night say a steamer-seeing on her port bow the green light of another steamer. Under the existing law the first steamer is bound to keep her course; but if the other has no look-out,* or a bad look-out, keeping the course may be exceedingly dangerous. If the green light simply approaches without any change of bearing, the conditions are alarming, even though the original distance be considerable. Now, if warning signals were established, they would in this case be something with a double purpose; they would be meant to attract notice in the first place, and to express intention in the second. The proper signal would be one which should say to the ship owning the green light: "Wake up: I am in the right to leave you on my left-hand side by keeping my course, so do not run across my bows." Such a signal would in other words express an intention not to starboard,‡ and by consequence might cover an intention to port, if porting were lawful under the circumstances. Take, again, the converse case of the steamer showing a green light and seeing a red one. Such a ship

* [If a steamer “has no look-out, or a bad look-out," which latter we presume is equivalent really to no look-out, we do not understand how or why she should be expected to see a "helm light." A steamer without a look-out, or with a look-out so bad that she fails to discern a permanent red or green side-light, would fail to see a temporary red or green helm indicator light. To care the evil that one ship does not know that there is no look-out on another ship, the logical and only remedy would be for that other ship to hoist a signal which should mean “I have no look-out." We point this out to show at once the absurdity of supposing that a temporary light will wake up a ship with no look-out. A sound signal may do it but not a light signal. If steamers do not keep a look-out, they disobey one of the most ordinary precautions of seamen, and no signal can meet such a case. Not only is this so, but if signals were provided on a supposition that they could make up for bad look-out, they would expressly provide for and dangerously encourage that fatal neglect.--ED. N.M.]

[And we would add "it is time for the ship which is required by law to keep her course, to slow her engines, as she is also required to do by law."-ED. N.M.]

[This would be a wrong signal. The signal should only be "I am keeping my course, as required by law.”—ED. N.M.]

might be in fear of the vessel with the red light not keeping her course, and under such a condition of alarm, her proper signal would say, “I see you; do not starboard, for I am about to leave you on my left hand." This signal again would express an intention not to starboard, but it might or might not express an intention to use port-helm. On the other hand the steamer showing the green light might hold the opinion that there was room enough for her to pass ahead of the ship showing the red light, and if this were the case, the danger might be from the red light porting after the green light had really cleared him. Then green light's proper signal would be, "I see you, and am

going to
going to leave

you on my right hand; do not make my movement more dangerous by the use of port-helm, but let me cross your bows in safety." This signal again would cover the use of starboard helm, though no helm of any kind was used. Again, the ship showing the red light might consider that there was room for the ship showing the green light to pass a-head of her, and that the only danger was lest she should port her helm. In this case the signal would be, "I see you; pass on, and do not port, for I am about to leave you on my right hand."*

Now all these apparently various signals are seen to be reducible to two, which might be expressed nearly in the words suggested by the Board of Trade Committee, namely, "I am directing my course to starboard;" and, "I am directing my course to port." It will be seen that it does not make it a necessity that a ship,

* [It seems to us much simpler to leave things alone, and not complicate matters by requiring shipowners to provide pyrotechnic or other lights. Commercial depression is bad enough now, and to saddle all ships, large and small, with additional lights, pyrotechnic or otherwise, would be to cause a cruel outlay, as well as useless if not dangerous arrangement. If a good look-out is kept; if the ship which is required to keep her course keeps it; and if the other keeps out of the way, as required by law, the difficulty would be met. Collisions happen, first, because the ship that is required by law to keep her course does not keep it; and, secondly, because the ship that has to get out of the way (often through defective look-out) fails to take proper steps until too late. Extra lights will never touch those evils.-ED. N.M.]

"I am

showing either of these signals, should actually put her helm over either way. The real point established is that if she says, directing my course to starboard," it is quite certain that she will not put her helm a-starboard; and if she says, "I am directing my course to port," it is quite certain that she will not use port helm. All this is clear if we reflect that a steamer showing a red light may allow another showing a green light to cross her bow from port to starboard by a simple reduction of speed, as may also the ship showing a green light allow the other to cross her bow from starboard to port, also by a simple reduction of speed. These considerations apply to the question which has been so usefully debated before Lord Sandon's Committee; the question about small sailing vessels and their rights as against steamers and other large vessels in the river. A steamer of great size going down the river with a fair wind, observes a barge close-hauled on the port tack stretching across from her starboard bow. The steamer is helpless by reason of her size, and fearing a collision, she signals to the barge," I am directing my course to port." This is a signal to the barge to go about and not to try to cross the steamer's bows, because to do otherwise, would in the event of the steamer's really directing her course to port, be unseamanlike and dangerous, but the steamer does not necessarily put her helm a-starboard because there is no room for her to go to port to any extent, and because she achieves her purpose in making the barge tack. So we see that whatever be the language with which each of these two warning signals is put, as though the maker of the signals uttered the words, their meaning to the receiver of the signal cannot be mistaken. One signal means, "do not attempt to cross my

