARINE DEVOTED TO THE LAKE MARINE AND KINDRED INTERESTS. ; Published every Thursday at No.409 Perry-Payne building, Cleveland, O by John M. Mulrooney and F. M. Barton. SUBSCRIPTION--$2.00 per yearin advance. Singlecopies 10 cents each. Convenient binders sent, post paid, 75 cents. Advertising rates on appli- cation. Entered at Cleveland Post Office as Second-class Mati Matter. The books of the United States treasury department on June 30, 1895, contained the names of 3,342 vessels, of 1,241,459.14 gross tons register in the lake trade. The number of steam vessels of 1,000 gross tons, and over that amount, on the lakes on June 30, 1895, was 360 and their aggregate gross tonnage 643,260.40; the number of vessels of this class owned in all other parts of the country on the same date was 309 and their tonnage 652,- 598.72, so that half of the best steamships in all the United States are owned on the lakes. The classification of the entire lake fleet on June 30, 1895, was as follows: Gross Class. Number. Tonnage. . Steam vessels......... peevaeaees eeeeaers Tosswesese 1,755 857,735-13 Sailing vessels............+0 navincteeee dees wen) X,100 300,642.10 Unrigged.......u.00006 eeoscnseed Resaconerteeccnnenes 487 83,081.91 MOtalecccetseccsccccetscs 900800050000000) ees GA2 I,241,459-14 The gross registered tonnage of vessels built on the lakes during the past five years, according to the reports of the United States com- missioner of navigation, is as follows: Number. Gross Tonnage. Year ending June 30, 1891........eceeceees - 204 111,856.45 ss § TSQ2rccseccalcerseees) | LOO 45,968.98 es s ss TSQZscsceccesseecese te eS 99,271.24 ss ss oe TSOAdcecocssees seosee' 106 41,984.61 a ss sé TOQSpacsesesececacsses 93 36,352.70 AEG E Ve conaneccscacucadeacoscconncononeg -- 9fAlb/ 335,433 98 ST. MARY'S FALLS AND SUEZ CANAL TRAFFIC. (From Official Reporte of Oanal Officers.) St. Mary's Falls Canal. Suez Canal. 1895.* | 1894. | 1893. 1895. 1894. 1893. No.vessel pass'ges| _17,956| 14,491] 12,008] 3,434] 3,352) 3,341 T'n'ge,net registd|16,806,781|13,110,366|9,849,754||8,448,246|8,039,175|7,659,068 Days of Navigat'n 231 234 219 365 365 365 * 1895 figures include traffic of Canadian canal at Sault Ste. Marie, which was about % per cent. of the whole, but largely in American vessels. THE PASSAGE of the marine engineers' bill in congress during the past week is a matter of more than ordinary interest to the vessel owners of the lakes, as well as the very large number of engineers who are em- ployed on lake steamers. The bill, which appears in full in another part ' of this issue, meets with approval from every fair-minded vessel owner, who realizes the importance of an engineer's position aboard a steam vessel, Although the engineers met with some opposition from owners of sea-going ships when the measure was first introduced in congress, it can be said authoritively that at notime since this legislation was pro- posed has there been any objection to it from lake vessel owners, either through the Lake Carriers' Association or otherwise. But there is one con- clusion, important to both engineers and vessel owners, to be drawn from the passage of the bill. It certainly directs attention to George Uhler as a shrewd aud conservative leader of the marine engineers of this country Mr. Uhler has proven an able chief in the organization that he represents and a continuance of his present course will rank him with Chief Arthur of the Brotherhood of Locomotive engineers, whose business-like, straight-forward methods have distinguished him as the only successful leader of a labor organization at the present time. This reference to Mr. Uhler is not intended as any bid for favor from him. The REVIEW has differed with him in certain matters pertaining to the passage of the measure here referred to, and may find occasion to oppose very earnestly his course in the future, but it is due him to say that he has shown more ability, since his election to the presidency of the organization of marine engineers, than any man who has ever been connected with associations of this kind. The passage of this bill will strengthen the engineers in their organization and will cause them to rally to the support of Mr. Uhler as _ aleader with confidence and enthusiasm. Congress has everything to do with shipping but little to do with railways or other coroporations that employ large bodies of skilled men like the engineers. On this account the influence of such a leader as Mr. Uhler in Washington may be made very great. He is against strikes, but thoroughly in favor ofa system of education among the engineers regarding their profession and the laws governing the operation of ships. If he remains with the asso. REVIEW. . ciation, of which he has twice been elected president, he will certainly be heard of in connection with further legislation along the line suggested by the bill that has just passed congress. In THREE or four issues of the REVIEW during March and April of this year there was printed a series of articles in support