that too many men were being put in the Sultana, it was proper that he should have satisfied himself from good authority whether there was sufficient grounds for the report, and if he found it so he should have interfered to have the evil remedied. Had he done so the lives of many men would have been saved.

In reference to the immediate cause of the calamity, the testimony which I have been able to collect does not enable to form a positive opinion. The testimony of the two engineers of the Sultana and of the inspector of Saint Louis establishes that her boilers were in good condition on her leaving that port for New Orleans, and apparently continued so until her arrival within ten hours' run of Vicksburg, when a leak occurred in one of her boilers. On the arrival of the boat at Vicksburg this leak was repaired by a competent boiler maker, and was pronounced by him a good job, though and permanent the two sheets adjoining the leak should have been taken out, and that in its then condition it was not perfect. The first engineers, Mr. Waitringer, testifies that after leaving Vicksburg he watched the repaired part of the boiler, which was near the front end, just over the fire bars, carefully, and it did not at any time show the least sign of giving way. When he was relieved from charge of the engine by the second engineers the boilers were full of water and in good condition, and on their return to Memphis the second engineer, Mr. Clemmans, who, being on watch at the time of the explosion, was fatally scalded, told him before he died that the boilers were all right and full of water. I was told by another engineer at Cincinnati that he had said the same thing to another person on landing at Memphis, but this other person was not within my reach. There is nothing to show that there was any careening of the boat at the time of the disaster, or that she was running fast; on the contrary, it is known that she was running evenly and not fast. A piece of boiler m the wreck, by order of General Washburn, which I examined. It seemed to have been broken from the bottom of the boiler the breadth of a sheet and torn tapering to near the top of the boiler, tearing the iron like paper, at times through the rivet holes and then through the middle of the sheet. The lower or wider end seems to have been exposed to the fire without the protection of water, and if so, this doubtless was the cause of the explosion. But this piece of iron may have been exposed to the fire of the burning vessel after the explosion, in which case some other cause must be found to account for it. The testimony of some of the most experienced engineers on the Western rivers is given, to throw some light on the matter, but until the boilers can all be examined no reliable conjecture can be made to account for the explosion. Thus far nothing has been discovered to show that the disaster was attributable tot he imperfect patching. It is the common opinion among engineers that an explosion of steam boilers is impossible when they have the proper quantity of water in them, but the boilers may burst from an over pressure of steam when they are full of water, owing to some defective part of the iron, in which case there is generally no other harm done than giving way of the defective part and the consequent escape of steam. One engineer, who is said to be the most reliable on the river, says that even in such a case the great power of the stream, having once found a yielding place, tears everything before it, producing the effect of an explosion, and his view seems to be reasonable. What is usually understood as the explosion of a boiler is caused by the sudden development of an intense steam by the water coming in contact with