THE Royal Commission appointed at the instance of Mr. Plimsoll " to inquire into the alleged unseaworthiness of British registered ships," has issued a " pre- liminary" report. The report is signed by all the Commissioners—namely, the Duke of Somerset, the Duke of Edinburgh, Mr. Liddell, M.P., Mr. Milner Gibson, Admiral Sir James Hope, G.C.B., Mr. Rothery, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Brassey, M.P., Mr. Denny, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Edgell, and Mr. Merrifield. The Commissioners begin by saying that, owing to the extent and number of the subjects included in their inquiry, they are not yet prepared to make a final report, but they believe that what they have done will show the diffi- culties by which the inquiry is surrounded, and will prepare the way for the legisla- tion which may be necessary. While keeping in view as their great object the preservation of life at sea, they deem it important to interfere as little as possible with the freedom of British enterprise, the inventive genius of the British ship- builder, and the property of British ship- owners, who have to compete with other mercantile communities. The number of British registered vessels is 36,804, their tonnage 7,213,829 tons, and the crews are computed at 329,000. In estimating the amount of trade, not only the tonnage, but the fact that with the employment of steamers a. greater number of voyages are made with fewer vessels, must be borne in mind. The annual loss of life is shown by the Wreck Register to be large; but to give the figures their proper value it must be shown what proportion the losses bear to the number of voyages and of persons afloat. The Commissioners find great diversity of opinion as to the over- loading of vessels. Many witnesses main- tain that ships are seldom overladen, and that overloading prevails only among coasters, while other witnesses hold that overloading exists to a serious extent, and that, under the present system of marine insurance, risk of life and property is encouraged, because ships can be over- laden with impunity. The large number of losses of ships in ballast and from collisions shows, however, that the mis- management and negligence of sailors are as disastrous as the carelessness of ship- owners. Overloading, without doubt, renders a ship unseaworthy, but there are many difficulties in the way both of a criterion of overloading and of legislation to prevent it. A compulsory load line, the prohibition of deck cargoes, and an inspection of merchant ships about to sail are remedies which have been sug- gested to the Commission. The suggestion of a compulsory load line involves con- siderations of the expediency of prescrib- ing to what extent ships may be loaded, of any rule or principle according to which the proper loading of a vessel can be defined, also of the expediency of marking a load-line on ships, and of the use to be made of a load-line so marked. " Over- loading " is a relative term, and an amount of cargo which would at one time of year be safe and necessary to a profitable voyage would at another be a foolhardy, venture. There is, however, a limit .be- yond which no sea-going vessel can safely be immersed. In proposing to fix a load- line it is necessary to distinguish between an extreme water-line, not to be safely exceeded under any circumstances, and a line which would make a vessel ordinarily safe. On this point there exists a general misconception by those who have not studied the subject. Some witnesses con- sider it practicable to lay down a simple general rule for fixing a load-line, others think it might be fixed by a Government officer in conjunction with the builder of the ship. The London Salvage Associa- tion countenances the rule of three inches of freeboard per foot of hold, and warns shipowners whose vessels are loaded be- yond that scale. The Liverpool Salvage Association adopts a similar principle, and it is said that this scale, being found practically convenient, might be legally enforced. On the other hand, experienced witnesses assert that such a rule would be unjust, and would lead to the building of light and weak ships, and thus to in- creased loss of life. One shipowner of great experience considered that a fixed load-line would compel the British owner to sell his ships or put them under a foreign flag, and owners of small coasters unanimously declare that such a law would ruin their trade and send them to the workhouse. The general opinion of the witnesses yet examined is unfavour- able to a fixed load-line. The Board of Trade now record the draught of water of merchant ships at several ports. In order to check overloading this system would have to be made complete by giving the Surveyors power to stop vessels. The detention of a ship about to sail would be so detrimental to business that it could only be justified by extreme necessity, and some rule as to loading would be better than the arbitrary opinion of an officer of the Board of Trade. Mr. Bun- dell, of Liverpool, " considered a uniform load-line to be an idea so absurd as not to admit of serious discussion," but sug- gested that ships should be marked at a spot which would leave one-fourth of their cubical capacity above water, the shipowner being still allowed to load at discretion. The Commissioners observe that this suggestion requires further con- sideration ; and, after mentioning some very manifest objections to it, they say that " they cannot recommend any enact- ment for establishing a fixed load-line founded on the proportion of free board to the depth of hold of the vessel." They reserve their opinion as to the possibility of any other scale of measurement till they are able to make their final report.

