be reprinted in the original French perhaps it would be better. I do not know whether that would be allowed or not.

The PRESIDENT. The delegate from the United States moves that this particular subject be reprinted in the original French instead of the copy which we have before us, because the translation is not a good one. Is the Conference ready for the question?

The question was put to the Conference on the motion of the delegate from the United States, and the motion was carried.

The PRESIDENT. The subject will be reprinted in the original French. The next question for consideration is the report on General Divisions, 2, 4, and 6, of which Captain Sampson is the chairman. Has he any suggestions to make in regard to the report?

Captain SAMPSON (United States). No, sir.

The PRESIDENT. The next report in order will be the report of Committee No. 2 on General Divisions 7 and 8.

Mr. CARTER (Hawaii). Mr. President, I would like to call attention to one or two errors which will be corrected in the subsequent edition of the report on General Division 8. In the note signed by the five members of the committee, explaining their signature to the report, the word "special" should come in the last line as to the desirability of giving special signals to be used with fog horns. On the last page, in the signal code J K should come first. The signals N P and J K should be transposed.

The PRESIDENT. Will the delegate from Hawaii please state his corrections again?

Mr. CARTER (Hawaii). Mr. President, on page 25 the word "special" should be inserted before the word "signals" in the third line of the note which is signed by the five members of the committee, so that it should read:

"The undersigned desire to report that in signing the above report they do so without prejudice to the opinions they hold as to the desirability of giving special signals to use with fog-horns on board pilotvessels."

It should be "with fog-horns" instead of "on fog horns." On page 30, the signal "JK" should come before the signal "N P." Those two sentences should be transposed, bringing the signal "N P" in the second place instead of the first. The signal "J K," two short blasts and a long blast, should come before the signal "N P," three short blasts and a long blast.

The PRESIDENT. The next report for consideration is that of the Committee on Collocation of Rules.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, on the first page of the report of the committee, in the last two paragraphs, reference is made to the note to be appended to the report, marked Appendix B. That appendix is not yet printed, but probably will be handed in to S. Ex. 53-65

day or to-morrow. On page 7, subdivision f, the last line but one, after the word "anchor," insert a comma. On page 12, the first heading, "Sound-signals for vessels in sight of one another," should come in after Article 28; in other words, at the head of Article 29. The Conference will understand that the note to be appended to the report, marked Appendix B, is to embrace the recommendations dealt with by the Committee on Lights, of which Admiral Kaznakoff is the chairman, and one or two notes which form no part of the regulations themselves, but are to be appended to the report; so that they are not necessary to be used in the consideration of the rules as presented by the committee.

The PRESIDENT. These reports are now before the Conference, and the Chair will entertain any motion with regard to them.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, of course I understand that we shall want some little time to consider these reports. Some of them are very important, and unless there is some special report which the members are willing to take up to-day, they had bet ter be suspended for the present. As they are important enough to form a division of the programme, I suggest that they be laid over. There is a subject with which we can occupy a part of the time this morning, and that is the report of the Collocation Committee upon the amendment proposed by the delegate from Norway.

The PRESIDENT. The report of the Committee on Lights with regard to that matter has not yet been received, and will not be in until midday.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, let me call the attention of the Conference to this fact. In the interlocutory report of the Collocation Committee, reference is made to that amendment as Article 3(g). That, of course, is correct according to the condition of the amendment as it was submitted to the Collocation Committee; but that paragraph will now form, if passed, sub-division ƒ of Article 2, the articles having been renumbered. The committee have left it out from their report because it is not yet adopted, the article having been reconsidered. The PRESIDENT. Does the Conference desire to have any of the report read?

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I was about to make a motion to that effect with regard to one of these reports, because I apprehend that it is very possible that the report of Committee No. 2, dealing with General Division 7, the one with regard to lanes for steamers on frequented routes, might be dealt with, if it should be read by the Secretary. It might be possible that we would be able to have all the discussion which is required upon that report now. I do not suggest for a moment that it should be taken up without discussion, for I do not know whether the delegates have read it. I have read it myself this morning, and it appears to me that the matter is conclusively dealt with in the report. It is very short, and perhaps the delegates will

be able to say whether they wish to have time to read it over again before dealing with it. I only want to take the sense of the Conferenee upon that. The report appears to me to be very clear and concise, and to deal with all the matters which have been referred to the committee. I would only suggest that we might consider this, as we have nothing to occupy the time until the receipt of the report of the Committee on Lights, which will not be received until nearly midday. We might, therefore, occupy our time in reading this report and seeing whether or not we could deal with it now, or whether, after it has been read, it is necessary to postpone it.

The PRESIDENT. Does the delegate suggest that the report and the appendices be read?

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). No, sir; only the report of Committee No. 2, and only that part of the report dealing with General Division 7.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, may I ask, in order to finish all the amendments at present before the Conference, the attention of the Conference to the fact that the new section, proposed by myself on November 26, in regard to the necessity of requiring vessels to stand by each other in case of a collision, was postponed until the coming in of the report of the Committee on Life-Saving Systems and Devices. That report is now in, and I should like to have the matter considered, so that the subject can go to the Collocation Committee, unless the learned delegate from Great Britain desires the other course to be pursued.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I certainly prefer that the amendment of my learned friend, the delegate from the United States, should be taken up for consideration.