of the claim that there must be a readjustment in some way of the relations of the engineer to our modern navy. These articles had special reference to a bill with this end in view, which has been under consideration in the present congress, but which has failed of passage, largely on account of the line and staff controversy which is proving very disastrous in the navy. But it is evident that the naval engineers are not giving up their fight on account of the difficulties which they met with in trying to se- cure this legislation. In an article in the North American Review for May, Chief Engineer Melville takes up the subject with his usual vigor and earnestness. Hesays: "The artificers, engine drivers, warrant ma- chinists, call them what you please, will have a light burden in battle compared with the trained engineer. This officer will have to supervise all the machinery below the water line. When the ship is cleared for action he must inspire that isolated band of firemen and mechanics her- metically sealed below the protective deck. Looking, therefore, to the engineer for instruction, for direction, for advice in emergency, and for support in danger, will be that body of unappreciated men who consti- tute his force. It is imperative that they (the engineers) receive military training, but the safety of our fleets demands that all should obtain more engineering instruction than is now given at the naval academy, where the cadets assigned to the engineer corps are given but one year in marine engineering. The co-operation of the many scientific colleges and schools should be secured without delay. The institution at An- napolis must be brought into competition with the scientific colleges. This policy would be of advantage to the cadets, to the competing insti- tutions and to the navy. Annapolis is either unable or unwilling to train naval engineers, and if its work is brought into comparison with that of other institutions, the naval academy will be compelled to extend its engineering curriculum or show cause for its existence." This argument on behalf of the engineering force is supported by a series of short papers by W. S. Aldrich, professor of mechanical engineering in the University of West Virginia; Ira N. Hollis, professor of engineering in Harvard University ; Gardiner C. Sims, of the American Society of Me- chanical Engineers, and George Uhler, president of the Marine Engi- neers' Beneficial Association. IN THE effort to obtain a clear spar deck, so as to facilitate loading and unloading, some of the big ore carriers that are now being built have no deck house of any kind aft, and in nearly all of them the houses, both forward and aft, are crowded into small space at the extremes of the ship. In the ship; with no deck houses aft, dining rooms and living quarters common to this part of lake vessels are below deck, and it has been neces- sary to put in blowers, in order that a current of air may be provided. It would seem that these changes in favor of dispatch in port and against the comfort of crews may be carried to extremes. Although owners may not have heard it as yet, there is a growing feeling of opposition to this practice, not only from such of the crews as are compelled to live in the after part of ships, but also from deck officers, who do not relish the idea of standing long watches in fall gales around pilot houses perched far up in the bow, especially when they are expected to make time by running in all sorts of weather. As arule, vessel owners on the lakes have had great regard in the past for the comfort of their crews, and it is tobe hoped that in this effort to obtain clear upper decks they will not lose sight of the duty which they owe the men in their employ. This isa matter that is subject to legislation, and it would be better to look to it in time than to incur a controversy that may result in stringent regulations. PREVIOUS to the collision between the steamers I. C. Waldo and Choctaw, Wednesday, lake underwriters were, very probably, congratu- lating themselves upon having escaped, thus far this spring, any big losses on steel ships. Their experience last season must certainly make them fear losses of this kind. In a fewcases the repair bills that they were called upon to pay were very heavy. Take, for instance, the steamer Alva of the Bradley fleet. She was in dockfor repairs last season three times and her bills footed up $40,000, against a premium ofa little less than $4,000. And the underwriters are not through with her yet. Her insurance does not expire until August. A SINGLE word omitted from a short article in the last issue of the REVIEW may have conveyed the impression to some of our readers that there was little possibility of the river and harbor bill becoming a law. Such is, of course, not the case. The bill has passed both houses and is now in conference. A report may be made by the conference committee any day now, and there is every assurance that the bill will become a law with few changes in the senate amendments.