Coming to the subject of " deck car- goes," the Commissioners recapitulate the action taken by Parliament in former years. On the recommendation of a Committee which sat in the year 1839, timber ships from British ports of North.

America were prohibited carrying deck cargoes during the winter months. In 1850 the Navigation Laws, and in 1860 the differential duties on foreign timber were repealed; and, to contend against foreign competition, shipowners began to evade the Deck Law by building on their vessels large poops, which they filled with deals, and by obtaining their clearances in an American port. The Deck Law was constantly evaded; it was found impossible to enforce it, and in the year 1862 it was repealed. The Tonnage Laws excluded from measure- ment the uncovered space on deck, and thus encouraged deck cargoes. The Merchant Shipping Bills of 1869 and 1870 attempted to remedy this defect by imposing dues on uncovered space used for cargo, but these clauses were aban-doned in deference to the remonstrances made by the owners of cattle and coasting ! steamers carrying live stock on deck.

j Witnesses are unanimous in testifying to the danger of deck, cargoes across the Atlantic in winter, and shipowners admit the desirability of their prohibition, if it could be generally enforced; but they fear that a law against deck loads would be an advantage to foreign owners. It is desirable to ascertain by friendly com- munication with foreign Governments, whether a law against deck loads could be made general. The Canadian Parlia- ment "has lately regulated deck loads from Dominion ports during the winter months. Any measure is imperfect which does not impose a similar restriction on timber vessels from foreign ports, and there are grave objections against inflict- ing upon foreign ships penalties for bringing deck cargoes into English ports.

Other deck cargoes add to the dangers of navigation, but a legal prohibition of them would be a questionable policy.

There are many branches of trade, such as the carriage of live stock, in which an absolute prohibition of deck cargo would be an unreasonable interference with the business of shipowners.

The next heading of the Report is the " Survey of all British Merchant Ships." Some evidence supplied by Mr. Plimsoll as to the benefits of a survey of guano ships instituted by Messrs. Gfibbs, at Callao, is inconclusive, and " suggests caution in accepting as trustworthy evi- dence the imperfect recollection of past events." Seaworthiness cannot be secured by the inspection of a ship when laden, and even the Board of Trade surveys of emigrant and passenger ships have not prevented considerable loss of life from the foundering of such ships. These surveys are held for the protection of passengers, supposed to be ignorant of the condition of their vessels. " Are sailors," the Commissioners ask, " equally helpless, and should the Government extend to sailors the protection which is now afforded to passengers ?" The Com- missioners have taken much evidence on the policy of instituting a compulsory survey of all British ships. There is great competition in Marine Insurance, * between Lloyd's underwriters themselves, between these and other underwriters, and between underwriters and Marine j Insurance Companies. An underwriter .

may insure the ship, the cargo, or the freight. It has been suggested that, ! since insurance renders shipowners secure ! against loss, and therefore less careful | to make their vessels seaworthy, a limita- tion of the amount of insurance in pro- portion to the value of the ship would i tend to the security of life at sea.

The Commissioners consider " the prac- tical difficulties of any such measure very great, and the policy of such a re- striction doubtful." They give some reasons, and conclude by saying that, " after collecting evidence on this subject, we are of opinion that any attempt to limit the amount of insurance in pro- portion to the value of the ship would be found to be impracticable." The Com- missioners explain that the business of Lloyd's Registry is the classification of ships, and that while the classification is voluntary, the more favourable terms of insurance and freight which can be secured by a classification are a strong inducement to an owner to class his vessel. The Commissioners think it pro- bable that if Lloyd's system of survey and classification were made compulsory on all merchant vessels, many unseaworthy ships would be stopped. But there are many objections against giving the Com- mittee of Lloyd's Registry a control over the mercantile marine of the British empire.

