Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-08-06

The following letter from the supervising
inspector-general TO Mr.. G. N. Scott is a COM
plete refutationo of certain ISLANDERS that are
current among some steamboatmen on the
Ohio:
OFFICE SUPERVISING INsPEcToR-GEsERAL or
STEAMBOATS,,
WASHINGTON, D.. c., July 81, 1882.
Captains sahs G Piiot, s ears s'G ffio St; ssais and Ro SsT s IS,
southwestcorner Market and Fourth Streets, st.
Louis, Mo-:
DEAR SIR-Your letter OF the 29th in
slant, with newspaper slipr inclosed, reached
your very sensible defense of the present
Western pilot rules. When the rule was
changed, in 1880, / gave the casting vote in
its favor because l believed it a sensible
thing 10 do. / should very much regret to
think 1 had made a mistake by 80 doing, yet
would acknowledge it at once if any con-
vincing reasons should be offered therefor,
but up 10 the present time no such reasons
have been offered. There have been asser-
lions plenty, but none supported by a parti-
Gle of evidence.
/ regret that the pilots at Pittsburg should
be in such haste to charge the Scioto disaster
10 the change, particularly so in advance of
the decision of the inspectors, who are
legally examining into the cause OF that dis
aster. 1t may have been caused by the
change of rules, as charged, or it may not,
but in the absence of any testimony upon
the subject / would be inclined to adopt the
second reason given by yourself as to the
csuse-that il was caused by cupidity and
stupidity-namely, the cupidity Of the own
ers in hiring cheap men, and the stupidity of
The pilots in not understanding SO simple a
rule.
You say that you have been connected
with navigation ffty-three years. You are,
therefore, my senior by eight years. / have
been connected with the navigation OF steam
and sail vessels forty-fve years, from cabin
boy through all the grades up to pilot, mas
ter, and owner OF steam vessels. Therefore
I think / have a right to claim some practi-
cal knowledge on matters relating to pilots.
The most bitter opponent OF the change
was a supervising inspector (now out OF the
s~ervice) whose whole experience as a navi-
gator was obtained while employed as q
quartermaster in the army during the war,
and as q railroad conductor 2fterward, up to
the time of his appointment as supervising
inspector. Even he admitted the logic of
the changes, but said that the pilots had been
so long accustomed to the old rule that the
blunders they would make in trying TO ac-
custom themselves to the new would more
than Offset the benefits to be derived from
the change; besides, he said, "the pilots, as
a class, were too ignorant and lacking in in
telligence 10 readily comprehend the change"
These may not be the exact words, but the
words used were of the same import.) Al
though thoroughly convinced OF the neces-
sity of the change, I might have abetsined
from voting, and thereby let the motion he
lost, had it not been for the assertion 1 have
| quoted. Therefore / gave my vote, first, be-
cause I approved the motion; and, second,
because 1 wished 70 indicate by my vote my
| contempt for the Islander upon the profession
to which / had slwsys considered it a n honor
to belong.
In regard to the other matter to which you
| refer, and relative to which We have had
| correspondence heretofore, / desire TO &C.
knowledge the points made by on, which
| believe will never be remedied until differ
emit method of appointing officers OF ths
steamboat inspection service is adopted
Please find inclosed the two last annual re
ports from this office. Upon marked page
therein will be found views upon the subiec
referred to. Very respectfully,
JAMES A DUAONT,
Supervising Inspector-General-