77
323
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
LC.O. 885
6
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
!
23 November 1896.]
Mr. TAYLOR.
Chairman-continued. have in store 5 per cent. for repairs? That is it exactly.
1089. Therefore you do not think, speaking, of course, roughly, that the annual bill for re- pairs and maintenance ought to be more than 30,000 to 40,000l. a year?—No, I do not think so. 1090. Supposing this section from Vancouver to Funning Island to be as much as 3,500 fathoms at its deepest point, after how many years do you think that it would be practically impossible to lift that cable for repairing purposes? It is very rough, but I should not like to say more than 20, certainly.
1091. Not after 20 years?—Not after 20 years. I should not like to say so; still, as to a cable in good as those waters, one man's opinion is as another's on the subject. There has not been any cable laid in those waters. I know, how- ever, of a cable 1,800 miles in length which was in laid in the Tropics without preliminary survey 1874; this line did not break down for 10 years. On making the repair the cable was found in perfect order on each side of the break, which was due to the crossing of a submarine range of mountains. A careful survey of the ground was made and the inserted cable laid along a better route, with the result that the whole line has remained in good order ever since.
1092. I do not quite understand your two answers; I do not want to press you at all, or to ask impossible questions, but I understood you to say that you thought, speaking generally, that a cable laid in these Pacific waters would have a longer life than 20 years?—Yes,
1093. If you could not raise the deepest sec- tion for the purpose of repairing after 20 years, how could the whole cable have a longer life than 20 years?-Well, it does not follow that the cable should deteriorate, that it should break in the 20 years.
The 1873 Atlantic is laid in B worse position, I consider, and that has been going 23 years. That never has been touched in deep water; that never has been looked at ; therefore I think if you have a better region to lay in that you may expect better results as regards longevity; but if you do break that is another point.
•
1094. From what causes would a cable break in deep water-It may be suspended; I think it is the principal cause if it does, but of course there is another point, that you may get a fault. 1095. Taking the case of suspension first, that, you think, can be really guarded against by such careful laying as you propose?-Very much guarded against; not entirely, of course, because, however close you sound, a mile of bad ground, two miles of bad ground, might do it.
1096. What is the general idea of the bottom of the Pacific; is it supposed to be smooth or the reverse ?-I think the idea is that there are large regions of it smooth, but there is a proba- bility there are so many islands already there that there may be islands which are not known, rising not to the surface, but to a considerable height from the bottom.
1097. What about a breakage from volcanic action; is that to be expected from that part of the Pacific?—I should not like to say.
1098. There have been cables broken from that
Chairman-continued.
[Continued.
cause, have there not from volcanic action or earthquakes?--It has been attributed to that; [ do not think it has ever been proved. I have known a landslip break a cable--an earthslip.
Could
1099. Now the question of the fault,
a fault not make itself felt for 20 years and then have the effect of a break?—Yes, a fault might certainly break out after 20 years that you might be perfectly unconscious of for the 20
That 1 have known happen. years.
1100. And would that be due to air-bubbles or the foreign substance in the core, or to any other cause?—I do not think the
cause 18
often found. When you go out to repair such a cable, the chances are you never see that particular part; in fact, all faults nearly look alike; when you are localising them, you have to put on a battery power, and the gutta percha is always charred and disintegrated round the fault. You have to open the fault, as it is called, by a considerable current, before you can localise it, and one fault, in my experience I have seen a good many-looks like another one. not tell the cause.
You can-
1101. What is your theory as to the cause of it?-I think foreign matters more likely than the air-bubbles to be dormant for many years. I think when you are laying a cable air-bubbles will show up a few miles behind the ship as a rule.
1102. The pressure will do that? The pres- sure will do it before the cable gets to the bottom very often; say 10 miles behind the ship it will appear.
1103. Are you prepared to tell the Committee what core you would recommend for that span we have been talking of from Vancouver to Fanning Island?—I am afraid of recommending anything very much heavier than this last 1894 Atlantic, which is 650 lbs. of copper and 400 lbs. of gutta-percha.
1104. Now why would you be afraid of recom- mending anything heavier-If it is to be done on anything like commercial principles; that is to say, to make it pay, and you want a greater speed, it means you must put a great lot of copper in that means you are carrying dead weight which hardly helps the strength of the cable, and adds immensely to the difficulties of picking up if a fault occurs- that you have got a lot of dead weight in this heavy copper. found that in the Atlantic, that this exceedingly heavy copper made it much more difficult to pick up.
We
1105. So, simply from the point of view of the mechanical difficulties in laying and raising for repairs, you would not recommend a core of over 650 lbs. of copper and 400 lbs. of gutta-percha? -I have put down 750 lbs. of copper and 475 lbs. of gutta-percha as the greatest that I thought safe.
1106. We have had suggested to us cores very Take one of considerably lighter than that. 500 lbs. of copper and 320 lbs. of gutta-percha? -It would be so dreadfully slow.
1107, Your only objection to that is the slow- ness of the speed - Yes.
