in the lower part. In the case of revolving storms, there would have been considerable difficulty in describing the differing nature of their rotation, had it not been for the familiar idea of the hands of a watch. When we are told that in the northern hemisphere the storm rotates in a direction opposite to that of the hands of a watch, the simile is so familiar to us that no effort is required to understand the language.

So, as we are all agreed, the terms "port" and " 'starboard," as used in a ship steered by a tiller, are clear and distinct. The "helm" or tiller is then in our hands and under our eyes, and we put it to the port or to the starboard side of the ship, without confusion or error. But to a man from whose eyes the tiller has always been hidden, and to whom the word "helm" does not at once convey the mental image of a tiller, the words "port the helm " must be referred to something else visible and familiar. And then comes the difficulty. The two things most impressed upon him are the motion of the wheel and the motion of the ship's head. The actual movement of the ship through the water-the "turn," as though round a corner-is not familiar to him, but he knows that the motion of the upper spokes of the wheel travel from port to starboard, and so far resemble the motion of the ship's head.

"port" more naturally

But both these motions are opposite to that of the helm, and if he has no tiller in his mind's eye, the motions of the upper spokes of the wheel and of the ship's head in a manner contradict the orders which cause those motions. Hence he gets an uncertainty in his mind, because the order to connects itself with motions from starboard to port, than from port to starboard. But just as he neglects in his thoughts the motion of the lower spokes of the wheel, so does he neglect in his thoughts the motion from one side; he only regards the motion to one side, and if we could reverse the usual way of looking at things, a motion from port to starboard would as naturally connect itself with the word "port," as it now rebels against that connection.

In a similar manner we can trace other sources of error. A man accustomed to stand on the starboard side of the wheel is accustomed, when he gets an order to "port," to draw the spokes

PORT AND

towards him. If we put him to the left of the wheel, while he has in his mind this idea of drawing the spokes towards him on receiving an order to "port," he will most naturally draw the spokes towards him again on receiving the same order. In fact, our experience often shows us these effects, as we see that even a good helmsman will now and then move the wheel two or three spokes the wrong way before sufficient recollection comes to his aid. In that moment he has exerted his imagination, and has referred the order he has received to its proper connecting object. He has either thought of the tiller out of sight below him, or of the motion of the upper spokes of the wheel in reference either to the side of the ship, or to the side on which he has been accustomed to stand.

Thus we see, that whatever terms we use to denote the two opposite positions or motions of the instrument employed to turn the ship, these terms must be connected with some particular part of the instrument to the total exclusion of every other part, otherwise there will be certainly as much confusion as at present. Mr. Vyvyan proposes, as we have said, to substitute the terms "right" and "left" for the terms "starboard" and "port." That is, we are to say "right" where we now say "port," and "left" where we now say "starboard." A successful introduction of these terms would clearly depend upon totally disconnecting them from the "helm," or tiller. This would probably be next to impossible in ships steered by a tiller, but it might be possible where the tiller is concealed from view; for stress might then be laid on the fact that the upper spokes of the wheel, the rudder, and the ship's head, would all move to the right when the order "right" was given, and would all move to the left when the order "left" was given.

Bnt then we must recollect how ingrained this reference to the tiller is in nautical language. True that when we "right" or "steady" the helm, we right or steady also the rudder and the course of the ship. But we carry lee or weather "helm' according as the tiller is towards the lee or the weather side; we put the "helm" a-lee or a-weather; we put the "helm" down or up, and so on. If we now say that a ship carries "port" or

PORT AND

"starboard helm," we have to consider whether we could say with equal clearness that she carries " 'right" or "left helm," and it is evident that we could not, for this brings in the very reference to the tiller which it is our object to abolish. It might be possible to speak of a right or left "rudder" without immediate confusion, though any reference to what is not seen must tend to bring in all the present troubles. We might possibly speak of a right or left "wheel," meaning that the midship spoke had moved to the right or left of its proper place; but, after all, we see that if any, or all of these arrangements could be made, we should always be liable to nearly the same difficulties and doubts as at present.

