The Arkansas banner., 1849-12-11
s,-.m Ro., rsplo.aou.


 f+ steam Boat Explosion.
 When from every quarter ths news of disssten from Steam Boat explosions reach us. aad the eaass and remedy k so earnestly investigated throughout shs county, we take up with interest the following article from the N. O. Crescent. in relation ts the r.csnt calamity in that city.
 The judicial investigations have ended without fnding any legal responsibility Tor the explosion on ho.rd the Louisiana It Is certain that no ndivid- usl will ever be proved to be the author, by act Of neglect cad that no legal penalties will ever be ina- Dosed The direct cause of the explosion iss more over still undetermined, although there is vague impression that 1t the want of water In the boil srs As the immediets horror of the event fades avay the strong feeling for instant action to pro- vide against the possible recurrence oi such murder ous accidents becomes weaker. What we hear pro- oo.ed is a memorial to Congress, asking for amend- rpents to the law and such other safe guards Inc SC, of Congress supply. against seihshness and ueelixsnce. The present laws, which have In their y,sw inc prevention of the explosion of boiI- srs have been often ceusurod by practical men, as inefficient. To suggest remedy, it Is important first to know what the law is, and what are the de- fleets alleged The Report of the late CommissiOn- CT of Patents, made last December, in reply to a cali of the Senate rscspituates the provisions of the laws. and states the objections made tO them by scientific and practical msa. We eOndenso from that document.
 The laws in force are those of July [, 1898. and March }, Is43 The latter refers only to the stsering" of steam vessels. By ths law of lS3S, the U 5. District Judge appoints Inspectors of steam vessels. boilers and machinery. It has been objected that the District Judge s by education and parsnits,. and often by the inconsistent svidence, seldom qualified to make fit appointment, or to know the qualifications of applicants. A sabstituts tor this appointing power mas been suggested in q local board of men, of skill and experience in the appropriate manufactures, and that the inspectors oi hus should be distact from that of boilers and machinery board of practical engineers is re- commented as the appointing power and 1t Is proposed that the same board should decide on the qualifications of engineers, whose certificates shall be necessary to authorize the employment on board of say steamboat of any person. as engineer.
 The section which regulates the inspection ol huils by government officer, is thought to be sa- perauous IL is thought that the inspections by the insurance offices Is sufficient, especially as it is a- ways mors regarded than that by any government ofbcer Some recommend that these inspectors, in steamboat cases, should be paid by the government By the hfth section of the law, inspectors are re- quired to make certificate as to the sounduess of the boilers, and to furnish tho master or owner with duplicate. The Cincinnati Association of Engi- has expressed the opinion that the gre worthless. Hence, the certificate only begets false of security The strength of boilers de Peads So much upon circumstances of thickness, strength, value of the particular metal used and other ceamstaRces in which no standa I'd has bee n laid down. that certificate Is of little practical value
 The intervals 4t which inspections are directed to be made are very unsafe criticism. The fact is well known that boilers may be fatally njured..du lag single trip, without explosion; yet, frequent ~R Ina t.xfs many cases useless, and operate vexatiously upon ths owner The most frequent ecommendation is, that the inspectors receive their fees from the boat for the setni-aanual examinations, and have in ad- dition, small annual salary from the government, Ia consideration of which they shall visit and inspect every vessel as Il arrives in port.
 section in the law requires the safety-vaIve to De opened whenever the vessel stops for any pur pose whatever. Engineers say thus rule, followed invariably, would produce explosions; and they give good scientific reasons for their opinion.
 he penalties provided in the law are strong, too snong 70 De enforced by luries. It Is impossible to ma Jnres 10 convict men of manslaughtsr for a crime so difficult to be proved negligence, and for consequences in which the party accused bears his equal snare of the danger. So the section sghich makes an explosion pYimG fecle evidence of negIi gence, in civil action for injuries and losses. is harsh and not only difficult to be enforced, but fl eatofced' liable to drive responsible per out oi the business
 The Commissioner, after rsciting these objections 10 the law, concludes tha, although they are in the maia well founded, they are not likely to be reme. oeo oy iegislatiou, on the ground that "by de- seendng to the details of ma nagemsnt in matters which 1t cannot be the best judge. the law sublecu i'e to the charge of oppression or lays itself OpeI to cOntempt''
 II constructors or engineers could be made com petent and careful there would be no necessity fo minute directions and when they are not SO. n isgsaiiOn can protect the public against :he quences Of their misconduct. For 1t is not to supposed that man who would neglect his duty a tho risk of his own life. would be induced 10 perforu h Sy ths superior motives of respect to law.