*

[The steamer cannot leave the deep-water channel, and the barge does not need deep water. We would refer our contributor to the introduction to Mr. Gray's last book on the Rule of the Road. All this is very good for river navigation, as is there shown; but for the open sea anything of the sort would be mischievous.-ED. N.M.]

[The steamer ought not to make the signal recommended by our contributor. Her signal ought simply to be " your barge must get out of my way, I cannot get out of your way."-ED. N.M.]

bow from port to starboard." The other means, " do not attempt to cross my bow from starboard to port.”

So much, therefore, for the purely "warning signals," expressive of intention. We now come to "helm signals," which express not an intention, but a fact which is either accomplished, or in course of being accomplished. Such signals must in all cases be automatic, and attached to the helm, and to be perfect, they must express a great deal more than any plans we have yet heard of succeed in doing. The simple fact conveyed by an automatic signal from one ship to another approaching her, that the first ship has her helm a-starboard, or a-port, is nothing. Very few ships carry their helms amidships, and the character and amount of helm necessary to keep a ship on her course vary continually with the speed, and the state of the wind and sea. For a ship to show starboard helm when her helm is really "steady," though not amidships, may become a fatal piece of information to an approaching neighbour. So to show port helm equally, whether there be a spoke of it, or all that can be given, is an equally misleading signal. Again, if the helm has been hard a-starboard, and shows starboard helm by signal, notwithstanding that the order "bard aport" has been given, and the helm is being righted as fast as possible preparatory to the porting, we are worse off than if we had no signal whatever. On the other hand, the automatic signals will do little for us if they did not show the rapidity with which the helm was being moved, as well as its character and amount. A helm moved with violent speed, means almost certainly that it will be pat hard over, and will considerably influence the ship before it can be reversed; whereas a helm moved slowly and deliberately is a helm most likely altered by the helmsman merely to correct a yaw, and which is, therefore, very likely to be reversed.‡

* [We do not so read them. We simply read them as the rules say they are to be read, "I am directing my course," &c.—ED. N.M.]

[It seems to us that our contributor properly contradicts himself here. They are, as he now says, "expressive of intention on the part of the ship making them."—ED. N.M.]

[We quite agree in this with our contributor. The evidence given before the Thames Traffic Committee is as conclusive to us as to him. We expressed opinions against lights as helm-signals some years ago.—ED. N.M.]

On the whole, therefore, we get, as necessary for our warning signals proper, only the conditions that they shall be two perfectly distinct signs, either visible or audible. For the automatic helm signals we require that they shall show us (1) the character of the helm used; (2) the amount of it; (3) its motion, whether fast or slow; and (4) whether the amount of helm shown is necessary to keep the ship on a straight course, or is causing her to turn. There is, therefore, very considerable difficulty attending the employment of helm signals at all, and very much greater difficulty than attends the employment of warning signals.

But there is also a most important difference between the helm signal and the warning signal, which must not be passed over. The approaching ship observing a helm signal has no guarantee whatever that such signal has any connection with her approach. The signal has been made to her irrespective of the will of the person in command, and it may be reversed at any moment. Such a consideration is less important for ships in very close quarters, and especially when going in the same direction; as, for instance, between two ships going up the Thames nearly side by side. In this special case the automatic helm signal, if not useful, is at least not dangerous, and might possibly save a rub of side to side, which otherwise would occur. But those who invent and advocate the helm signals have cases

entirely different in their "nearly end-on" cases

minds. They mentally refer to the almost exclusively; and their view is that A, nearly end on to B, gets a helm signal from her, she can obey that signal with identical helm on her own part, and so pass clear on either side, according to the helm used. This idea demands the closest thinking out, and brings us face to face with a grave consideration, which affects the warning signal equally with the helm signal.

The automatic helm signal must, from its nature, be free in its use. It will denote illegal helm impartially with that which is legal. The warning signal can be restricted to legal movements. Ought it to be so restricted? and if so restricted, should an illegal signal be obeyed, whether it be a warning, or a helm, signal? The Committee of 1877 decided that the proposed sound warning signal should only be used to denote " any course