The number of passengers that went on board in London was 125, and these were increased to 180 by the embarkation of 55 at Plymouth. That the _London_ stood very high in the estimation of all sea-goers, and that her seaworthiness was above the faintest suspicion, is evident from the number of those who tried to secure a passage out in her, but without success, and from the reports and declarations which all those who were officially responsible for her good trim made respecting her. After a certain time there was not a berth in her to be obtained on any terms, though many were disappointed at not being allowed to obtain them: there was not a word of dissatisfaction, however slight, expressed by any official after the strictest examination had been made. Captain McLean, the Emigration Officer, who acts under the authority of the Emigration Commissioners, had, after careful survey and inspection, certified the _London_ to be in safe trim, and in all respects fit for her intended voyage to Melbourne. His words were, “I consider her perfect in every way.” It would have been unnecessary to have appeared even to insist upon the good trim and seaworthiness of the _London_, had not the suspicion gained ground that much more might have been done for the passengers’ safety than actually was done. Some have thought that more boats ought to have been on board; but it should be borne in mind that she carried one more than was actually required by law, and that no ship carries a sufficient number of boats to contain all on board, unless the number of passengers happens to be very slight. With reference to the length, breadth, and depth of the ship, a suggestion has been thrown out as to her narrowness of beam for a vessel of such length; but this alleged disproportion was not peculiar to the _London_: it exists in a much greater degree in some of the finest ships afloat. The length, for example, of Her Majesty’s transport ship _Himalaya_ is 340 ft., while her breadth is only 44 ft. 7 in. The same might be noticed in the case of other steam-ships. We have no doubt that eventually, out of the terrible calamity that all must truly deplore, greater safety will accrue to the thousands who sail the seas, through greater care being taken of every means that concerns such safety, and that immediately some plan will be devised for securing the engine-room of steam-ships against inundation. Meanwhile the matter will not be mended by any unfair criticism of the ship’s sea-going qualities. It will only increase unavailing regrets, to array what might have been against what actually is. It is a fact, patent to all, that the _London_ enjoyed a first-rate reputation as a fast ship, as a most comfortable one, and as having in her commander, Captain John Bohun Martin, a gentleman of the highest repute, both for his seamanship and many other admirable qualities.