The PRESIDENT. You can not consider that until you have read this Leport.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, I have had a moment's conference with the chairman of the Committee on Life Saving Systems and Devices, and he calls to my attention, as I call to the attention of the Conference, the first page of that report. I will read the first paragraph in order that we may understand the bearing of it upon the amendment which I have offered:

"Saving of life and property from shipwreck at sea. "(a) Duties of vessels after collision."

"What these duties are is obvious enough. Common humanity requires that the colliding vessels should remain by each other and render all needed assistance so long as they can do so consistent with their own safety. Experience shows, however, that masters of vessels frequently take advantage of the circumstances attending such disasters to escape from the scene without identification, in order to avoid responsibility. Several of the maritime nations have therefore imposed upon them the legal obligation of performing these natural duties. The extent to which they are evaded, where such legal requirements do not exist, is probably not generally appreciated. The committee have had

before them statistics of one such country, which shows that in 8 per cent. of the collisions reported, the master got away without being known. In these instances there was loss of life upon some of the vessels so abandoned; some of them went down, and all suffered damage. "It would seem, then, that any effective measure which might prevent such a practice, or make it less frequent, would not only be in the interest of humanity, but also aid in securing justice in regard to the rights of property. The committee, therefore, are of opinion that in case of collision between two vessels, the master or person in charge of each vessel, should be required, so far as he can without danger to his own vessel, crew, or passengers, to stay by the other vessel until he has ascertained that she has no need of further assistance, and to render to the other vessel, her master, crew, and passengers, such assistance as may be practicable and necessary in order to save them from any danger caused by the collision; and also to give to the master, or person in charge of the other vessel, the name of his own vessel, and of her port of registry, or of the port or place to which she belongs, and the name of the ports or the places from which and to which she is bound.

"So far as the committee can learn, the laws of those countries which have taken action upon the subject are to the above effect, substantially agreeing in defining the duties of masters, although the infraction of the law is differently dealt with in the different countries.

"In expressing the foregoing opinion the committee are unanimous, but a minority think the Conference should indicate what, in their opinion, the penalty of failure to comply with the duties prescribed should be. The majority, however, do not deem this necessary, believing that the consequences of disobedience to their laws can and will be properly taken care of by the several governments, without suggestion from the Conference.

"For the information of the Conference, the enactments of Great Britain upon the subject, which prescribe severer penalties for disregard of the duties imposed than those of any other nation, are appended to this report. (See Appendix A.)"

Now, Mr. President, in regard to this section---

Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, I rise to a point of order. It was established by one of our rules that no report and no amendment should be discussed unless forty-eight hours had elapsed between the presenting of the amendment and its discussion. Now quite a number of reports have been distributed among us. In order to be able to discuss them it will be absolutely necessary that we have time to read them. I certainly would have no objection to discuss the amendment itself were not a question of principle involved which it is important to observe. We are at this moment on the point of discussing one of the reports with which we were furnished this morning. Therefore, if we discuss this one we may be led to discuss all the other reports. I have no special objection to discuss the amendment itself as it was presented some time ago, but the Conference having previously decided that this amendment should be taken up for discussion simultaneously with the report on Life-Saving Systems and Devices, pursuant to the rule with which our discussions are governed, we should not discuss it until at least forty-eight hours after the said report has been presented.

The PRESIDENT. The delegate from France desires the matter to lie

over.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, I have no objection to its lying over if any delegate desires it.

Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I apprehend that there is some slight mistake here. I did not understand that the learned delegate for the United States wants to discuss this report at all, but he proposes to discuss his amendment. This amendment was postponed until this report should be handed in, and unless there is something in the report which would make it undesirable to discuss that amendment, or something against the principle of that amendment, I do not see why we can not discuss it, as we have had it before us for a fortnight. I understand that there is practically no difference of opinion about it, except with regard to the last three or four lines, and I apprehend that that would hardly be pressed without there was a reasonable possibility that the powers would agree to it. I am sure that everybody will agree in this: That it is very undesirable for any of us to attempt to carry any resolution against the sense of a considerable portion of the Conference, because it would be a waste of time. As I say, the amendment of the learned delegate for the United States has been before us some time, and now surely we can express our opinion upon it, especially as we have no reason to suppose that anything can occur to change our opinion with regard to the matter.

Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, if the gallant delegate from France desires to have the amendment laid over, of course I must assent to it; but I do not think the difference between the committee or the gallant delegate from France and myself is so essential as to make it necessary to postpone. But that, of course, I leave absolutely to the gallant delegate from France so far as I am concerned, and if he desires the amendment laid over I shall at once assent.

Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, I look upon this matter simply as a measure of precaution. We can not refuse to discuss the amendment of the honorable Mr. Goodrich, which was presented a fortnight ago; but, in order to discuss this amendment, Mr. Goodrich commences by reading the report of the Committee on Life-Saving Systems and Devices. But this report can not be discussed until forty-eight hours have elapsed. If we discuss it now I think that we enter upon the wrong course, and that, after having violated our rule once, we will hereafter be more easily led to violate it again.

Under those circumstances I ask that the discussion upon the lifesaving systems and devices and the amendment of Mr. Goodrich, be both adjourned forty-eight hours, not because we have not the right, when necessity requires it, to discuss the amendment-inasmuch as it was presented a fortnight ago-but because the Conference has decided that it should be discussed simultaneously with the report, and that, by reason of such decision, its fate is irrevocably cast with that of the report.