of her." This rule is proposed to take the place of Art. 14 of the Steering and Sailing Rules, which is as follows:-" If two ships under steam are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the ship which has the other on her own starboard bow shall keep out of the way of the other." The latter rule is as evidently unsuitable to steam-vessels rounding points over which their lights can be seen as the former is necessary in such circumstances under present conditions. Indeed, it was stated by the managing owner of the General Steam Navigation Company that after the collision between their vessels, Ostrich and Benbow, which happened near the place of the collision between the Princess Alice and Bywell Castle, an amendment embodying the proposal of the Thames Conservators was inserted in their own rules.

But the radical cure for collisions below the pool is contained in the suggestion that all traffic should be confined to two streams of vessels, the one going down on the Kentish side of the fairway, and the other coming up on the Essex side of the fairway. It is suggested as a more practical rule that the large class of steamers and large sailing vessels should keep in the deep fairway, passing each other invariably on the port hand, and that vessels of light draft should not be driven into the fairway, and only cross or navigate the fairway at their own risk.

If these regulations could be carried out they would go far to render serious collisions impossible, but unfortunately there are many difficulties raised by competent men to a hard and fast starboard rule being established. Captain Burstal, R.N., Secretary to the Thames Conservancy Board, pointed out that in a certain state of tide a vessel rounding a point would be caught on her starboard bow, and carried against her helm towards the wrong side of the fairway; that there would be great difficulty in designating the fairway, or at least the line which should divide the two streams of traffic; and that in some places, for instance off Broadness, a vessel of deep draft coming up the river would be obliged by the shoal to keep near the Kentish shore, whereas a vessel of light draft going down, would be under no such necessity, and would consequently pass the other vessel on the starboard side. There is also the objection that sailing

vessels driving or turning down, or barges drifting, would go with the tide, and so obstruct the navigation as to render the starboard rule impracticable. It is, however, suggested that nothing should be allowed to drift above Blackwall, but that everything should be under the command of sail or steam, or in tow. Here, however, the Committee meet with what appears to be two of their greatest difficulties in their regulation of the traffic from London Bridge downwards. The sailing barges hailing from the Medway, &c., are generally acknowledged to be well manned and thoroughly under command, and, with a few exceptions, ready to give way to a steamer when the latter intimates that she is unable to keep clear, as required by the Rule of the Road; whereas the dumb barges, which are as generally asserted to be a nuisance and badly managed, can only drift with the tide. The suggestion that dumb barges should be towed from Blackwall is, however, met with grave opposition from the barge interest, and we notice that at the annual meeting of the Kent Barge Owners' Association it was strongly condemned, the chairman naïvely remarking that the proposition was the outcome of the Princess Alice collision, in which barges played no part whatever, except in saving life from the unfortunate steamer. We have, however, pointed out above that the Committee is not so much the consequence of the Princess Alice collision as the climax of the increased danger and inconvenience which attend the increased navigation of the river. The bargeowners, we are convinced, will not permit any inconvenience they may at first feel, to rouse them to oppose the efforts of a Committee who are evidently fully alive to the interests of all classes concerned in the navigation of the river, and who would be reluctant to subject any class to permanent injury.

On the whole, the weight of evidence appears to be against a hard and fast starboard rule, but in favour of the re-establishment of the old starboard hand rule, at the same time reserving the deepwater channel as far as possible for vessels of deep draught of water, and the addition of a rule for rounding points.

A system of signals by whistle and lights to show the intention of steamers in passing sailing-vessels and other steamers, was recommended by some witnesses, but opposed by others on the

ground that any increase of such signals would be bewildering and frequently misunderstood. It was, however, pointed out that the suppression of unnecessary whistle signals, and the establishment of a system well understood, might prove beneficial.

The navigation of the river from London Bridge to Hookness seems to present the most serious difficulties. The sailing-barges and small craft, working up with the tide, are at Hookness joined by hundreds of dumb barges leaving the docks and drifting with the tide to their destinations at the various wharves on both sides of the river, and navigated by one, or at most two, lightermen, who are sometimes unable, and sometimes unwilling, to make way for the steamers and the large vessels in tow.