It is said that the competition among Registry Societies at home and abroad exercises a bad influence, since the owner often applies to the Society which will class his vessel on most favourable terms.

Should Parliament decide on compulsory classification, these voluntary societies would have to be harmonized or super- seded by a Government Registry. To be effective a survey must be periodical and strict, must include the stowage of the . vessel, must be made at every de- parture, and must be enforced at foreign ports. Such an attempt to regulate com- merce would, it is said, induce owners to seek a foreign flag. Laws for regulating the number of watertight bulkheads and j of boats, for testing chain cables, and securing safety valves, have been passed and found ineffective and mischievous.

A compulsory classification must be based , upon rules, which, unless framed with great judgment, would interfere with im- provements in shipbuilding. If the Board of Trade were empowered to modify the rules from time to time, and to license vessels for particular trades, the British shipowner would be at a serious disad- vantage. On the other hand, it is con- fidently asserted that many hundred old wooden ships, which their owners will not repair, and which are unseaworthy, are now habitually sent to sea. These vessels are known to Lloyd's Surveyors, but no list exists of them, since they have been withdrawn from Lloyd's Register.

Under the Act of 1873, giving the Board of Trade power to inspect and detain ships which they have reason to believe are unfit to be sent to sea, these unseaworthy wooden ships, and vessels grossly over- laden, can be stopped. The condition of new iron vessels and of steamers is said to be a source of danger to seamen. M. Bal, Director of the Bureau Veritas, said that the percentage of loss in steam vessels had been greater than in sailing vessels, and Mr. Reed stated that there was a continuous degeneration in the iron used for shipbuilding. Mr. Reed advises Go- vernment supervision; but M. Bal would rely on private enterprise and voluntary association. The evidence of the Sur- veyor who surveys vessels taken up on account of the Indian Government shows, from an experience of twenty years, and the despatch of two hundred ships a year, that vessels well built and equipped, with the amount of freeboard and the carriage of dead weight regulated, and deck cargoes prohibited, can perform the voyage to India in almost perfect safety.

Lloyd's Register provides only for con- struction and equipment; but Salvage Associations include the loading of the vessel in their supervision. The Com- missioners explain the working of the London and Liverpool Salvage Associa- tions. The chief business of these Asso- ciations is the care of wrecks and wrecked property, and the protection of the mem- bers in matters arising out of contracts of insurance. The Association collects from its agents in different parts of the world a variety of information for the benefit of underwriters. It receives occa- sionally reports of fraudulent wrecks (but prosecutions in such cases are costly and uncertain), also reports of the state of vessels, of overloading, and of damaged cargoes. In cases of dangerous overload- ing the secretary calls the attention of the shipowner, usually with the desired effect. It is not unreasonable, say the Commissioners, to ask why, if the inter- vention of these private associations is so beneficially employed for the benefit of the underwriter, intervention cannot also be employed for the safety of sailors. After pointing out difficulties in the way of using the existing machinery of Lloyd's Register for the detection of unseaworthy ships, the Commissioners ask,— " On the other hand, would it be practicable, and if practicable would it be prudent, to enact that the Government should superintend the building of all merchant ships, and should inspect them periodically ? The supervision of the loading and the regulation of the stowage would become equally the duty of the Govern- ment. It is difficult to assign a limit to such in- terference, pressed upon the Government by bene- volent men, unacquainted with mercantile affairs, and forgetful of the infinite variety of causes which lead to disasters at sea." Pointing out that the Board of Trade have already the responsibility of detain- | ing all ships which they may have reason to believe unseaworthy, the Commissioners : conclude this part of their subject by saying that before they recommend addi- tional legislation for the regulation of merchant shipping, they are anxious to j obtain further information from expe-rienced men. Upon the subject of " Inquiries by the ; Board of Trade," the Report contains the j following passage:— " Mr. Pliinsoll stated that there had been few inquiries until the pressure of public opinion had constrained the Board of Trade to undertake their duties. In support of this allegation he said that there were only three inquiries in the year 1869.

