which provides for that eventuality. I heard the remark made that Article 11 only refers to vessels aground in a fair-way. Even so! My objection nevertheless maintains its force, and I again take it up. A vessel not under command is dangerous, because she can not be mastered, as, for instance, her rudder may be broken and her course may be tortuous. To indicate such course I think that it is of great advantage to have lights which are on the line with the keel and which indicate the course of the vessel. We should not alone endeavor to indicate the vessel's course but also the condition of such a vessel when she is not under command. Moreover, what does "where the lights can best be seen" mean? Is it in general a position which will be visible from all the points of the horizon? When, for example, a vessel is under sail, how can she show those two red lights more effectively than according to the rule of 1884?

Captain MENSING (Germany). Mr. President, the reason why this amendment was brought forward is principally that if a ship is under sail, with all her sails set, it is very difficult to find a position in front of the foremast where the lantern could be hoisted, and it is only to give liberty to the master to place it in some other position.

Captain MALMBERG (Sweden). Mr. President, if the Conference should adopt this amendment proposed by the German delegation I think it ought to state that these lights in sailing vessels should at least be hoisted in the forepart and not anywhere where she might see fit to do so. She might see fit to hoist them in the afterpart, and that would convey no information to another vessel meeting that ship as to which way the sailing vessel was heading. It ought at least to provide that the lights should be hoisted in the forepart of the ship.

Mr. VERNEY (Siam). Mr. President, I do not wish to trouble this Conference about a mere matter of wording when we are going to discuss the verbiage on the report of the Collocation Committee later, but I reserve to myself the privilege of discussing what is the most accurate description to be used here.

The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please read amendment No. 6, Class 2.

The amendment is as follows:

"Amendment to Collocation Report, proposed by Dr. Sieveking on behalf of the German delegation, December 14, 1889.

"In Article 4 (a) instead of the words 'in the same position,' insert the words 'at the same height,' and after the words 'Article 2 (a)' insert the words, where they can best be seen.'"

The PRESIDENT. Is the Conference ready for the question?

The question was put to the Conference upon the adoption of amendment No. 6, Class 2.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair is unable to decide. The Secretary will please call the roll.

The PRESIDENT, Ten have voted in the affirmative and 9 in the negative, so the amendment is adopted. The next subject for consideration is amendment No. 7, Class 2, which will be read by the Secretary.

Amendment No. 7, Class 2, is as follows:

"Amendment to Collocation Report proposed by Dr. Sieveking on behalf of the German delegation, December 14, 1889:

"In Article 4 (a), strike out the words, 'in globular lanterns, each not less than 10 inches in diameter,' and insert after 'visible' the words "all round the horizon.""

Captain MENSING (Germany). Mr. President, I tried to point out before that the words "in globular lanterns" have no real meaning whatever, and I would only move that these words be stricken out. Our amendment is about the same as that proposed by the gallant delegate from The Netherlands. I would like to point out also that by prescribing such a form of lantern, it would make it impossible for any ship, or it would be against the rules for any ship, not to use a globular lantern, but to use one of any other sort. A globular lantern, as I take it, is one in which the glass is of the same thickness all around the lantern at the same height. We do not use them in our navy at all. We have adopted the French system, and we have got a most excellent lantern, which shows a uniform light all around the horizon. By having a certain profile, we get a much better and stronger light. Now, with a telegraph ship laying a cable, it would be of great interest to show as powerful a light as possible, in order to give warning, as far as possible, that she is coming, to get out of the way. The red lantern is of course of a diminished power, and as a great authority has stated, the light is diminished to such an extent that all there is left of it is not very efficient. It is probably visible two miles; but as it has been adopted, we should allow the use of these lanterns. By striking out the words "in globular lanterns, each not less than 10 inches in diameter" and inserting the words "all around the horizon," I think we shall come to the desired result.

Captain SALVESEN (Norway). Mr. President, I would suggest that it should read "two red lights in lanterns, etc., and so constructed as to show the light all round the horizon." A vessel may be so constructed as to enable the light to be seen all around the horizon.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, in England we have found that the best lanterns are not globular, but cylindrical; they are flat at the top and flat at the bottom, but they are circular. They certainly throw a better light than what is called the ordinary globular lantern. I am told that our Board of Trade holds that this is a lantern within the rule. But of course it is an open question as to whether or not they are globular lanterns. As we find that these lights are very effective and better than any globular lantern, I do not see the object of maintaining this epithet. Therefore, we shall support the proposition which has been made by the delegates for Germany and the delegates for the Netherlands.

The PRESIDENT. Is the Conference ready for the question? The Secretary will please read the amendment.

Amendment No. 7, Class 2, is as follows:

"Amendment to Collocation Report, proposed by Dr. Sieveking on behalf of the German delegation, December 14, 1889.

"In Article 4 (a), strike out the words, in globular lanterns, each not less than 10 inches in diameter,' and insert after 'visible' the words 'all round the horizon.'"

The question was put to the Conference upon the adoption of amendment No. 7, Class 2, and it was adopted.

The PRESIDENT. The next subject for consideration is amendment No. 8. No. 8 seems be the same as amendment No. 7.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). It is under Article 4 b.

The PRESIDENT. The question now will be upon amendment No. 8. The question was put to the Conference upon amendment No. 8, and it was carried.

