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

\ September, 1915 land was for a time manager of the boat. On June 6, 1913, she ran aground on the mud near the East Ninth street pier, Cleveland, and it was after 2 a. m. before the passengers were taken ashore. In one of her first trips, while carrying 2,000 passengers, employes of the Sherwin-Williams Paint Co., the boat went aground near Cedar Point and listed severely. In the investigation under the aus- pices of William C. Redfield, secre- tary of commerce, Capt. Ira B. Mans- field, for many years inspector of hulls in Chicago, testified as_ fol- lows: “In 1904 we granted SRacanatp the THE MARINE REVIEW various EastLanp hearings indicates that the water ballast with which the boat was equipped was improperly handled, although this fact should not absolve the owners from blame in that they were operating a boat re- puted to be lacking in stability. The testimony of Fred T. Snow, second assistant engineer, is particularly illuminating. It is as follows: Question.—What was the condition of the ballast tanks when you came aboard? Answer. —I think they were empty. Question.—Whose duty is it to fill or empty the ballast tanks as occasion demands? Answer.—The engineer’s duty. Question.—How did you know when to put water in the tanks? Answer.—I did not know much about the EastLanp’s ballast system. I 323 Question.—You say that you had been told that tanks Nos. 2: and 3 were to be used be- cause of their responsiveness. Now, tell us why you didn’t use all the tanks when the boat did not respond to Nos. 2 and 3? Answer.—Well, we could have tried the rest of them, but the engineer told me to use Nos. 2 and 3. Question.When did you leave the engine room? Answer.—When the water came in the gangways I crawled out of a hole in the side of the boat and up on the steel deck, where the boat was listing so that my feet slipped from under me. Question.—Why did you leave the engine room? Answer.—To save my life. Question.—lf it took you 17 minutes to attempt to right the boat, was there no talk between you and Erickson (chief engineer) about the failure of the boat to respond? Answer.—Very little. Once Erickson said: . FIG. 6—A GENERAL VIEW OF THE WRECK AS IT APPEARED ON THE DAY AFTER THE ACCIDENT right to carry 2,800. Later in 1905 and 1906 we gave them 3,000. When Easttanp had trouble at South Haven she had 2,270 persons on board by counted tickets. I was on board the boat. She listed about 20 degrees, but by putting water in her tanks she was righted and we came across all right. There were about 1,200 persons on the roof. Orders had been given that not more than 600 persons should be allowed’ on the roof.” “After the listing in 1904 we or- dered the captain and chief engineer and the president of the company to keep water in her ballast tanks at all times.” The concensus of testimony at the had been employed on the boat only two days before the accident. Question.—What tanks did you use on Sat- urday? Answer.—Tanks No. 2 and 3. Question.—Why didn’t you use all five of the tanks? Answer.—The engineer told me to use only two or three, as they responded most quickly. The witness stated that the water for all these tanks was taken through a seacock on the port side and that this seacock was the only one through which water was drawn for the tanks. Question.—How long would it take to empty the port tanks? Answer.—I don’t know. Question—How long would it take to fill the starboard tanks? Answer.—I don’t know. Question.—Could you fill the starboard tanks and empty the port-tanks at the same time? Answer.—No. “T think you’ve caught her now, all right,” but we hadn’t. Peter Erickson, 19 years old, oiler, testified as follows: Question.—Did you ever have anything to do with the water ballast? Answer.—Yes, when we are near the engineer tells us to open the valves or to close them. Question.—Did you do ing? Answer.—Yes. It “was».-abouts. 6330 o’clock. The second assistant engineer, Mr. Snow, told me to open the ballast pump valves on tanks Nos. 2 and 3 on each side while he an so Saturday morn- saw to the pump. We did, and the tanks were emptied. Question——Was that a new _ procedure? Answer.—No, we always did that every morn- ing while in the harbor of Chicago, and usually on the other side, too. Question.—Did you touch the valves again? Answer.—Yes, about 17 minutes—maybe more —hbefore the boat went over I was ordered to