feet 8 inches wide; and, by resolution of the Canal Board, are restricted to a draft not exceeding six feet below the surface of the water. Their heights above water are likewise regulated, so that no part of the boat or load shall exceed 114 feet above the surface of the water.

Boats navigating the old canals are built 78 feet long and 14 feet wide, and are restricted to a draft of 3 feet below the surface of the water, no part of the load or boat being allowed to exceed 9 feet above the surface.

The heavier built boats on the Erie canal weigh 75 tons, and the boat and cargo of the largest class 290 tons. The scow boats on the Genesee Valley and other non-enlarged canals weigh about 30 tons, and the boat and cargo some 110 tons.

AUTHORIZATION, COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION.

In the following table will be found the dates of the authorizing acts, the dates of commencing and completing each work, and the cost as estimated by the engineers, and the actual cost, with the average annual cost of repairs per mile:

The Genesee Valley Canal was completed to Dansville November 1, 1842; to Olean, November 1, 1856; and to Millgrove Pond, December, 1861. The Champlain Canal, between Fort Edward and the Lake, was opened November 24, 1819, and the whole completed as above in 1822.

TOLLS RECEIVED AND COST OF REPAIRS.

The total amount of tolls received on all the canals from 1821 to the close of 1865 has been.

Cost of repairs, 181-665.....

Tolls, 1821-65, less cost of repairs.........

$93.943,120 21.035,519

The amount of tolls received and the cost of repairs annually for the twenty years ending September 30, 1865, are shown in the annexed summary table:

Amount of tolls. $2,788,134

Cost of Fiscal
repairs. year.

Amount
of tolls.

Cost of repairs, $606.932

$2,719,926

1848

3,153,614

687,793 | 1858.

2,045,443

890,442

This shows the average rate of cost of repairs to amount of tolls in the the ten years, 1846-55, was 22.13 per cent., and in the ten years, 185665, only 21.53 per cent. The ratio for the last decade would have been much lower but for the extraordinary expenses in 1865 to repair the damages done by the spring freshets.

COLLISION AT SEA.

Collisions between steam vessels have lately been of frequent occurrence, as well as attended by fatal and disastrous consequences, demonstrating either the existence of grave defects in our maritime code, or gross dereliction of duty on the part of these in charge of these vessels. In some of these instances the culpability has been fixed, but in others the responsibility remains undetermined. It is of the highest importance that the official regulations for the prevention of collisions with steamers should be efficient beyond all bounds of doubt. That there is, however, a prevailing belief that the code of directions is imperfect, is evident from the opinions of several eminent nautical men, and may justify the publication of the views of one whose nearly half-a-century's nautical experience entitles him to treat on this subject. We refer to Mr. E. C. Rutter, a retired officer of her Majesty's Postal Packet Service, now residing at Dover, who not only points out the defects in our maritime code, but suggests modified regulations by which he contends collisions may always be avoided, and he adduces as evidence of their practical value his successful working of the system for more than thirty years in the navigation of the narrowest and most crowded part of the British Channel. His suggestions have also found favor with several naval officers and members of Parliament to whom they have been explained, and they have undertaken to bring the matter before the Board of Trade, the marine authorities of which will doubtless investigate them, with the view, if they are found practicable, to their official promulgation.

Mr. Rutter states, that of six "situations" of steamers set forth in the Admiralty directions (1847), only the last one provides a correct and safe rule for preventing collisions, viz. : that when two steamers meet end on to each other, both are to put their helms to port." No. 1 gives directions to one vessel only, and that to lead to collision when the vessels are near, and to incur risk when much apart. No. 2 represents two vessels at right angles, already safe, being half across each other, but makes no rules for their courses being right-angled instead of their hulls, which is a position of danger. Nos. 3 and 4 represents vessels approaching each other in direct opposite but parallel courses, where the vessel would pass each other if continued so, but omits to provide for the contingency of their being transverse, which is not indicated by the side lights that are of the same color in both vessels in either of these cases. If the latter happened, it would be likely to cause accident by one vessel crossing the other, and therefore a rule ought to be provided for both commanders to act by, though none is given, it being merely stated that the vessels are passing each other to starboard or to port, because the side lights are of corresponding colors to each other. No. 5 represents two vessels approaching each other on oblique courses, but gives

a rule to one commander only, and that, too, for him to put his helm the very way most likely to produce collision; while no direction is given to the other commander, who is left to chance, in what is often a critical emergency, requiring correct and prompt action in both officers.

