The other arguments urged by Messrs Leigh end
What I urged in
Orange do not at all to my mind justify the withdrawal
or any modification of the suggestion.
favour of booms in the case of Messrs Samuel (see papers
referred to above) holds good as strongly now and ever;
and there have indeed since that date been accidents
into which on behalf of the Board of Trade I have held
inquiry which have further illustrated the risk against
which booms are designed to afford a protection.
And
I therefore and with great confidence and after a full
consideration of all that Messrs Leigh and Orange have
urged, adhere to my former recommendations.
As regards the design of boom submitted by
Messrs Leigh and Orange I see no reason to doubt that
it would prove efficient for the purpose. Indeed I am
disposed to think that a less costly design would probably meet the case, e.g., as I understand the design
it is proposed to cover the wooden boom with Muntz metal.
I do not see that this is really necessary. If the
booms are (as the design would seem to show) of considerable section, it is unlikely that they would be burnt
through (so as to become ineffective as regards the
confinement of the burning oil) within any time in which
such burning oil would be in contact with them.
But in
Page 286