between these two ports.  By taking out her paddle engines, she would be relieved of a weight of 850 tons.  The removal of her paddle engine boilers would further lighten her, and would give in addition an enormous stowage space.  By using her both as a cargo and a passenger ship, the whole of the upper portion could be utilized for emigrants, let us say, and the lower decks for cargo, of which she could carry nearly, if not quite, 20,000 tons.  She would possess the great advantage that, notwithstanding she was a cargo ship, she would be nearly, if not quite, as fast as any, save a few of the most recent additions to the Australian fleet.  There is every reason to believe that she has been driven at 14 knots by about 6,000 horse power.  We are inclined to think that the power has been overstated, and we have it on good authority that she has more than once attained a speed of 15 knots.  Let us assume, however, that her speed is to be 13 knots, or about fifteen miles an hour.  Assuming the power required to vary as the cube of the speed, if 6,000 horsepower gave 14 knots, then about 4,800 would give 13 knots—­say 5,000 horse power.  Now, good compound engines of this power ought not to burn more than 2 lb. per horse per hour, or say 4.5 tons per hour, or 108 tons a day.  Allowing the trip to Australia to take forty days, we have 4,320 tons of coal—­say 5,000 tons for the trip.  The Etruria burns about this quantity in the run to New York and back.  For each ton of coal burned in the Great Eastern about 15,000 tons of cargo and 3,000 passengers could be moved about 3-1/3 miles.  There is, we need hardly say, nothing afloat which can compare in economy of fuel with this.  Taken on another basis, we may compare her with an ordinary cargo boat.  In such a vessel about 3,000 tons of grain can be moved at 9 knots an hour for 600 horse power—­that is 5 tons of cargo per horse power.  Reducing the speed of the Great Eastern to 9 knots and about 2,000 horse power, we have 9 tons of cargo moved at 9 knots per horse power; so that in the relation of coal burned to cargo moved she would be nearly twice as economical as any other vessel afloat.

The important question is, What would the necessary alterations cost?  Much, of course, would depend on what was done.  A very large part of the present screw engines could be used.  For example, the crank shaft, some 2 feet in diameter, is a splendid job, and no difficulty need be met with in working in nearly the whole of the present framing.  If the engines were only to be compound, two of the existing cylinders might be left where they are, two high-pressure cylinders being substituted for the others.  If triple expansion were adopted, then new engines would be wanted, but the present crank and screw shafts would answer perfectly.  The present screw would have to be removed and one of smaller diameter and less pitch put in its place.  All things considered, we believe that for about L75,000 the Great Eastern