Steamers are of course obliged to run at a slow rate of speed in this part of the river, and very often to drive the barges before them until an opening presents itself. The inconvenience arising out of this chaotic navigation is very great, although not attended with much loss of life; and the obvious remedy is towing. But here the Committee have to deal not only with the interests of the barge-owners, but with the "vested" interests of the watermen and lightermen who navigate the barges. The origin of this vested interest is almost as curious as the qualifications the men are required to possess.

Q."Your Company is a very old Company, and I notice that in the early Acts there were certain provisions named whereby freemen of the said Company were obliged to serve on board His Majesty's fleet under such circumstances, and subject to such penalties, as were therein mentioned. Is it not possible that some of these exclusive rights of the watermen and lightermen may have been granted originally in return for some idea of compulsory service ?—A. I should think at the time those privileges were granted it was really in the war days, in order to make a provision for our navy; that is my idea of the meaning of it.

Q. "It was something for something ?—A. It was something for something; you may depend upon that.

Q. "But the compulsory service is abolished ?-Compulsory service is abolished.

Q. "So that now it is something for nothing?-A. Of course,

every young man who takes up his freedom takes his oath, and is compelled to take his oath to serve his Queen and country if called upon.

Q. "That oath continues, does it, although the obligation is gone? A. Yes."

The qualifications required from the watermen and lightermen do not appear to be commensurate with the exclusive privileges they enjoy.

In answer to the Chairman, a witness stated that though some of the Watermen's Company's men are satisfactory, the majority of them are the most ignorant lot of men that it is possible to find. They are supposed to pass an examination before they obtain a license, but it is a very limited one indeed, and is held by the Warden and Court of Assistants of the Company, who are selfelected, so that, practically, the men who navigate vessels upon the Thames aro governed by themselves.

In answer, another witness admitted that the boy who drew corks on board the Princess Alice was a waterman's apprentice, and that his service in that capacity for two years would count as efficient service to enable him to become a lighterman.

A lighterman and barge builder, who appeared to have very decided opinions on the subject, stated as follows: "With regard to the examination by the Watermen's Company, they have no machinery; when they grant a license, two men sit at a table, and one or both of them knows very little about the whole matter; it is the payment of fees, and they ask you to show your hands, and the master gives a recommendation; they can get half-a-dozen men for half-a-dozen pots of beer to sign recommendations."

A Trinity pilot states that "the up-country people in command of sailing barges try to get out of the way of large steamers, but that the London lightermen of the Watermen's Company are the worst of the lot; there is no doubt about it, they are an obstinate set; they have the privilege, and they think they should keep it; they do not care about their master, if they get the sack from one they get a berth with the next one."

Besides the waterman's professional privilege, he has civil privileges, which possess a peculiar value to him. Among other

anomalies, it appears that if the public have a complaint against a waterman they must take it to the Court of the Waterman's Company, but if a waterman has a complaint against the public he takes them before the Lord Mayor.

It is further asserted that a lighterman does not lose his freedom, no matter how often he may have been convicted of felony and other offences, and that he looks very lightly upon dismissal, as the number of his body is so limited that he is practically sure of being taken on somewhere else the next day.

The bargeowners complain bitterly of their restricted choice of hands, and suggest that a license should be granted, after strict examination, to any qualified person who might offer. This suggestion would practically abolish the exclusive privileges of the Waterman's Company, as it would throw open the river to the men from the Western barges, and the men from the Kentish sailing barges, who are generally acknowledged to be competent hands.

On the other hand some witnesses, representing certain societies of watermen and lightermen, complained that the men were not represented upon the court of their Company, which was entirely. composed of employers of labour, that the owners frequently register their barges at considerably under their carrying capacity in order to evade the Conservancy Bye-Laws requiring vessels of over fifty tons to have two men on board. One foreman of the Company, representing himself as the Secretary of the Watermen's and Lightermen's Association, and who stated that he had just returned from six years sojourn in America, astonished the committee with the statement that in the year 1866 there were 125 watermen drowned in the river owing to there not being a second competent man on board the barges. Mr. Fairbairn further stated that there were 1,500 freemen idle on the banks of the river.

On the part of the bargeowners and lightermen it is urged that the responsibility of pilots should be increased, but there seems to be very little inclination among bargeowners and lightermen to favour the suggestion of general towage.

We apprehend that the difficulties which present themselves in connection with dumb barges and lightermen are among the