A reference to the returns proves that in that year there were thirty-seven inquiries. We might, if necessary, point out many other inaccuracies in his statements, but he has the merit of having called attention to the loss of life which occurs in the mercantile marine from the culpable neglect of shipowners, as well as from other preventable causes. Some allowance may, therefore, be made for misstatements and exaggerations which we are obliged occasionally to notice." . The Commissioners consider that the present system of inquiry into wrecks is defective and needs remodelling, but will take more evidence before making recom- mendations. Under the head of " Defec- tive Construction of Ships' we read that " Competent witnesses state that many merchant ships are built with bad iron; that they are ill put together and sent to sea in a defective condition. It is also said that they are lengthened without additional strength, and are thus weak ships." In the race of competition among shipbuilders, it is probable, say the Com- missioners, that inferior materials and bad workmanship are admitted into ships.

Yet, if Parliament is to regulate the quality of iron, mode of construction, proportion of length to beam, &c., Government would have to interfere further, and license vessels for a particular trade.

" It is obvious that under such a system the Government would take upon itself the responsi- bility for the construction of merchant ships, and even for the conduct of the shipowner's business.

Some new iron steamers, from faulty construction or imperfect equipment, are sent to sea in a con- dition endangering human life. Should the Go- vernment, therefore, undertake to supervise the building of all merchant ships, and regulate the employment of vessels engaged in trade ? Before attempting such interference with the maritime commerce of the country, the more prudent course would be to observe the effect of the large power with which the Board of Trade has been recently invested. That Department may now detain any ship which, from the defective condition of her hull or equipments, may be believed by the Board of Trade to he unfit to proceed to sea. Such a measure, under careful administration, will afford a remedy for immediate dangers. The improve- ment of iron shipbuilding must be a slower pro- cess ; but the vigilance of a public Department instituting inquiries under a competent tribunal, and publishing the information obtained, would lead to remedying defects of construction, and diffuse a knowledge of the details of iron ship- building, which is said to be so much needed." Of the present law as to the measure- ment for tonnage, the Commissioners ob- serve that "it is in some respects un- favourable to the seaworthiness of ships." It operates as a direct inducement to the carriage of deck cargo, and discourages, it is said, the erection of awning decks, which improved a ship. But the whole subject of the tonnage laws is so full of difficulty, and touches so many interests, that no change can be made till it has been more fully discussed and investigated.

A section of the Report is devoted to " The state of the law as to the liability of shipowners." The course of legislation is traced, and it is stated that " the evi- dence before the Commission points to the conclusion that there should be the means of punishing shipowners through" whose negligence lives are lost, but Acts of Par- liament will not be of much use unless a Public Prosecutor be appointed or the Board of Trade strengthened for the per- formance of the duty." The Commis- sioners sum up the evidence of witnesses who have asserted the deterioration of seamen, and they condemn the advance- note system. With reference to the under- manning, they say they do not think it advisable to regulate by law the number of seamen to be carried in a vessel. They are unable yet to report fully under this head.

In concluding their preliminary Report, the Commissioners again draw attention to the material change in the law which has occurred since their appointment, and which gives the Board of Trade full powers to detain unseaworthy ships. Before recommending further legislation, they think it would be well to observe the effect of the new enactment.

The establishment of registry societies and salvage associations shows that, in the judgment of those conversant with trade, some inspection of ships-is required, and " such an extensive system of survey would not have been organized except from a well-founded conviction that many ships were unseaworthy from faulty con- struction, insufficient repair, or reckless overloading." Recapitulating the schemes suggested for a compulsory survey and classification of merchant shipping under Lloyd's or Government, and counter evi- dence "throwing doubt upon all such proposals," and tending to show that "Government interference would only make matters worse," the Commissioners end their preliminary Report by saying that " it involves a great principle of public policy which should not be adopted or rejected without a comprehensive and searching examination."—The Times.