Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1898-12-21
THE FULL REPORT
Recommendations of the Winter
Load=Line Committee.
THE EFFECT ON THIS PORT
Other Southern Points Effected. Baltimore
and Sorfolk Will Lose If the Report
is Adopted. Features of the
~ Situation Detailed.

is Adopted. Textures of the
Situation Detailed.
Newport News will be deprived of ben
Gifts that She has heretofore enioyed
over the ports farther north-that OF
loading several feet deeper in winter
owing to the more southern location Of
the port and its advantageous location
with regard to the course of the winter
storms.
The committee has made revision Of
the old rules and under it all seaports
north of HatteraS are placed on equal
fooung with regard to the depth of
loading vessels for foreign shores.
The London Board Of Trade is author
ity for all matters pertaining to ship
ping and as many Of the ships which
take cargoes from this port fly the Brit
ish flag it will be readily seen that its
final decision in the matter will have
the weight desired by the commercial
bodies Of New York. Boston and Phila-
delphia when they appealed to the Lon
don Board of Trade
The completed report here presented
for the benefit of its readers many of
whom are Interested in the settlement
5of this question.
% To consider the operation of the
North Atlantic winter frceboard as pre-
scribcd by the Load-Line Tables and to
report if any and il so, what nodifica-
ton is required in the Load-Line Ia
hles in the application Of such freeboartl
and to advise as to the area throughout
which such freGboard should be in
force
CD To examine the present mode of
assigning frceboards to vessels of the
sturret deck type and TO advise if any
modification bc necessary.
go to advise rs to the extension Of
the present IoadLine Tables for steam
vessels not having spar or awning
decks. so as to make them applicable
10 vessels of moulded depths up to As
feet
As regards the first question submit
ted to us We found no substantial diff
ference of opinion among those whom
We heard. and our own opinion is unan-
imous. We think that vessels. whether
they trade to and from ports north Of
~ 80 north lat or to or from ports ap-
preached by the entrance to Chesapeake
Bay, pursue practically the same course
across those portions of the Atlantic
where sea risk is the greatest, and nr:,c-
tically encounter the same dangers. We
are Of the opinion. therefore, that the
same re@ula tionS as to lOad-line should
be applied to vessels on both thase
routes ana to draw a distinction be-
tween them operates prejudially and
unfairly against the ports with regard
to which the severer rule is applied. We
recommend that the same rule should
be applied to all vessels trading TO and
from United States ports north of Cape
HatteraS
This raised the far more difficult ques-
ton submitted TO US by the second ref
erence-namely, what should be the
n Sal> Il
all these scorts, or, in other words,
should the load-line be extended to
ports south of 81 80 north lat, or should
some line between these extremes be
made universally applicable?
Although it might be expected that
the experience of the period during
which the ports approached by the en-
trance to Chesapeake Fay have enjoyed
immunity from a special load-line in
winter would. by q comparison between
the losses and casualties suffer respect
lively by vessels trading to and from
ports north of Chesapeake Bay With
those trading to and from the ports Of
Chesapeake Bay, have afforded much
guidance, we regret to say that availa-
BILE statistics appear to us not to be con-
elusive on the subject. We, think, in
deed. that. taken as a whole. they show
that the trade across the North Atlantic
has been conducted With an amount Of
freedom from loss which must be re
ssarded as fairly satisfactory, and. in
our opinion, there is nothing in these
statistics to prove that the immunity as
regards winter load-line enjoyed by
vessels trading With the ports of the
Chesapeake Bay has operated to pro-
duce relatively greater number Of
losses and casualties in the case OF those
vessels. But we cannot conceal from
ourselves that these statistics give in
60, =
possibly to some extent misleading be-
cause on the one hand it is not possible
to ascertain with any exactness to what
extent losses and casualties We're due
to overlooking, or on the other hand to
what extent there may not have been
injuries to seamen short OF loss Of life
and SO not finding their way into the
table of statistics, but nevertheless due
TO the effect of the sea on vessels ever
laden. We have found ourselves bound,
therefore, TO supplement the inference
To be drawn from these tables by the
experience and opinion of those CON
ncctcd with the trade. whether as ship
owners, insurers, or seamen. The result
mas been that some persons have form
cd the opinion that the immunity from
winter load-line existing in respect OF
ports within the entrance to Chesapeake
Bay might safely be extended to all
ports, or in other words that the spe-
ical load-line for winter in the North
Atlantic should be abolished. The CON
c:nsion, however, to which we have
come. on fun consideration OF the mat
ter, is that it will be safe and prudent
to so so far, but so far only. as to rec
ommend that the uniform rule of winter
lcad-lne be extended to ali ports north
of Cape IIatteras should be reduced
ana that from it vessels CT the larger
type should be exempted
We We're mainly led to this conclusion
ny finding 4 concensus OF opinion that
of late years the vessels navigating the
Atlantic have been greatly enlarged and
improved. and that with regard to these
vessels Il rule properly Applicable 10