utes. I would give precisely the opposite signal to a pilot-boat. I would give to a pilot-boat a short and a long. The proposition of the board of trade committee is that as the communication signal may not be learned so readily as the danger-signal, they shall begin with the short. I propose to give to the pilot a short and a long. By transposing these two signals I think they would be readily learned and there would be very littly confusion amongst the signals which you have already chosen. But that is altogether apart. I only put out the characteristics of the signal with a view to counteracting the impression which might be in the minds of some of the delegates when they see that we have proposed a short, short, long for both boats. Now, I will tell you why we did not propose these simpler characters in the committee. This simpler signal of two sounds, a short and a long, has been chosen in London by the committee of which I was one of the members, and we did not like to interfere with one of the very important characters. But still we must not view it as a selfish busi ness. These signals have only been put forward, and the several characters are not yet adopted by the several countries. Each country still has to consider them. And if we here consider that our signal for a pilot is of sufficient importance to adopt this signal, then we have the right to adopt it. I have been rather long, but I thought it was necessary just to allude to the character and then to leave it to the ConferThese characters will have to be adopted if the Conference is prepared to adopt a signal for a ship wanting a pilot. ence. Mr. CARTER (Hawaii). Mr. Chairman, I only rise to say that we are just in the position I prophesied. We have given the pilot a signal and now we must give the boat wanting a pilot a signal. It seems to me that of the two parties the one anxiously seeking a pilot was the one to be preferred, and although I think we are, on general principles, multiplying the signals to too great an extent, I really do not see how I can stand before the Conference, which in the plenitude of its wisdom has deliberately voted to give the pilot a signal, and refuse to give the signal to the man who is seeking a pilot. My convictions are against it; but under the circumstances I am compelled to stop the argument. Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, in stating how I wish to vote upon this, I wish, if I may do so, to imitate my learned friend on my right, and to give a similar reason. It appears to me that we are rather putting the cart before the horse. We have determined that a pilot-boat shall give a signal without first determining whether the vessel who wants the pilot is to give a signal. It seems to me that it is much more important that the vessel which wants the pilot should give the signal for the pilot. In the first place, if she is a steamer she can give a much more powerful signal, which can be heard a much greater distance. A pilot-boat signal will not probably be heard half the distance of that of an ordinary steamer. I see at once that we are in favor of a vessel wanting a pilot giving the signal. But now you have put as into this position: You have increased the number of signals by giving a pilot-boat a signal. We are in this dilemma: The Conference has just adopted what we think is an objectionable principle, that is, increasing the number of these signals so much. On the other hand, we do not like to refuse to give a signal to the vessel which we think ought to have it, and that is to the vessel which requires a pilot. If the vessel which requires the pilot gives the signal you may be certain the pilot-boat will come to it without sounding any signal at all, and the vessel wanting a pilot is able to give a much more powerful signal. She will not wait to hear the signal of the pilot-boat, but she will keep on sounding her own signal as she goes up. Captain NORCROSS (United States). Mr. Chairman, It does not seem to me that the vessel requiring the pilot wants a signal. When she hears the pilot-signal she will make her way in that direction. It has been many times in my experience after a long passage from the Pacific or Eastern seas to be obliged to heave to and lay many hours because I could not locate a pilot. Certainly if I could have done so I should put my ship's head in the direction of the sound, thankful that such a signal was contained in the general rules of the road. With the difficulty of finding special signals I think this can be safely waived in favor of some greater requirement. The CHAIRMAN. Is the Conference ready for the question? The proposition is that a special signal shall be given to the vessel requiring a pilot in a fog. The question was put to the Conference upon the adoption of the principle and it was carried. Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, I now move, in consequence of this decision, a resolution to which I referred before the Conference adjourned for recess to-day. It has already been pointed out, I think, sufficiently clearly and distinctly that this discussion has no connection whatever with the rules of the road. My resolution is as follows: That the Conference being of the opinion that sound-signals should be adopted to be given by and for pilots in thick weather and a fog, that Committee No. 2 be requested to consider and report as to the nature of such signals and to confer with the Sound-Signal Committee thereon. The CHAIRMAN. You have heard the proposition of the delegate from Great Britain? The question on the resolution of the delegate from Great Britain was put to the Conference and carried. Mr. CARTER (Hawaii). Mr. Chairman, the time has come for the adjournment, and as this is the only business to be transacted this afternoon I beg to ask the members of the Committee No. 2 to meet immediately upon the adjournment of the Conference. Admiral NARES (Great Britain). The Sound-Signal Committee is to join them. Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. Chairman, while I know that the only subject before the Conference was the special order which has just been discussed, I think it expedient to present the following resolution, with the permission of the members, and I present it for the purpose of having the subject brought before the Conference. The Conference may either discuss it now or wait until the next meeting. It is this: Resolved, That, in the opinion of the Conference, it is inexpedient to adopt course, indicating sound-signals in foggy or thick weather, because among the other strong reasons presented by the Sound-Signal Committee, if such signals were used in crowded waters dangers would result from the uncertainty and confusion produced by the multiplicity of signals and from the false security which would be created in the minds of mariners. Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, I beg to support that resolution most heartily. I was under the impression, and I think many of us are under the impression, that the Conference has already decided in an unmistakable way upon that very point, but so far as I am aware, and I have endeavored to look through my notes which I have made during the meetings of the Conference, we have not actually passed a resolution to that effect. I think it would be most desirable if we were to put this matter completely at rest. We have had a very able report from the Sound-Signal Committee, which is before us, and so far as I am aware, since the presentation of that report, and the very conclusive reasons which were advanced therein, no member of this Conference has argued in favor of course-indicating sound-signals. I think we are all of one mind upon the fact. I certainly should not ask the Conference to give its decision upon it unless I thought that we were absolutely unanimous upon the point; but if that be so, let us put it upon the record so that there shall be no doubt as to the opinion of the Conference upon this important subject. Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. Chairman, I desire to call out no great discussion on this but I want to call the attention of the Conference to the very strong report of the Committee on Sound-Signals which was dated October the 31st, where, on the second page, at the bottom of the page, the committee states: "Until seamen are able to localize a sound with as great precision as they can the position of a light or object seen visually, the results to the mercantile marine from the adoption of a system of course-indicating fog-signals are in the opinion of the committee a doubtful advantage. The chief use would appear to be to give facilities to approaching vessels, when not in sight of one another, and therefore when not certain of one another's position, to continue their respective courses without having first localized the direction and distance off of the neighboring ship, and for the two vessels to try to pass close to each other without taking the precaution of first reducing or, if necessary, stopping their way through the water." Later on, on page 3, the committee say: "The committee are of opinion that, however simple an adopted system of course-indicating sound-signals may be, and however distinct in character the symbols chosen are from the signals now authorized and used, if vessels were navigated in dependence on them, when neither can see the other, there would be a danger of the officer in charge reading the signal incorrectly; or, if read correctly, of interpreting it wrongly. "Further, if such signals were in use in crowded waters, we apprehend that danger would result from the uncertainty and confusion produced by the multiplicity of signals, and from a feeling of false security that would be created in the minds of many." I have imported into the resolution the final paragraph which I have just read. It was stated to me with a good deal of force the other day, by a gentleman who was very urgent to have these course-indicating signals adopted, that the primordial protoplasm of this Conference was the necessity of having course-indicating sound-signals in a fog adopted. Therefore, I have presented this resolution that the public may know, if this resolution is adopted, that, although the Conference have given the most careful study to the subject, not only around the board but in the committee-room, they are of the opinion, perhaps unanimous, that the time has not come for the adoption of any such course-indicating soundsignals. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands that before recess it was decided to close the Conference after the business which has already terminated. Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to present this resolution. Mr. CARTER (Hawaii). Mr. Chairman, I would simply point out that some of the delegates may have remained away this afternoon who would perhaps like to be present before any action was taken upon this resolution. Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. Chairman, then I will postpone it. I will let it lie over and be printed. Admiral BOWDEN SMITH (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, may I give notice on behalf of my colleague, Captain Mensing, that he would like to have his committee meet at 10 o'clock to-morrow morning? He is not well enough now to come himself. The SECRETARY. I am directed by the President of the Conference to say that, owing to the illness of Lieutenant Baba, he has appointed his colleague, Mr. Tsukahara, on the Committee on Collocation. Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. Chairman, I move that the Conference adjourn until Monday morning at 11 o'clock. The Collocation Committee will meet to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that for Monday we might perhaps fix some order of business so that we may be prepared? There are several reports of committees in the hands of the members, and have been for nearly a week. I suppose that we might deal with them on Monday morning after dealing with the resolution as to course indicating sound-signals, which I suppose will come first. I would suggest that we take up then the reports of the several committees which have sent them in and which we have had time to consider, so that the delegates may know what business to be prepared to discuss when we meet. The CHAIRMAN. Will the delegate from Great Britain indicate what part he would like to have taken up? Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, there are two already in our hands, the Load Line Committee and the International Maritime Commission report. Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. Chairman, I would like to have that arranged in such a manner that the report of the Collocation Committee shall have precedence whenever it is ready for presentation; because while we have the rules of the road in our mind it is probably wise for us to finish with the report. I think the Collocation Committee will be able to present the printed report to members on Monday morning; and unless some one objects I shall ask that it be taken up Monday morning. Dr. SIEVEKING (Germany). Mr. Chairman, I would like to remark that I do not think it would be very advisable to deal with the report of the Collocation Committee as soon as it has been-handed in. If it is handed in on Monday morning, as it will be perhaps, it would be wiser to allow the members of the Conference four, five, or six days' time to consider it, as it really is very important to consider every item and every word in that report. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would state that there are two committee reports, one on the load line and one on Division No. 13, which have been completed and handed in. Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. Chairman, of course I am very anxious that the delegates should have ample time to consider the report of the Collocation Committee; but I should think that forty-eight hours would be ample time to consider simply a question of verbiage. No question of principle is involved in the report of the Collocation Committee. It is merely verbiage, the principle being determined by the Conference. I apprehend that it is a matter which the delegates will not require very many days to consider. It is a pure matter of verbiage and nothing else. Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. Chairman, I can not agree with the learned delegate from Great Britain in considering the work proposed to us strictly as a matter of verbiage. There is a work before us in its entirety, which we are going to review thoroughly. Before submitting this law to our various governments, it will be necessary for us to see how its various component parts are adjusted among each other. It seems to me that it will be necessary to cast a glance over the entire edifice, and |