1108. How many letters do you reckon to a word?-Five; it is always spoken of as five- letter words.
23 November 1896.]
Chairman-continued.
Mr. TAYLOR.
1109. But in point of practice is it really five letters & word?—It would be if you sent a column of the Times"; in point of practice with the code it is more like double that.
1110. Now on the basis of five letters a word, what is the slowest cable you have ever known laid? The French Atlantic; it was laid between Brest and Ste. Pierre. That was the slowest cable that has been laid.
11. That gave how much?-That gave about 70 letters; I think that was the maximumu, 14 words.
1112. Fourteen words ?-May I say that there is a cable existing at present that has only, well, a maximum of 16 words; that is at present the longest cable in the world, and also the slowest.
1113. Now suppose a cable on that section from Vancouver to Fanning Island, of only 70 letters a minute for practical working purposes, would not that be enough?-For working pur-
I hardly follow. poses?
1114. I mean for the purpose of the business which is likely to come by such a cable. Would not that fulfil all necessary requirements? Its earning power is very low, of course, for the I am no authority on great cost of the line. the traffic at all, but I know as a fact that the letters do run about nine letters per word code- messages averages, and there is about a word in each message to put in extra or rather to take off for instructions, sent free, "time," day," originating station," so that practically what we call a 14-word cable would not send more than six paying words-not more.
f.
1115. Supposing a cable of 500 lbs. copper and 320 lbs. gutta-percha could send something over 2,000,000 words a year as the maximum, and that no calculation showed a likelihood of a business of more than half that amount, would there be any object in laying a heavier cable?— Well, I cannot calculate the speed in my head.
1116. The figures you may take from me as approximately right for the purpose that a cable of 500 lbs. of copper aud 320 lbs. of gutta-percha should as a maximum send during the year over 2,000,000 words; and supposing that no calcula- tion of the business likely to be obtainable came to more than half that amount of words in the year,
would there be any use in having a heavier cable ?-I presume this
will carry 2,000,000 words.
1117. Yes, you may assume that. Of course, it is no use having your cable heavier if you have no chance of getting any extra profit for sinking extra capital. It seems useless to do so.
1118. In fact, you would strongly advise a purchaser or a possible proprietor to take the question of business into his calculation equally with the question of superiority in the speed? Certainly.
Mr. Murray.
1119. You consider an accurate survey indis- pensable ?—I do.
1120. Would the object of that survey be to surmount any submarine difficulties that you find, or to avoid them?-To avoid them, either holes or hills.
[Continued.
Mr. Murray-continued. 1121. And you would not deliberately, though you knew the exact configuration of the bottom, attempt to go over any submarine peak or any- thing of that kind?—Most objectionable, in my opinion. A cable always goes on that class of bottom, especially in the Atlantic; I am speaking with considerable knowledge of this.
1122. There is no way of laying it so as to be certain of it, in fact, even if you do know what the nature of the bottom is ?-There is no way of lying it so as to be certain of what ?
1123. Of its lying properly; I mean, suppos ing you had one of those mountains you speak of, and you knew it was there, and you knew the shape of it, could you arrange to lay your cable over it notwithstanding?—It is a thing to be avoided always if you can; the top is sure to be bare and hard, and the cable would have more chance of chafing through and being destroyed there by a bad bottom than elsewhere.
1124. Then your advice would be to avoid it altogether?-Oh, yes.
1125. And that is the real object of the sur- vey?—Yes; of course a hole is just as great a difficulty; you may lose your cable.
1126. What is it that produces deteriora- tion in the cable when it is at the bottom, apart from difficulties of that kind?—I do not know. Taking the Atlantic bottom, you pick up cable in very good condition, and then you come to miles of cable as rotten as touchwood, and if you try to lift it you cannot; you have to skip miles and miles to come to a good place again.
1127. And nobody knows what the cause of that is?—I have never heard it accounted for. It is nearly always in shallower water, where it goes we will say from 1,900 fathoms to 1,600 fathoms. In the 1,600 fathoms the cable is generally bad it will be better in the 1,800 or 1,900, I do not think anyone knows why.
1128. And is it the outer covering which deteriorates, or the core-Not the core; it is the outer covering.
1129. Entirely?—It is the hemp and fibrous matter and the iron. They rot on the one hand the fibrous matter gets pulpy, and the iron gets rusty,
1130. Without asking you what sum in money you would allow for repairs and maintenance, cannot I put it in this way; what would you recommend a prudent owner of a cable to consider would be the life of this cable?—As I said before, we do not know enough about the bottom.
1131. If you did know the nature of the bottom would you be in any better position?—If one knew, for instance, there was such water as there is be- tween Pernambuco and St. Vincent, I believe you might put down a good deal more than 20 years, but I do not think it would be safe to take it that there was a certainly good bottom there.
1132. What would you say, for instance, if you were going to lay an Atlantic cable to-day; what would you say would be its probable life?
-Twenty-five years.
1133. Twenty-five?-There is nothing alive over 23 at present.
1134. And you would not like to say that it
K 3
K
78