The object wanted for the security of lives and property is that both officers of steam vessels meeting each other in the night should have a rule of action prescribed and known by both, so that each might know with certainty how the other was going to put his helm, so as to act himself with confidence accordingly. Mr. Rutter has drawn a set of seven diagrams, which he says comprises every possible case of contingent difficulty between steamers, and from these he deduces four clear and safe practical rules for universal guidance in all

cases.

The first case to be provided against is two vessels coming end on to each other on the same line of track, when each will see the three lights in a triangu lar form on board the other, in which by both putting their helms to port they will pass on the portside of each other.

The next case is when coming in opposite directions, but in different and parallel lines of track, in which position each will see only one side-light of the other, but both will be of the same color. In this case both vessels must go clear of each other while their lights are kept of the same color, the only danger being in altering the helms, for if one put to starboard and the other to port a collision would be inevitable.

The third case is when two vessels are steering across at right angles, or directly athwart each other, but showing themselves ahead, in which position the relative lights will be of different colors; that they are approaching in a right angle direction will be manifested by rapidly changing the bearing of each other's lights; for, as the direction one is coming in having no relation to the speed of the other, in consequence of its point-blank progress towards the other's broadside, it seems like a fixed light to the other, whose speed alone causes the rapid alteration of the bearing; consequently, if an officer sees another steamer's lights thus rapidly altering when not more than two points before the beam, he knows she will quickly be abaft it, and there is no danger of collision. He could, however, bring the light abaft the beam immediately by putting his helm the opposite way to the other vessel's light. The principal danger begins in proportion as an opposite vessel's light bears more than two points before the beam, except when about two points from right ahead, because the rapid change of bearing is produced by the speed of the other vessel, which will as quicly cross the bow as she would be abaft in the former case; only in this instance a change of helm would be highly dangerous, for the officer must point right at the other vessel before he could get under his stern, and unless he had considerable space to do it in, collision would be certain. In all cases of such bearing, the only safe and sure way is for both to put their helms hard over opposite ways, as indicated by opposite lights, and to stop their engines, or at least, to have only sufficient way to draw their heads round till their broadsides come abreast of each other, which precaution is especially necessary when the vessels are in close proximity. The vessels must be very close for a collision to happen at all; but, even if it did occur, the vessels thus coming in contact sideways the collision could not be a serious one.

THE

MERCHANTS' MAGAZINE

AND

COMMERCIAL REVIEW.

DECEMBER, 186 6.

THE COTTON TAX AND THE INDUSTRIES OF THE NORTH.

We are pursuaded that the effect of the cotton tax on Northern interests has not been sufficiently considered. It is customary to look at this impost as one merely of revenue, shutting out from view entirely its influence upon our own industries. The argument sustaining it has always been based on the idea that the tax was not paid by the North, nor even by the South, but that it was collected in great part out of the European consumer. There are, however, weighty reasons, at present apparently lost sight of, why the North should question the expediency of this tax, and demand that the policy or impolicy of it be brought under the immediate and earnest consideration of Congress.

It must be clear, we think, by this time that the Liverpool manufacturer cannot be compelled to pay the tax. Before the war we had a monopoly; our cotton drove out all competition. No country could produce the staple in sufficient quantities, as good or as cheap as we could. A tax of three cents then, would have been easily collected. The planter could have added it to his price without materially affecting the production in other countries. A four years cotton famine has, however, worked a very decided change. Now, instead of monopolizing the trade, we have many competitors. Even the India staple, which was supposed to be incurably defective, has been improved, and English machinery has been far better adapted for working it, the war having developed methods of using India cotton not before known. Then, again,