We may think that all is clear because the motions of the rudder, upper spokes of wheel, and ship's head correspond to the terms used. But it is manifest that they only correspond so long as we all agree to ignore the motion from, and to think only of the motion towards. If circumstances brought the motion from into prominence, that alone would make a confusion quite as great as any that we have at present.

And in the very cases where the shoe most pinches now, we appear to have just the prominence given to motions from, which we speak of. In approaching towards collision, or in taking steps to avoid it, we have a connection between the tiller and the word of command which would be lost under other conditions. If a man sees a red light a very little on his port bow, his present order is "port," and his head turns from the port or red light. If, on the other hand, a green light is very little on his starboard bow, his order is "starboard," and he turns from the starboard or green light. In these cases, with the substituted words and ideas, "right" would mean "turn from the left," and "left," "turn from the right." There are no such confusions now; and it may be fairly argued that the confusion described is remote. But it is hardly more remote than that now asserted to arise between the opposite motions of the tiller and the rudder.

There are still some curious thoughts in relation to this subject which deserve a place. "Starboard" is connected with odd numbers, and "port" with even numbers. Thus the ship on the starboard tack is to denote the fact by a single sound, while the

ship on the port tack is to denote it by a double sound. So, also, in the new scheme, the steamer is to sound a single blast starboard, and a double blast when Between the nature of the signals

when directing her course to directing her course to port. denoting the tack and the helm there is no confusion, provided we can steadily keep the tiller out of our minds. But if we give the order "port the helm," the established connection between the even number and the word "port" will tend to make us, on an emergency, and without clear reflection, make a double-blast signal when we should use a single blast.

If the use of the terms "right" and "left," or any other proposed terms, would rid us of all ideas connected with the tiller, or the "helm," the above sources of error would disappear. But the question really is, whether any words will effect this object. Of the terms "right" and "left" as substitutes for "port" and "starboard," we may observe that they must become verbs and adjectives. We must be able to speak of an order "to left," as a substitute for an order "to starboard," and of an order "to right" as a substitute for an order "to port." Here we observe we are forestalled, because "to right" already has a special meaning, namely, to "put the helm amidships." Again, we must be prepared to speak of a "right" rudder, or wheel, and a "left" rudder, or wheel, just as we now speak of a port or starboard helm, as we have already observed; and the question is, whether any terms are really available for our use under these circumstances.

Suppose, again, that we had adopted the word "right" to denote port helm, and "left" to denote starboard helm, we should lose a connection between the coloured lights and the terms now employed, which might in cases be undesirable. We can hardly hope to get rid of the connection between the words " right" and "starboard," and "left" and "port." In approaches towards collision the orders "starboard-show him our green light," or "port-show him our red light," are utterances of course. If the terms were altered as proposed, we should find ourselves saying "left show him our green light," and "right-show him our red light." But as the commander's attention would be concentrated on his right side light when he said "left," and on

his left light when he said "right," we can readily imagine the wrong word springing unbidden to his lips.

We have not attempted to steer a clear course through all these difficulties. Most of those who advocate a change are well worthy of being listened to, and if a change is necessary, and can be made satisfactorily, simple objection to change will but prevent it. We have ventured, however, to point out some of the difficulties which lie in the way of change, even when the change on the surface appears to be very insignificant. The fact is, that nothing connected with the motion of a ship's helm is insignificant. It can but move to the right or left, but in the one case we get safety, and in the other destruction. As destruction, therefore, is always impending upon a simple substitution of one word for another, we cannot be too close critics of any proposals based upon these two words.

INQUIRIES

INTO

WRECKS.

ENGLISH AND GERMAN.

W

E have in a previous article referred to the new German law establishing courts of inquiry into wrecks and casualties; and we are asked to refer to the subject again, now that the British shipping interests are obtaining an insight into it through investigations which have been recently held under it into casualties to British ships. We cannot do better towards effecting an elucidation of the subject, than by comparing the English legislative enactments and supplementary rules with the German law, and in doing so pointing out as well as we are able in this early stage, the resemblances and differences between the two systems, and inquire how, if at all, the British shipowner and shipmaster are affected thereby.

We will begin with the English law. There are under the