The PRESIDENT. Amendment No. 9 is the next subject for consideration.

Captain VAN STEYN (The Netherlands). Mr. President, that has been disposed of.

The PRESIDENT. Amendment No. 9 has been disposed of by the action of the Conference on a previous amendment.

The next subject for consideration is amendment No. 10. The Secretary will please read it.

Amendment No. 10, Class 2, is as follows:

"Amendment to Collocation Report proposed by Dr. Sieveking on behalf of the German delegation, December 14, 1889:

"In Article 7, 1 (a), strike out the words 'or in front of.""

Captain MENSING (Germany). Mr. President, this proposition is not of very great importance, I take it. I think that perhaps small vessels have got no other place where they can place this lantern than the funnel. If they do not want to have a mast, they will place it on the funnel, and very likely they will have a kind of hook rigged on which they may hang it. I would state that this is rather a mere matter of expression. We do not want to change anything in the meaning of the rules. The

words "in front of" might be stricken out and still the sense of the whole paragraph left.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I think it is hardly neces sary for the gallant delegate from Germany to press this amendment. There may be cases where it is desirable to carry the lights not on the funnel, but in front of it. It might be in a small steamer using bad coal, and there would be smoke coming out of the funnel, and this might obscure the light. Therefore, if these words were left in, the light might be carried on or in front of the funnel. It is a very small matter, and I think we might as well leave in the words.

Captain BISBEE (China). Mr. President, I will point out another difficulty. In using mineral oil, if the lantern were placed close to the funnel, it would very often be so hot there that the oil would explode. Dr. SIEVEKING (Germany). Mr. President, we attach very little importance to this amendment, and I beg leave to withdraw it.

The PRESIDENT. The delegate from Germany withdraws amendment No. 10.

Captain SHACKFORD (United States). Mr. President, I would like to call attention to the language of this rule. If these words " or on " are left in there, they can carry the light on the after-part of the funnel, as far as I can see.

Captain MALMBERG (Sweden). Mr. President, in such case they would not comply with the regulations under Article 2.

Captain SHACKFORD (United States). Mr. President, I still do not see why these words "or on" should be left in there.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, it is to be carried as laid down in Article 2 (a), as the gallant delegate from Sweden has pointed out.

Captain SHACKFORD (United States). Mr. President, it seems to me that this is a pretty broad article. It applies to steam-vessels of less than 40 tons. I would like to inquire why the words "or on" should be left in there; what is the use of them?

The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no motion.

Captain SAMPSON (United States). Mr. President, then I will vote to strike out the words "or on" after the words "the forward part of the vessel."

Dr. SIEVEKING (Germany). Mr. President, that would be a separate amendment, and, as the amendment has not been brought in in time, I think it would be inadmissable.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I am afraid that we are out of order in discussing this matter. There is no amendment before us, but if the gallant delegate from the United States will read through subsection a, he will see that Article 2 prescribes where the masthead light is to be. It is to show a light a certain number of points ahead, over the horizon, which it would not be possible to do if it was fixed on the after-part of a funnel.

Captain SAMPSON (United States). Mr. President, I am probably very stupid, but I still fail to see why these words "or on" are in there. A half a dozen of us discussed this matter very carefully yesterday and did not see the necessity for these words.

The PRESIDENT. This will be in the nature of an amendment, and the Chair is of the opinion that no amendment can be considered which is not adopted by a three-fourths vote.

Captain BISBEE (China). Mr. President, these words originated in the Committee on Lights for Small Vessels. There are circumstances, no doubt, where it would be of advantage to carry this light on the funnel, and if there is an advantage they ought to be allowed to do so. As the learned delegate from Great Britain has pointed out, no man can fulfill the rule and place it abaft of the funnel.

The question was put to the Conference as to whether or not the motion of the delegates of the United States should be entertained, and the motion was lost.

The PRESIDENT. The next amendment will be No. 11.

Amendment No. 11, Class 2, is as follows:

"Amendment to the Collocation Report proposed by Dr. Sieveking on behalf of the German delegation, December 14, 1889.

"In Article 7, 1 (b), instead of the words 'such lanterns shall be carried not less than three feet below the white light,' insert the words 'such lantern shall be carried vertically below the white light at a distance from the same of not less than 3 feet.""

Dr. SIEVEKING (Germany). Mr. President, this amendment is only to express a little more clearly what was intended by the words as they now stand. At any rate, at present the rule does not say anything about the position in which these red and green lanterns are to be placed with reference to the white light. It says only, such lantern shall be carried not less than three feet below the white light. That would allow the colored lanterns to be carried upon one side or the other of the white light. And that would, of course, give quite a false idea as to the position of the vessel. The two colored side lights are replaced by one colored lantern, with a green light on one side and a red light on the other, showing their respective colored lights from right ahead to two points abaft the beam on their respective sides. That can not be carried out in any other way than by placing the colored lights vertically below the white light. Besides, if we allowed these different colored lanterns to be carried in front of the white light or abaft of the white light, the distance between the lights, seeing them from some distance ahead, could be so lessened as to make their lights mix up with each other and prevent other vessels from distinguishing them. Therefore, this distance of three feet is only of importance and useful if the colored light is carried vertically below the white light.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, there is a practical difficulty with regard to this which I dare say my friend has not foreseen,