1866. | Considerations on the Loss of the * London.’ 179 
been proved by experiment, that under these circumstances time is 
the only element in the endurance of the structure, and this varies 
according to the intensity with which the strains are produced. I 
offer these remarks from the conviction that heretofore the decks 
have been the weakest parts, and that several iron vessels have 
broken right in two from the constant working of alternate strains 
at midships along the line of the decks. I have also, by way of 
illustration, compared an iron ship to a hollow girder, supported 
at each end and resting on the middle for the exclusive purpose of 
showing the alternate changes to which she may be subjected if 
stranded or placed in the dangerous position of rising and falling 
on rocks in a heavy sea. Exceptions may be taken to these views, 
but they nevertheless exemplify what is necessary to be observed 
in the construction of a strong ship, and I may probably be excused 
the comparison, when the object in view is to effect security in the 
construction of our iron vessels. 
have been confirmed in my opinions on the forms and strain 
of vesseis, from such facts as I was able to gather from the narrative 
of the loss of the ship ‘London.’ From the accounts and the 
different statements of the witnesses examined before the Com- 
missioners appointed by the Board of Trade, I was unable to discover 
any serious defect in the construction of the ship. On the contrary, 
I have reason to believe that both material and workmanship were 
perfectly sound, with the exception of the combings of the hatches, 
which it would appear were imperfectly secured. As respects the 
design, I have assumed that she inherited the extremely fine lines 
at the bow and stern already described, and to which I have 
directed attention, and additional weight is given to this opinion 
by the manner in which the vessel behaved at sea. Taking all the 
circumstances into account, as also the statements of the different 
witnesses, with regard to the rigging and the state of the decks, I 
arrive at the conclusion that the ship did not founder from any 
serious defect of construction, excepting only the insecurity of the 
hatches, but from the hurried manner in which vessels are sent to 
sea, with their decks crowded with coal, hampers, and a variety of 
articles always dangerous and always objectionable in long and 
narrow vessels that are low in the water and hable to ship every 
succeeding sea. If these matters and the upper rigging had been 
properly cared for, there would have been no broken jibboom to 
batter to pieces the combing of the hatchway, and instead of the 
‘ London’ being entombed with all on board at the bottom of the 
Atlantic, she would, by this time, have been well advanced on her 
voyage to Australia. 
